|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 5:53AM
#31
|
|
|
That being said, your character concept isn't dead, it just works different. Unless your concept was "Uber-powered Forgelock with 20 embedded rods that does mass amounts of badness every turn" and not "warforged with embedded items that has the right tool 'up his sleeve' for any situation."
How about Paladin with Warlock multiclassing? Having to spend two minor actions to switch between weapon and implement makes the warlock powers pretty much useless. Not using a shield to free up a hand makes him an even worse defender than he is now.
Well, I guess that's what I get for building something non-standard. As for not using things that are too good to be true, that's why I didn't get a reparation apparatus...
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 5:56AM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Jul 16, 2002
|
The new rules state that a component heavy shield allows you to hold things in your hand. So you can get the benefits of a shield and hold your rod in your off hand (man that sounds bad... could they have called it something other than Rod?)
EDIT: You just can't embed shields.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 6:04AM
#33
|
|
|
The new rules state that a component heavy shield allows you to hold things in your hand. So you can get the benefits of a shield and hold your rod in your off hand
That might help, but does it state you can actually wield it as well? The old rules also allowed you to hold things in your attached shield's hand, but specifically disallowed wielding something with it.
Anyway, I'll wait and see when I get to read the rules for myself, to see what I'll do with the character. I'll make a new one and play low-level only for a while longer.
(man that sounds bad... could they have called it something other than Rod?)
Well, I use a magic wand, but that doesn't sound all that much better...
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 6:23AM
#34
|
|
|
Concidering the interaction between the warlock at-will power, the paladin challenge and a particular feat from Dragon, I somehow don't feel that much pitty for this build. I know many non-warforged paladin warlocks who are still highly effective (even without a rod or wand readily available). After all, 1 minor action to put weapon away, take Quick Draw feat to get wand ready for free and then put rod away. If AoO is triggered, you can draw weapon during the opportunity attack (unless I am misremembering Quick Draw).
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 6:37AM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
So you can get the benefits of a shield and hold your rod in your off hand (man that sounds bad... could they have called it something other than Rod?)
yeah... when i was running my game night last night, i found myself saying, "the goblin hexer pulls out and waves his little goblin rod at you." i didn't realize until i was saying it just how dirty 4E could be... 
EDIT: Now that i think about it, changing the word 'rod' to the more generic 'implement' doesn't even make it any better...
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 6:44AM
#36
|
|
|
Concidering the interaction between the warlock at-will power, the paladin challenge and a particular feat from Dragon, I somehow don't feel that much pitty for this build.
Aparently I really suck at using powerful combo's, and have managed to build the worlds only non-overpowered warforged character.
Anyway, with all the negative responses and whining about 'robots' I've encountered with this character, it's probably better to just retire it, and go play some regular fantasy stereotype.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 7:09AM
#37
|
|
|
Aparently I really suck at using powerful combo's, and have managed to build the worlds only non-overpowered warforged character.
Warforged were not overpowered persee. There are a couple of things that can easily make them so, but I blame those items more then the race. The old embedded item rules were one of these. Your build gave your character the Quick Draw feat for free, which is obviously not game breaking, although, still rather good. It were the four implement wielding characters that theoretically* break the game...
* Never came across such a character in LFR, so I cannot speak from personal experience how bad such a build is.
Anyway, with all the negative responses and whining about 'robots' I've encountered with this character, it's probably better to just retire it, and go play some regular fantasy stereotype.
If you are not happy with your build, don't play it, but please, do not let whining people be the cause. Warforged are really not that odd in FR or any typical fantasy for that matter as long as you downplay the steampunk/artificer background of Eberron.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 7:32AM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
How about Paladin with Warlock multiclassing? Having to spend two minor actions to switch between weapon and implement makes the warlock powers pretty much useless. Not using a shield to free up a hand makes him an even worse defender than he is now.
Spend a feat to get a Disembodied Hand familiar, which lets you switch out items as a free action. (If you're a paladin of Torm or Kelemvor, it can even look like your deity's holy symbol.)
If you are not happy with your build, don't play it, but please, do not let whining people be the cause. Warforged are really not that odd in FR or any typical fantasy for that matter as long as you downplay the steampunk/artificer background of Eberron.
I've ran into three warforged PCs: one was playing Iron Man, the second was playing a Transformer, the third was playing a Star Wars droid.
Yes, it's quite possible for a warforged PC to fit perfectly within the Realms; it's just that most players of warforged don't seem to want to--if you want to play a fantasy race in a fantasy setting, you have many options; if you want to play the race with the potential for SFish flavor, odds are it's because you like the SFish flavor.
It's entirely possible that the original poster is the exception, but I can't blame people for being leery of the race if their only experiences with it are flavor-destroying.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 8:09AM
#39
|
|
|
Yes, it's quite possible for a warforged PC to fit perfectly within the Realms; it's just that most players of warforged don't seem to want to--if you want to play a fantasy race in a fantasy setting, you have many options; if you want to play the race with the potential for SFish flavor, odds are it's because you like the SFish flavor.
It's entirely possible that the original poster is the exception, but I can't blame people for being leery of the race if their only experiences with it are flavor-destroying.
There is a difference between being leery about particular builds, and whining about the existence of a particular race. I have met among other silly stuff Britney Spears and a smurf in the campaign. The fact that those PCs are bad for my style of gaming has nothing to do with them being human and gnome 
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 18, 2009 - 10:15AM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
If you are not happy with your build, don't play it, but please, do not let whining people be the cause. Warforged are really not that odd in FR or any typical fantasy for that matter as long as you downplay the steampunk/artificer background of Eberron.
If you like warforged, look to me as an example. I exclusively play warforged PCs, and have built 19, of which 11 have seen action at least once*. Since I play so much more than anyone else in my area, warforged are so ubiquitious around these parts that they don't even get a raised eyebrow anymore.
*Between the three of them who are level 6 or higher, they own exactly one Reparation Apparatus, and none of them take advantage of multiple implements.
|
|
|
