# Sacrifice to Caiphon - Overpowered?



## logopolis (Nov 12, 2008)

I was flipping through Dragon Magazine 266 (August 2008), and I found this heroic tier feat:*Sacrifice to Caiphon* [Warlock]

*Prerequisistes:* Con 13, warlock
*Benefit:* When you attack with an encounter power that has targets and you miss all targets, then you can deal damage to yourself equal to the level of the power. If you do, you immediately recover that power.​Essentially, you can make any encounter power reliable by taking a fairly small amount of damage. The feat is not restricted to warlock powers, so a multiclass warlock can use it for his main class powers. This feat seems way more powerful that any other heroic tier feat I've seen.

Does this seem pretty overpowered to anyone else as well? Should it be in a different tier? Is the damage enough to keep this feat balanced? Or is there some mitigating factor that makes this feat weaker than it appears at first glance?


----------



## xCruelx (Nov 12, 2008)

originally, i had the same reaction. But once a took some time to consider it, i was ok with it.

the more targets it has, the less likely it is to be a 100% miss. So in order to actually have a good chance to get the power back, you will be using your AoE power in a less than optimal situation in the first place.

So ya, its a good feat, and I would likely take it. But by no means is it a 'must have' 

Cost - a feat slot, and spending one standard action being utterly useless
Benifit - A do over on an AoE encounter power next round.


----------



## Mithreinmaethor (Nov 12, 2008)

My worry and question is in the wording of it.  It uses Targets in the plural instead of Target in the singular.  

So does the encounter power you use have to have multiple Targets or does one Target count as Targets?

If its multiple it makes it a little less useful than you might think.


----------



## IanArgent (Nov 12, 2008)

Enh - I find that encounter powers miss too often for good fun. At-wills you can try again; and most dailies have something happen on a miss. Most encounter powers are an all-or-nothing deal.


----------



## logopolis (Nov 12, 2008)

Mithreinmaethor said:


> So does the encounter power you use have to have multiple Targets or does one Target count as Targets?



It's pretty clear to me that "targets" means "one or more targets"; I don't think it's restricted to AoE attacks. If it meant "two or more targets", the feat would be nearly useless since most warlock powers only affect a single target.



IanArgent said:


> Enh - I find that encounter powers miss too often for good fun. At-wills you can try again; and most dailies have something happen on a miss. Most encounter powers are an all-or-nothing deal.



I agree. Reusing encounter powers at a cost opens some really cool strategic options. My concern is that this feat provides warlocks with powerful combat options that aren't matched by any other class until high levels.


----------



## IanArgent (Nov 12, 2008)

That's a good point - I expect to see more feats to patch this in the future. (Something like, say:
Divine Recuperation
Prerequisite: Divine Character, Wis 15
Benefit: Spend a Healing Surge and instead of the normal benefit recharge up to 2 expended encounter powers. This can only be done once an encounter.

Another way to do it would be something like Veteran's armor.


----------



## James McMurray (Nov 12, 2008)

It's definitely powerful. The warlock in our epic campaign uses it almost every encounter. While others are missing with their powers and eventually using At wills, he has much more staying power. Sure, it's a painful hit if he opts to keep a 23rd level power, but Frigid Darkness is only 3rd and gives an enemy an effective -7 to AC and -2 to other defenses for one round.


----------



## James McMurray (Nov 12, 2008)

The only things that make it too powerful IMO are

1) No other class gets anything like it. If everyone had a "trade resource X to keep a missed encounter power" feat available, it'd be fine.

2) There's no clause in there to prevent temporary hit point abuse. The warlock in the epic game is Star + Fey, but if he were Star + Infernal instead the cost for using the feat would be next to nil a lot of the time, especially for lower level powers like Frigid Darkness and Far Realm Phantasm (steals an action from the enemy and gives a fighter a possible combat Challenge attack, as well as lowering Will defense temporarily).


----------



## Brian999 (Nov 12, 2008)

James McMurray said:


> The only things that make it too powerful IMO are
> 
> 1) No other class gets anything like it. If everyone had a "trade resource X to keep a missed encounter power" feat available, it'd be fine.
> 
> 2) There's no clause in there to prevent temporary hit point abuse. The warlock in the epic game is Star + Fey, but if he were Star + Infernal instead the cost for using the feat would be next to nil a lot of the time, especially for lower level powers like Frigid Darkness and Far Realm Phantasm (steals an action from the enemy and gives a fighter a possible combat Challenge attack, as well as lowering Will defense temporarily).





You may not even need to worry about temporary hit points.  Dreadful Word is a level one power, but it can be spectacularly useful for Starlocks and their parties, helping to ensure that all the nastiest Will-based attacks (like a powered-up Sleep) consistently hit.  The cost to activate the Sacrifice and reuse Dreadful Word if it misses is one measly hit point.


----------



## Bold or Stupid (Nov 12, 2008)

I like the concept of feat, but find the combination of it and Witchfire a little overpowered (though that may be the feypact additional penalty...)

I'd quite like to see similar feats to for other classes, but I'd fear they would become must have feats (my basic definition of an over powered feat).


----------



## bganon (Nov 12, 2008)

I don't think it's overpowered in the "will this break my game" sense.

I do think it is overpowered in the "every Warlock will take this feat" sense.  On the other hand, part of the point of the Dragon article seemed to be about fixing the fact that "core" Star Pact Warlocks get kinda screwed.  But fixing that through feats means everyone will take those feats.

I've considered houseruling it to 4+level damage or something, just to restrain the low-level awesomeness to where one might have at least a brief second thought about using it.


----------



## James McMurray (Nov 12, 2008)

If starlocks were otherwise a bad choice, and if the feat were only allowed for them, it wouldn't be a problem. But after the article starlocks are among the most powerful warlocks around, and the feat is available to all warlocks, and even multiclass characters. 

I'm picturing a fighter / warlock whose powers are all effectively reliable, has huge hit points, and multiple ways to heal himself (including regeneration). He'd never run out of non-at wills until he'd hit with them all at least once.


----------



## The_Fan (Nov 13, 2008)

Our group warlock has it, and I will tell you how it is always used:

"Diabolic grasp!"
*rolls a 1*
"$#@%!!!!!"
"Sacrifice to Caiphon! Action point! Diabolic grasp AGAIN!"

Not optimum use, but how it's always used.


----------



## Wepwawet (Nov 13, 2008)

But this feat only works with Area powers? Or does it work with any power, even single target ones.
Because the description says "if you fail all targets" I assumed it could be only used with area attacks.


----------



## The_Fan (Nov 13, 2008)

The plural is not exclusionary in general english, so I took it to mean it works with any encounter power. He has no area powers, so it would be pointless otherwise.


----------



## logopolis (Nov 13, 2008)

bganon said:


> I don't think it's overpowered in the "will this break my game" sense.



I agree. The feat isn't giving the character anything that he wouldn't already have if the player rolls well. In fact, if the player rolls well, the feat is kind of wasted.



bganon said:


> I do think it is overpowered in the "every Warlock will take this feat" sense.  On the other hand, part of the point of the Dragon article seemed to be about fixing the fact that "core" Star Pact Warlocks get kinda screwed.  But fixing that through feats means everyone will take those feats.



Not only that, I could see characters multiclassing as warlocks for the sole purpose of taking this feat.



bganon said:


> I've considered houseruling it to 4+level damage or something, just to restrain the low-level awesomeness to where one might have at least a brief second thought about using it.



I'm currently playing in an RPGA game, so my DM has no choice but to use Sacrifice to Caiphon as is. 

I'd definitely make some tweaks to the feat for a home game, though. Maybe:


Increase damage to 5+level or so, like bganon suggested?
Make it a paragon or epic feat?
Restrict its use to once per encounter?
Restrict it to primary class star warlocks?
Change it so you have to spend a healing surge instead of or in addition to the damage?


----------



## Bold or Stupid (Nov 13, 2008)

logopolis said:


> I
> 
> Increase damage to 5+level or so, like bganon suggested?
> Make it a paragon or epic feat?




The first of these is good, the feylock in the game I run uses SoC everytime he misses with Witchfire but any of his higher level encounters he tends to ponder the hp cost on. Maybe I'll go for 5+half level (round down) which should help control it.


----------



## bganon (Nov 14, 2008)

i don't know if multiclassing for this feat is such a great deal as it might seem.  You essentially get the benefits by paying two feats, 13 Cha, 13 Con, and the loss of any other multiclassing.

A fighter multiclassing into warlock just for Sacrifice to Caiphon can have tons of reliable powers, sure.  But Cha is generally a pretty useless stat for fighters (Wis is slightly better as a tertiary) and not many of the warlock powers really mesh well with a fighter build.  Fiendish Resilience?  Unstoppable is strictly better.  

Paladin/warlock is easier, but personally I think that's such a fun combo that I don't mind a little extra awesomeness .  The only other class that can really take good advantage of multiclassing into Warlock is the Bard.  All other classes struggle at least a bit with MAD, since no other classes use Cha or Con as a primary stat.

On a separate note, if you want the hit point cost of the feat to always be roughly 1/5th of a character's hp for their max level power, 4 or 5 + level is pretty much spot on.  Making it half-level will cause the scaling to favor Epic levels (which might be fine, since recovering powers is otherwise more common at Epic anyway).


----------



## logopolis (Nov 14, 2008)

bganon said:


> i don't know if multiclassing for this feat is such a great deal as it might seem.  You essentially get the benefits by paying two feats, 13 Cha, 13 Con, and the loss of any other multiclassing.



Actually, the prerequisite is just Con 13. It's pretty easy to get, especially for martial classes.

Now that I think about it, simply bumping up the prerequisites to Con 13 and Cha 13 might prevent abuse of this feat as well.


----------



## Milambus (Nov 14, 2008)

logopolis said:


> Actually, the prerequisite is just Con 13. It's pretty easy to get, especially for martial classes.
> 
> Now that I think about it, simply bumping up the prerequisites to Con 13 and Cha 13 might prevent abuse of this feat as well.




You need 13 Cha to take the Warlock Multiclass feat.


----------



## Evilhalfling (Nov 15, 2008)

On the plus side, warlocks seemed to be the most underpowered striker - unless/until they start using the kill 2 minions per round as minor action combo. 

I changed the feat to 3+lvl damage.  - Warlock is the preferred next character of the current leader, but the party is him and 2 strikers, so it may be a while before there is one played in my game.


----------



## Shroomy (Nov 15, 2008)

Our star pact warlock sometimes has problems hitting anything (to put it mildly).  I want him to take this feat.  Hell, sometimes I think we need him to take this feat.  I'm pretty sure he will at 6th level.


----------



## Bayuer (Nov 15, 2008)

I was playing warlock and I didn't take this feat couse I was think it's useful only with multi targeting powers. Almost all my attack was vs. Fortitude. The hardest defense of almost all monsters. I realy say. This feat isn't overpowered. It's good.


----------



## Mal Malenkirk (Nov 15, 2008)

The problem is the cost.  It's far more powerful with low level powers than the high levels.  The cost doesn't scale with the utility at all.

It's the reverse of the Infernal Pact boon, which is almost meaningless at level 1 and very strong at level 30.

i.e. Warlock with con 14 at level 1=  26 hp, pays 1 hp to re-use a level 1 encounter.  That's 3.85% percent of his HP to regain his only encounter power.  A laughable choice, a complete no-brainer.

i.e. Same Warlock, level 11= 76 hp.  Pays 1 hp, to recuperate his level 1 encounter power.  That's 1,32% of his HP.  A joke.  But if he wants to recuperate his paragon path encounter, that's 11 hp.  14,47%.  That's more of a choice.  Especially since as good as the paragon path power can be, there is no way it is 1100% more powerful than the level 1 encounter power...

That's just bad.  Many feat introduce a new tactical considerations, but I can't think of any that brings such absurd choices to the table.  

To bring it in line, it should be proportional.  i.e. Spend a healing surge and get back 1 encounter power (1/encounter max).  The current write-up is absurd and isn't getting in any of my games.


----------



## Danceofmasks (Nov 16, 2008)

Well, for an infernal 'lock, one dose of ablative temp hp will soak up all the damage from the feat .. regardless of what level power .. it's not that bad a deal.

Personally, I have more issues with the fact that:
It does not specify that the power has to be a warlock power.
So what level is ... say ... Dragon Breath?


----------



## Incendax (Nov 16, 2008)

This feat is not broken because it allows you to regain encounter powers.
*This feat is broken because it allows you to turn Encounters with Miss effects into At-Wills.*

Hello, I'm a Multiclass Warlock/Cleric with the minimum wisdom necessary. Hell, I don't even have the right implement. I think I'll use Mantle of Glory! I can only hit on a 20? Aww shucks, I missed. I guess everyone gets to use a healing surge! [*sounds of party cheering*]

Otherwind Stride, Healing Torch, and Hand of the God all spring to mind. That's not even picking through the PHB for anything else more abusable.


----------



## IanArgent (Nov 16, 2008)

Incendax said:


> This feat is not broken because it allows you to regain encounter powers.
> *This feat is broken because it allows you to turn Encounters with Miss effects into At-Wills.*
> 
> Hello, I'm a Multiclass Warlock/Cleric with the minimum wisdom necessary. Hell, I don't even have the right implement. I think I'll use Mantle of Glory! I can only hit on a 20? Aww shucks, I missed. I guess everyone gets to use a healing surge! [*sounds of party cheering*]
> ...




And the first example blew 2 feats to get it, and an encounter power where he is using an out-of-build stat. Enh.

It's a tad broken with Otherwind Stride. I would limit the feat to requiring an attack roll actually occur (as I would with any other power with a separate attack and effect), so no recharge of Otherwind Stride if nobody (or even no enemy) is next to the warlock when he uses the power.

That having been said, I think they should have run it off daily resources, either AP or healing surges (as my proposed Divine Recuperation feat above does). At the very least, put in a requirement to use actual HP, not Temp HP, given the infernal pact boon.

In the end, though, that makes it only a little overpowered, not ZOMG good. Any non-warlock who wants to take the feat has to court MAD and take 2 feats. The warlock who takes it still has to deal with having striker-level hit points.

For those of you looking to limit it - change the HP cost to the level of the character, not the power. That makes it a rough-and-ready scaling. (Or, as I believe someone mentioned, 5 for a heroic-tier power, 10 for a paragon-tier, and 15 for an epic-tier).

As a DM, though, I have already noticed that Encounter powers are the disappointing ones for my characters. At-wills you try again, Dailies almost always have some kind of effect on miss. Given the way the math works, encounters miss noticeably often. Now, both the campaign I'm running and the one I'm playing in are heroic-tier, so I don't know if this will get worse in the higher tiers (it might, given the lack of scaling).


----------



## DracoSuave (Nov 16, 2008)

IanArgent said:


> It's a tad broken with Otherwind Stride. I would limit the feat to requiring an attack roll actually occur (as I would with any other power with a separate attack and effect), so no recharge of Otherwind Stride if nobody (or even no enemy) is next to the warlock when he uses the power.




This is covered by two factors:  

1)  You actually have to miss with the power, so if there's no attack roll there's no miss.
2)  The Bag-of-Rats rule.

In fact, it's the same with the Warlock/Cleric build mentioned before.  It's -obviously- attempting to use the feat in a Bag-of-Rats-y way, and therefore can be veto'd using the Bag-of-Rats rule.


----------



## Incendax (Nov 17, 2008)

DracoSuave said:


> In fact, it's the same with the Warlock/Cleric build mentioned before.  It's -obviously- attempting to use the feat in a Bag-of-Rats-y way, and therefore can be veto'd using the Bag-of-Rats rule.




One could argue that the attack is being attempted against perfectly meaningful targets (such as in the case of Mantle of Glory), but it is only the attack itself that is not meaningful. Ergo, you avoid the Bag-of-Rats rule.

Regardless, I am opposed to this kind of abuse in general so it is a moot point. I am content with the fact that Dragon Magazine will never be allowed at my table. I have no faith in the level of playtesting that goes into their mechanics, despite how creative their non-mechanic ideas may be.


----------



## IanArgent (Nov 18, 2008)

DracoSuave said:


> This is covered by two factors:
> 
> 1)  You actually have to miss with the power, so if there's no attack roll there's no miss.
> 2)  The Bag-of-Rats rule.
> ...




The bag-of-rats rule is thankfully not needed to be spelled out in my campaign so far. (admittedly, most are veterans of my SR game, in which I made it quite clear I could drop a PC within the rules any time I wanted, so don't push it, eh?)


----------



## Runestar (Nov 18, 2008)

What's the bag of rats rule?


----------



## James McMurray (Nov 18, 2008)

DMG p. 40


> When a power has an effect that occurs upon hitting a
> target—or reducing a target to 0 hit points—the power
> functions only when the target in question is a meaningful
> threat. Characters can gain no benefit from
> ...


----------



## DracoSuave (Nov 18, 2008)

Incendax said:


> One could argue that the attack is being attempted against perfectly meaningful targets (such as in the case of Mantle of Glory), but it is only the attack itself that is not meaningful. Ergo, you avoid the Bag-of-Rats rule.




If ever you need to rules lawyer or technicality your way around the Bag-of-Rats rule, then the Bag-of-Rats rule should -definately- apply.  The Bag-of-Rats rule is to avoid using technicalities to do broken crap, not to avoid beating on bags of rats.

All that said, the Bag-of-Rats rule came into play when some enterprising young fighter decided to go Whirlwind Attack+Cleave with a bag of rats.  He'd Whirlwind Attack, kill an ungodly number of the little rats, and then each dead rat would then let him get a free attack on who he wanted... say... Orcus.  The 'bag-of-rats' rule is a direct homage to this cheese and its prevention.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 19, 2008)

You mean great cleave, right? Since Whirlwind forces you to give up any extra attacks...but point taken.


----------



## Agamon (Nov 20, 2008)

My doppleganger warlock took this as her 2nd level feat (1st level was Ranger multi...it worked storywise, I didn't realize how powerful it was though until play, a lot more than StC).  In two sessions and 7 encounters, I've used StC once.  Of course, that means I only missed once.  So while it's nice insurance, I'd hardly call it overpowered, and it sure doesn't turn her Witchfire into an at-will.  The DM agrees...and maybe feels sorry for me being a doppleganger; great for RP, but not a combat optimized race, for sure.


----------

