Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thorgrimm 01-12-06, 04:41 PM	Quick question and oppinion session. First: I have looked through the Complete Arcane through the entire entry for Warlock as well as the Incantations section in the spells section. I cannot find anywhere that it says how many times an Eldritch Blast can be used a day. I have seen where it states that Invocation can be used at will, but then again it also says that an Eldritch Blast is not considered an Invocation. If im missing something can you please direct me to the answer to this. Second: If it does not state anywhere in the entry for warlock the number of uses for the Eldritch Blast i would think that maybe, Once per Day per warlock level would sound about right. I really dont think that At will like the Invocations makes any sense (ie doing 7d6 damage every round with a ranged touch attack that with one feat can have a range of upto 250 with no range penalty, plus being able to use the Invocations at will with the Eldritch Blast. Then again 14 times a day at level 14 might even seem a little powerful so how about 1/day for every 2 levels (minimum 1) What ya think.....?
Enamel_32 01-12-06, 04:44 PM	There is no limit on eldritch blast uses... and it's not that powerful, anyway. Sure, it looks overpowered at first glance, but it's really not. Edit: you should try playing it before "balancing" it.
Crimson_Concerto 01-12-06, 05:03 PM	There is no limit on eldritch blast uses... and it's not that powerful, anyway. Sure, it looks overpowered at first glance, but it's really not. Edit: you should try playing it before "balancing" it. I second this. I've played in a campaign alongside an unedited warlock, and he wasn't any better than my Cleric/Alienist.
phelanarcetus 01-12-06, 05:13 PM	Eldritch Blast is at will, and it's not overpowered. Yes, it's solid damage, until you reach high level, and it's reliable in that it's a touch attack with no save (SR does apply, though). The thing is that it's pretty sturdily capped. At level 20, you've got 9d6 damage, or 11d6 if you have a Greater Chasuble of Fell Power (also in Complete Arcane, wondrous item). That's it. You can add various effects, at the cost of giving a save against them, and you can affect multiple targets via Cone or Doom shape invocations. But a standard caster can do much more damage to multiple targets per round at that point, and so can a martial character. About the only way to increase your Eldritch Blast damage beyond 11d6 and an effect is to take less Warlock levels and spend them in Rogue, or Scout, or another class that gives you bonus damage on attacks that meet certain criteria. A Warlock loses nothing by moving and blasting as opposed to standing still and blasting, so Skirmish helps... as long as you can find get enough bonus d6s from Skirmish to make up for what you lose by taking less Warlock levels. Similarly, with invocations a Warlock can qualify for Sneak Attack damage fairly easily (Retributive Invisibility, the Darkness one as well) each round. But again you have to get enough from the non-Warlock levels you take to make up for what you lose in having less Warlock levels. And even if you get your damage higher by doing this... if you face an encounter where you can't use that bonus damage, now your blast is even weaker. The Warlock is not about doing a ton of damage in one round, but rather about being an arcane character with the same sustainability as a Fighter or Rogue. His abilities are not limited in uses, so he can basically continue using them until he runs out of hit points. Just like a Fighter or a Rogue, the Warlock will be as good in the last fight of the day as he was in the first fight of the day (aside from hp and expended items). The Blast is the Warlock's primary attack. Limiting its uses would be like limiting the number of times a Rogue can Sneak Attack.
Arcane Guyver 01-12-06, 05:16 PM	"Balancing", IMO, would involve making the eldritch blast weaker at earlier levels (1d4 damage maybe?) and then making it more powerful at later levels. Lemme tell you, 1d6 damage (+1 with PBS) every round (forget that meaningless attack roll, you WILL hit) is enough to make all the other 1st-levelers a bit annoyed, despite your "yeah, but I'm gonna be less powerful than you guys in the far-flung future" mantra.
TheWinterBard 01-12-06, 05:58 PM	It's really not overpowered. Unlimited uses per day doesn't really matter because the party tends to stop when the sorcerer/wizard/cleric etc. run out of spells, so it's not as if they'll just go on for ever. In a damage-dealing contest with a high-level sorcerer or evoker or the like, they will basically always loose, because a sorcerer, even with limited spells per day, can still run off enough damage to level a small city. Or something. You get the idea. But if not.. here, we'll go hypothetical. A level 1 warlock does 1d6 damage. That's the same as a fighter with a short sword (which rarely happens to be their primary weapon), and the fighter gets strength bonus, possibly more to damage. They, like the warlock, can attack every round, and with roughly equal chance to hit (touch attack vs. higher BAB, possibly higher stats, feats, etc.). Also like the warlock, the fighter can attack all day, but we hear no complaint about it simply because attacking isn't a spell-like ability. Later on, at around fifth... they're doing 3d6, anywhere from less to a little more than same fighter friend.. who is anyhow about to get two attacks per round, thus levelling the field. And their wizard chum just picked up fireball, and while he can't do it as many times per day, he's doing 5d6 (or half, largely automatically save for those few with evasion) with each one, to multiple opponents, no attack roll necessary. And who cares that the warlock can go on doing it indefinitely? The party stops, as I said, when the spellcasters run out of magic. Not really a factor... Skipping far ahead to 20th level. Our warlock has picked himself up a chausible of fell power, and deals 11d6, while the sorcerer of the party can fling a 24d6 meteor swarm (either no save whatsoever or in an area so multiple opponents are taking 2+ times the damage as those hit by the warlock, and that's only if she's taken eldritch doom) at least 6 times per day and possibly more. The party stopping time again plays into the situation. Recall that even after the sorcerer has run out of ninth level spells, she can still cause so much damage with her eighth level spells, seventh, sixth, etc (I mean, disintegrate?). Furthermore, fighter over there is doing four attacks or more per round with his uber blade o' doom and is dealing handy death himself. Note that I am comparing this all basically on a damage-dealing viewpoint; there are other ways to consider it too. We can, I hope, clearly see at this point that unlimited uses per day and the damage of the eldritch blast are really just fine. I might have also made it seem that warlocks are underpowered comparatively; they're not because of their other class abilities, and they focus on slightly different areas than other classes. That's why I like 'em- they're fairly unique. Hope that made sense. Cheers!
Neeek 01-12-06, 06:28 PM	"Balancing", IMO, would involve making the eldritch blast weaker at earlier levels (1d4 damage maybe?) and then making it more powerful at later levels. Lemme tell you, 1d6 damage (+1 with PBS) every round (forget that meaningless attack roll, you WILL hit) is enough to make all the other 1st-levelers a bit annoyed, despite your "yeah, but I'm gonna be less powerful than you guys in the far-flung future" mantra. Um...right. A first level fighter will hit just as often and do roughly 2.5 times as much damage. Eldritch Blast is a *weak* ability. Overall, Warlocks are weak accross the board. They do make interesting solo characters, but aren't really suited to a party.
TheWinterBard 01-12-06, 06:32 PM	I'd say they're better in a party, where they can shore up other characters, serve as many different roles where the party might be weak, rather than as a solo, where they themselves will need a little help on most fronts.
General_Ridley 01-12-06, 06:34 PM	Eldritch Blast is usable 14400 times a day. if you don't sleep.
Enamel_32 01-12-06, 06:34 PM	While they can't buff their allies, they can certainly hinder their foes in combat, using non-blast-related invocations. ...and brimstone blast is just funny, with people bursting into flames, and all.
TheWinterBard 01-12-06, 06:37 PM	Eldritch Blast is usable 1440 times a day. if you don't sleep. That... is just an awesome fun-fact type of thing. I'm so.. happy someone calculated that! "It's got endless uses each day, that's not fair..." "No- actually..." OK, I'll be quiet now.
Chaotix42 01-12-06, 06:47 PM	Warlocks = nifty. A player of mine ran a warlock with a feat from Savage Species that turns a spell-like ability (Eldritch Blast in this case) into a supernatural ability, so he didn't provoke AoOs when firing while threatened, and he didn't have to worry abut SR. The party was tangling with mind flayers and spell-warped driders among other creatures, so it came in quite handy!
Crimson_Concerto 01-12-06, 06:56 PM	Eldritch Blast is usable 1440 times a day. if you don't sleep. Really? I got 14400 when I calculated it... 1/round x 1 round/6 seconds x 60 seconds/minute x 60 minutes/hour x 24 hours/day = 14400 I'm gonna feel really dumb when it turns out I'm wrong. :P
Neeek 01-12-06, 07:09 PM	I'd say they're better in a party, where they can shore up other characters, serve as many different roles where the party might be weak, rather than as a solo, where they themselves will need a little help on most fronts. Many of the invocations lend themselves to a scouting/spying role. Unfortunately, they only work on the Warlock. So if there is anyone else around, they are sort of less effective. Which is why they do well solo: They're hard to find when alone. Really? I got 14400 when I calculated it... 1/round x 1 round/6 seconds x 60 seconds/minute x 60 minutes/hour x 24 hours/day = 14400 I'm gonna feel really dumb when it turns out I'm wrong. No, you are correct.
Bardic_Nerd 01-12-06, 07:10 PM	While they can't buff their allies, they can certainly hinder their foes in combat, using non-blast-related invocations. With a big enough selection of wands and/or scrolls, they can buff quite well -- they can have pretty high UMD modifers, and somewhere along the way they gain the ability to take ten on UMD checks, even in combat. If it was needed, a warlock could play the role of primary healer -- which is actually what one of mine will likely be doing soon.
The Dude 01-12-06, 07:12 PM	I have to disagree about the warlock being balanced, but for different reasons than what has been mentioned here. (and before anyone decides to shoot down my argument with a silly authority-attack, yes I have both played and DMed a warlock) Eldtritch Blast has two problems: 1) in some campaigns, it gives them an advantage over other classes, and 2) warlock class features make Eldritch Blast more powerful than options available to other classes. People get most upset about the Eldritch Blast possibly outshining other spell-casters. However, Eldritch blast is only a problem in certain camapign types. In dungeon-crawls or other campaign types where combat is of primary importance and all other things are secondary. As was already pointed out, the Eldritch Blast doesnt do as damage as a Meteor Swarm or similar 9th level spells; the only advantage to Eldritch Blast is that it only requires 1 ranged touch attack and has no save (unlike Meteor Swarm, which requires 4 ranged touch attacks or a Reflex save). While a typical magic-user can only cast these spells a handful of times per day, they have other spells of lower level that do damage similar to the warlock's Eldritch Blast they can fall back upon. In the kinds of campigns I described, there is no problem with the magic-user having nothing but combat spells all day; when the magic-user exhausts his spells, there is no problem with taking a break and resting to get spells back so there is no problem with the warlock being able to blast more than the magic-user. In short, Eldtritch Blast isn't a problem as written in a combat-focused game. Eldritch Blast becomes a problem in campaigns where combat is important, but only in the framework of the story. Without the framework of the story, spellcasters can memorize or learn only combat spells to cast all day and can rest whenever they wish. When the story interferes with strategy by creating goals other than "kill the monsters", spellcasters have to spend valuable spell slots or spells known on less offense-oriented spells; further, they frequently lose the option of resting whenever thier spell selection is exhausted. Warlocks do not have these concerns and thus have an advantage in achieving these non-kill-the-monsters goals compared to other characters. Let me give an example: I recently ran a game where the 15th level PCs were trying to track down some thieves to retrieve a valuable antidote before many people died. They had to push hard through the night with no rest. The wizard had to be very judicious in both his spell selection and in his use of what offensive spells he had memorized; the player made some excellent choices and did his best to adapt to the story's challenge. Most everyone else similarly had to adapt to the limited rest, healing, and other resources affected by time. Not the warlock- while everyone else was worried about how to last, he was flying, invisible, and doing the same damage as the rogue from further away without flanking or flat-footedness. This brings up the other big problem: ability to use the Eldritch Blast. While the blast isnt more powerful than wizard spells, the characteristics of its use give warlocks a considerable advantage. Sure, wizards and sorcerers have ranged touch attack spells; they also have the worst Base Attack Bonus of all the classes. The warlock has an easier time of hitting targets compared to arcane spellcasters using thier ranged touch spells. Sure, warlocks do the same damage with the same Base Attack Bonus as rogues with sneak attack; but warlocks deal thier damage every round no matter what from further away while rogues must maintain flanking position (which automatically fails if the target is flying). When this is combined with other invocations allowing them to fly, be invisible, affect constructs at full strength (albeit with a save), etc, all day thier advantages over other classes increase. One could argue that magic items can bestow these same abilites upon other classes,. but warlocks get magic items too, so they keep thier advantage. The warlock's blast isnt unsavable; it just needs some limits. I intend to experiment with limiting the number of simultaneous invocations usable at one time (forcing warlocks to manage thier powers, turning them on and off as necessary) and with making the Eldritch Blast a ranged attack roll instead of ranged touch (objects take only half damage from Eldritch Blast, implying that armor should provide some resistance; also, they have medium attack bonus so might as well make them use it). I am also open to other suggestions. Sorry to disagree with so many of you, but warlocks do have advantages over other classes and, in campaigns where non-combat goals affect combat tactics, those advantages can really overwhelm other characters.
Neeek 01-12-06, 07:25 PM	Sorry to disagree with so many of you, but warlocks do have advantages over other classes and, in campaigns where non-combat goals affect combat tactics, those advantages can really overwhelm other characters. No more so than a straight fighter. Also, by 15th level, a wizard can do things that should allow him to rest in safety without worrying about story goals. If he couldn't figure these out, that's his fault, not the warlock's. Further, a 15th level rogue should who isn't hitting more than once a round and/or using a burst weapon(say, acid) as his attack is just not trying all that hard. D&D would be a much better game if *every* class used similar mechanics to the Warlock. "per day" abilities make balancing classes nigh-impossible, and lead to things like Divine Persisence being broken.
Shirosai 01-12-06, 07:26 PM	Hm... Why do a few people think that eldritch blast is unbalanced? It's no more unbalanced that a fighter with a good sword, or an archer with a good bow. Eldritch blast has a max damage of 66, right? That's nothing compared to a decent fighter, and I'm fairly certain Mr.Fighter can, technically, swing his blade around unlimited times per day. Plus eldritch blast is subject to SR, which can be a pain, especially at higher levels where nearly everything has SR. I do agree, however, that the eldritch blast could be treated as a ranged attack, rather than a ranged touch.
Crimson_Concerto 01-12-06, 07:40 PM	Sorry to disagree with so many of you, but warlocks do have advantages over other classes and, in campaigns where non-combat goals affect combat tactics, those advantages can really overwhelm other characters.Okay, I read everything you posted, and all I saw were a few conditions when the Warlock would indeed triumph, but you fail to realize that although Warlocks do have advantages to other classes in some respects, other classes also have advantages to it in a lot of respects as well. That's what makes a class worth playing; the fact that in some area, you're going to have an advantage then characters of a different class. Yes, Warlocks are good, but so are other classes.
TheWinterBard 01-12-06, 08:00 PM	Yes, Warlocks are good, but so are other classes. Hear, hear!
General_Ridley 01-12-06, 08:02 PM	Really? I got 14400 when I calculated it... 1/round x 1 round/6 seconds x 60 seconds/minute x 60 minutes/hour x 24 hours/day = 14400 I'm gonna feel really dumb when it turns out I'm wrong. :P let's see. 1/round. 6 secs = 1 round, so 10/minute. 60 minutes per hour, so 600/hour. 24 hours a day, so 14400/ day. damn, I left the 10 out of my final calculations. thanks for noticing. I'm going to fix that in my original.
Todd 01-12-06, 08:15 PM	Let me give an example: I recently ran a game where the 15th level PCs were trying to track down some thieves to retrieve a valuable antidote before many people died. They had to push hard through the night with no rest. The wizard had to be very judicious in both his spell selection and in his use of what offensive spells he had memorized; the player made some excellent choices and did his best to adapt to the story's challenge. Most everyone else similarly had to adapt to the limited rest, healing, and other resources affected by time. Not the warlock- while everyone else was worried about how to last, he was flying, invisible, and doing the same damage as the rogue from further away without flanking or flat-footedness. Yes *that* situation is *exacty* the single one in which they really shine. Otherwise not so much. If you had had the party infiltrate a place with a permanent Invisiblity Purge then the Rogue would have had an advantage. Would you have had a problem with that? If you had had the party stage a single big ambush that would be their one fight for the day the Wizard and Cleric would have ruled. Would you have a problem with that? I've played a blast focused warlock and frankly I would never do it again. Yes the blast is reliable damage but it's also freakishly easy to counter. With the errata a simple globe of invulnerablity is all it takes in most cases. SR is also a huge issue for the warlock's blast until at least 11th level or so ... and after that a high SR & Acid resistant foe is still a problem. And if you use Vitriolic Blast then none of the other useful eldritch essence invocations, like nausiating blast, are an option. Frankly my warlock loaded up on scrolls just so he could do *something* in the encounters with things like dragons. There were a lot of times where he used scrolls to far better effect than his "trusty" blast. I also got really tired of all the fighters and whatnot flying faster than my warlock via boots of flight or potions of the same ... so I loaded up on fly spells too just to have halfway decent moblity when it counted. It's also annoying that Fell Flight doesn't have the built in feather fall the way the Wizzy version does so a dispel is really disruptive unless you spend more gold shoring up *that* weakness. Not having fireball or other area attacks was a big weakenss too. The warlock has to be really high level before those things become real options. Around 12th level I replaced the character with a Warmage and the whole group was much happier. Never once did the warmage run out of spells and his ranged touch spells did roughly twice the damage and had no SR. The new guy opened his first combat with a maximized empowered fireball and it only got better from there. If I were to play a warlock again you can bet your last penny that he will be a UMD focused guy. Spells are where the real power is at ... and being able to create them various ways via Imbue Item & feats starting at 12th level is the true power of the warlock class, not his blast.
TheWinterBard 01-12-06, 08:24 PM	Also, the "not having to choose what to do ahead of time" argument falls apart when placed against a sorcerer; they are very similar in that respect.
Milo HoBo 01-12-06, 09:50 PM	SNIP The warlock's blast isnt unsavable; it just needs some limits. I intend to experiment with limiting the number of simultaneous invocations usable at one time (forcing warlocks to manage thier powers, turning them on and off as necessary) and with making the Eldritch Blast a ranged attack roll instead of ranged touch (objects take only half damage from Eldritch Blast, implying that armor should provide some resistance; also, they have medium attack bonus so might as well make them use it). I am also open to other suggestions. Magic of Incarnum has the same basic set up that you describe, and might fit your concept of balanced better. They can't turn their powers off, but switch where their energy is going to. Hope that helps.
Mirikon 01-12-06, 10:31 PM	The warlock is quite balanced as is. A barbarian will always outdamage them, no matter what level you're talking about, at least until you get to monsters with high AC, low touch AC later on. But those typically have Spell Resistance. Basically, the Warlock fills much the same niche as the Bard. Backup magic, and some melee ability. Also, later on when they get Imbue Item, either the Scribe Scroll or Magic Tatoo (Races of Faerun) feats give them access to all arcane and divine spells for a relatively low price. Personally, I like magic tatoo better, because you can put them on other people, and they can use it without needing a check. It is a use activated magic item that takes a standard action (doesn't provoke). And for 1 hour creation time and a cost of a measly Spell Level x Caster Level x 50gp, it is quite a bargain. Of course, since you are always the target of the spell when it is activated, it has some limitations. But it does allow you to help that fighter out by giving him access to Heal in an emergency.
Roatso 01-13-06, 01:36 AM	I think the Warlock is fine as is. Compare the damage a Warlock and an equal level Warmage can produce... I'm sure you'll see that Eldritch blast is quite balanced. What ya think.....?
Seeker of Undeath 01-13-06, 01:48 AM	From what I've witnessed, personally experienced, and heard/read on these boards I have to say that the Warlock is presently rather balanced. As for the Warlock's party role...it's the anti-Bard. Whereas Bard does a lot of things, but few of them expertly, the Warlock does only a few things, but does those things solidly. The Warlock just has to constantly look for creative and unorthodox ways of using the limited abilities it gets. Well...then there's always the Use Magic Device thing. We won't get into that. ;) BTW a high-level Warlock makes an ideal scout. Fell Flight + Invisibility (Retributive or Walk Unseen as necessary) + Entropic Ward + Dark Foresight (cast on self and party members) is just...beautiful. The only hope of detection is some form of seeing invisibility, blindsense, or scent. Only seeing through invisibility would let them be pin-pointed, though. Well that and possibly Blindsight, but I'm not sure how that reacts with Entropic Ward. Meanwhile you can telepathically communicate with the party a short ways and everyone gets some decent bonuses.
Lady Maedhros 01-13-06, 01:56 AM	Warlocks are weak, if anything. In order to take full advantage of their class abilities, they need to take a lot of feats. Item creation feats for their Decieve Item and Imbue Item abilities, Point Blank and Precise for their Eldritch Blasts, Ability Focus or Spell-like Metamagic to help them deal with spell resistance, and if they have any room left, perhaps an Extra Invocation here or there. Warlocks don't have bonus feats of any kind to alleviate this pain, and at two skill points per level, they can basically max UMD and then flip a coin to see if they'll gimp themselves on Concentration or on Spellcraft. Plus, throw a few black dragons or clay golems at him, and watch him a) cry b) pull out his wand of Cure Light and play main healer while the cleric deals out wtfpwn damage You want overpowered, check out anything based on the cracked and asinine Vancian casting system. Except possibly bards. Give me a lock, a bard, a paladin and a favored soul and i will thank you for the most balanced party i'd ever had the fortune to DM.
Hariman 01-13-06, 02:03 AM	You don't really need to balance out a Warlock. I'm playing one and the only major assets he has is that he hits more often than the melee characters as often as he wants and that he can use scrolls and wands without a problem. (Though there is a cap on scrolls because the DC for UMD is based on caster level.) My warlock actually relied on a wand of Lightning Bolt instead of the Eldritch Blast during the last session. All you need to do is have a variety of enemies that gives everybody a chance to shine. Throw in a group of low HD undead to let the cleric shine. Throw in a monster with spell resistance to let the melee characters shine. Throw in a monster with high Damage Reduction to let the spellcasters (& the warloock) shine. Toss in a series of battles that wears down the other casters of the group to let the warlock and the melee characters shine. Throw in a monk or a ninja with a high touch AC to confound the warlock and the other caster's ray spells. (And make magic missile shine.) Just not all at once. Two or three types in an encounter is the most I'd drop on a party. The warlock might do consistent damage most turns, missing occasionally but he doesn't excel at doing the excesses of damage that a wizard/sorcerer can do with Scorching Ray/Fireball/Lightning Bolt. A rogue can do more damage because a rogue can get a full attack with sneak attack. There is only one thing that is really needed to balance out the Warlock that some might miss/forget: Deceive Item only works for spell trigger and spell completion items. A warlock cannot use Deceive Item to take 10 on the Use Magic Device check when using the Imbue Item class ability. To make an item with Imbue Item, the warlock must still roll the use magic device check to "know" the spell and must have the required item creation feat. This prevents the warlock from abusing Imbue Item by taking 10 and "knowing" all the spells he needs. Yes the Warlock can blast and Invoke all day, they just serve themselves better if they don't. A warlock will gain much more if he makes use of the various magic items that he can buy. This includes healing wands as the warlock can make a backup cleric in dire times. Just let the player enjoy having a warlock and don't worry too much. The warlock only seems broken at first glance.
The Dude 01-13-06, 02:43 AM	Although I respect the opinions of those who disagree with me, I must point out that it isnt fair to compare the damage dealt and all-day quality of a warlock's eldritch blast to melee combatant's melee attacks. Melee combatants must be in harm's way to deal thier damage and must contend with missing more often (more attacks = more chances to miss; each attack has less attack bonus than the last). The fact that a warlock can deal remotely similar damage to a melee combatant more reliably, at a distance, and with magical safeguards- before counting the effect of magic items- only reinforces my belief that the warlock's eldritch blast is imbalanced. Many of you disagree with this conclusion; maybe I am not considering something and you are right. But you are not going to prove your point by making comparisons between warlocks and melee combatants.
Neeek 01-13-06, 03:02 AM	The fact that a warlock can deal remotely similar damage to a melee combatant more reliably, at a distance, and with magical safeguards- before counting the effect of magic items- only reinforces my belief that the warlock's eldritch blast is imbalanced. First of all, they *don't* do anywhere near the amount of damage that a similarly leveled meleer does. I'd guess that, on average, a suboptimal meleer will do 2.5 times more damage per hit than a warlock of similar level. And, as the levels go up, will hit more times per round. Second, why would you be looking at things before counting the effects of magic items? That just silly. The game is designed *expecting* magic items to be at a certain level. If they are not, then non-casters will be grossly underpowered. Finally, it is in fact perfectly fair to compare all day meleeing to all day Eldritch Blasting. So the melee classes are attacked more often. So what? They have better armor and more hps specifically because they are suppose to take more attacks. The Warlock, on the other hand, will probably have half the hps and a ginormous comparative deficiency in AC. If a Warlock tried to actually fight in melee, they'd be dead in a couple hit from anything even marginally level appropriate.
Oliver D'Argent 01-13-06, 07:34 AM	Second, why would you be looking at things before counting the effects of magic items? That just silly. The game is designed *expecting* magic items to be at a certain level. If they are not, then non-casters will be grossly underpowered. To add to this comment; without magic or feats that allow him to use heavier armor, a 15th level Warlock will have a maximum AC of 19 which is pretty much nothing at that level. Finally, it is in fact perfectly fair to compare all day meleeing to all day Eldritch Blasting. So the melee classes are attacked more often. So what? They have better armor and more hps specifically because they are suppose to take more attacks. The Warlock, on the other hand, will probably have half the hps and a ginormous comparative deficiency in AC. If a Warlock tried to actually fight in melee, they'd be dead in a couple hit from anything even marginally level appropriate. Also, a Fighter or Ranger that has focused on ranged weapons can put out a lot of damage at range and will still have advantages in HP and, in the Fighter's case, AC.
Lord Schpungus 01-13-06, 08:03 AM	I get it now! The warlock is just like the soulknife! While the soulknife is a meleer who can't be disarmed, the warlock is the archer who can't be disarmed. Sweet!
phelanarcetus 01-13-06, 09:26 AM	First of all, they *don't* do anywhere near the amount of damage that a similarly leveled meleer does. I'd guess that, on average, a suboptimal meleer will do 2.5 times more damage per hit than a warlock of similar level. And, as the levels go up, will hit more times per round. Second, why would you be looking at things before counting the effects of magic items? That just silly. The game is designed *expecting* magic items to be at a certain level. If they are not, then non-casters will be grossly underpowered. Finally, it is in fact perfectly fair to compare all day meleeing to all day Eldritch Blasting. So the melee classes are attacked more often. So what? They have better armor and more hps specifically because they are suppose to take more attacks. The Warlock, on the other hand, will probably have half the hps and a ginormous comparative deficiency in AC. If a Warlock tried to actually fight in melee, they'd be dead in a couple hit from anything even marginally level appropriate. I find it better to compare the Warlock to an archer, rather than to a meleer. In this case, the comparison is much more even. Neither is on the front lines taking a heavy pounding (assuming the enemy hasn't said "oh... that guy's slow, we can avoid him and kill his friends", which has happened for me), and is instead making ranged attacks. If you assume the archer character has a basically unlimited supply of arrows, which should be easy enough with a bag of holding or even a pack animal early on, they have similarly unlimited uses. The Warlock gets a touch attack instead of a regular one, but the archer character has a much higher attack bonus between higher BAB, magical weaponry, and so on. The Warlock ignores DR, but deals with SR. And a properly outfitted archer will have a selection of arrows to bypass just about any DR (as long as what type of DR is needed can be identified by the character). A blast does more damage per hit than an arrow, after a little while. But the archer gets multiple attacks, as well as being less feat-starved. In fact, by 2nd level the archer should have Rapid Shot, and then he's potentially doing 2d8 damage while the Warlock is still doing 1d6. Eventually the Warlock has his 11d6 (more if he has a Warlock's Scepter and uses charges), and the archer has multiple attacks for 1d8+some bonus dice+some other bonuses. Against high AC, low touch AC foes, the Warlock has an advantage over the archer. But the archer has superior range, the ability to switch targets, much more potential to add damage, as well as better hp and AC. Now the Warlock has other class features, the most important of these being the rest of the Invocations, and the Deceive Item ability. So the Warlock has a bunch of unlimited use Invocations (aside from the amount of actions you get in a day, that is), but remember that he only gets 12 total. Three least, three lesser, three greater, three dark. Extra Invocation can never get bonus Dark Invocations. This means that the Warlock's repertoire of Invocations is extremely small. Sure, there are some very nice things in here, and whatever you take you can use over and over again, but you can't use very many different things. So that's where Deceive Item comes in. Warlocks are the masters of UMD, so they can get a lot of Spell Trigger and Spell Completion items and use those to expand their versatility. They can use any form of consumable, which makes them great for versatility, at the cost of acquiring all the items to make them versatile. A Warlock is like an arcane archer (but not like the prestige class). He has less total damage output, less durability, but he has more versatility. Warlocks do single-target ranged damage fairly well, possibly even competitively with a suboptimal but decent archer, and they do "filling in the gaps" very well, with an assortment of items.
Todd 01-13-06, 10:45 AM	I will just add that if the Archer is a ranger he should have a number of very nice spells that signficatly boost what he can do. Via these and some wands and his natural skills he can be fairly versitle too.
Kurotowa 01-13-06, 12:26 PM	Just to offer a specific example, I'm in a campaign where I play a 12th level Warlock and another player has a Ranger 6/OotBI 6. My Warlock almost never misses. His EB is 7d6. Using Eldritch Chain he does an average of 24.5 damage to one target and 12 damage to two other targets. So between 24.5 and 48.5, depending on how many targets are clumped together. The archer almost never misses either. His bow does 1d8+6. Using Rapid Shot he's usually doing 4d8+24. That's an average of 42 damage; slightly less against my max but it can all be directed at one target, which is much better when we're facing a single powerful monster. With Manyshot, he's doing 3d8+18. That's an average of 37.5, still a lot more than my average damage to a single target.
Lina_Inverse 01-13-06, 02:35 PM	Although I respect the opinions of those who disagree with me, I must point out that it isnt fair to compare the damage dealt and all-day quality of a warlock's eldritch blast to melee combatant's melee attacks. Melee combatants must be in harm's way to deal thier damage and must contend with missing more often (more attacks = more chances to miss; each attack has less attack bonus than the last). The fact that a warlock can deal remotely similar damage to a melee combatant more reliably, at a distance, and with magical safeguards- before counting the effect of magic items- only reinforces my belief that the warlock's eldritch blast is imbalanced. Many of you disagree with this conclusion; maybe I am not considering something and you are right. But you are not going to prove your point by making comparisons between warlocks and melee combatants. 30foot range. Archers have hundreds of feet range. So do casters. The warlock basically needs to be in melee range to use his blasts.
Chaotix42 01-13-06, 02:43 PM	30foot range. Archers have hundreds of feet range. So do casters. The warlock basically needs to be in melee range to use his blasts. Eldritch Spear fixes that problem quite nicely.
Yak of Darkness 01-13-06, 03:06 PM	Melee combatants must be in harm's way to deal thier damage and must contend with missing more often (more attacks = more chances to miss; each attack has less attack bonus than the last).That's an impressive argument right there. Warlocks being limited to one blast a round is actually a strength of the class, because then they don't have as many opportunities to miss as a class with multiple attacks. I love these boards sometimes. :D
Todd 01-13-06, 03:13 PM	Eldritch Spear fixes that problem quite nicely. I like Eldritch Spear ... but you can't use it at the same time as Eldritch Chain or Eldritch Cone or Eldritch Doom. So either the warlock can either snipe or he can get up reasonably close and affect more than one target. He can't do both at the same time. And if he snipes on one target then the archer is *really* going to be able to pump out more damage in comparison. And just for the record the normal range of the Eldritch Blast is 60' not 30'. ;) Archer has 110' range incriments & even close range spells are longer range than this at the higher levels let alone medium and long range junk.
wolfie-kun 01-13-06, 03:17 PM	That's an impressive argument right there. Warlocks being limited to one blast a round is actually a strength of the class, because then they don't have as many opportunities to miss as a class with multiple attacks. I love these boards sometimes. :D Is it in the errata that they can only use their blast once per round? I don't see anything in CA that says that.
Kurotowa 01-13-06, 04:37 PM	Is it in the errata that they can only use their blast once per round? I don't see anything in CA that says that. The EB is a SLA that takes a standard action to use, not an attack action. Since you only get one standard action a round, you can only use it once. Full attack doesn't help because it isn't an attack. Yes, there are a lot of little factors. A warlock doesn't have to worry about DR and has a lower chance of missing. An archer doesn't have to worry about SR and can do more damage to a single target. Overall I think it balances very well.
phelanarcetus 01-13-06, 04:37 PM	Warlocks can only use Eldritch Blast once per round because using it is a standard action. By taking the Quicken Spell-Like Ability feat and selecting Eldritch Blast as the ability, you can use it as a free action 3 times per day. However, when quickened, you are limited in the effective spell level (unmodified blast is level 1, but the various blast shape and blast essence invocations change the effective spell level). Meaning that you can't quicken Eldritch Doom, or Utterdark Spear, or similar, without epic levels. Additionally, an unmodified Blast is negated by a Lesser Globe of Invulnerability. 60 feet is as good as you can get without using Eldritch Spear. Decent, but not spectacular. To use Cone or Doom, you need to be closer for any decent effect. Your advantage over an archer in damage-dealing with your Blast is that you avoid DR guaranteed (while he may not if he lacks the appropriate arrow types), and have the ability to impose a status effect on your target. His advantages are range, ability to mix targets, and a much greater ability to have a build that can add major damage in certain situations. You lose Blast damage rather quickly when you try to take levels in another class. He's also more durable than you, though less versatile if you have a good selection of magical items like you should. What's that 60-foot range mean for you? It means that you will be within charge range of most opponents you face. That archer at 110 feet... they need to run to reach him. Granted you can easily fly, which gives you a maneverability advantage over some opponents. And since there's no penalty to you for moving and blasting (while an archer gives up his full attack by doing so), you can maintain maximum range without losing damage. But you're still vulnerable to charges, and even close range spells (CL 14 gets them to 60 feet). And if you want to use Eldritch Doom effectively, you kindof need to be in the middle of a pack of enemies. Not a good place for a low-AC, low-HP character to be. Which makes that a singularly bad choice for one of your three Dark Invocations.
Thorgrimm 01-13-06, 04:42 PM	Wow look at all these replies in less than a day.... heh oh and wulfie kun that is pretty much my basic question that i asked, how many times can they use it a round and if it is only one round, or maybe one round per attach (per the base attack bonus) does it say this. im thinking of playing one and my dm wants an answer on this before he will let me play it. I do agree now that being limited to one time per level or what ever does not make sense when compared to other classes. Though if it is one time per attack based on the BAB that probably would be a bit much, hence the reason i want to find actual definative writing that states that or the once per round theory to show my dm.
Lotus Crane 01-13-06, 04:45 PM	It's once per round. I forget where, but it is, because an eldritch blast is a standard action, like an invocation.
Seeker of Undeath 01-13-06, 05:08 PM	Wow look at all these replies in less than a day.... heh oh and wulfie kun that is pretty much my basic question that i asked, how many times can they use it a round and if it is only one round, or maybe one round per attach (per the base attack bonus) does it say this. im thinking of playing one and my dm wants an answer on this before he will let me play it. I do agree now that being limited to one time per level or what ever does not make sense when compared to other classes. Though if it is one time per attack based on the BAB that probably would be a bit much, hence the reason i want to find actual definative writing that states that or the once per round theory to show my dm. :rofl: I like that you call it a theory. Well let's get to it then... Eldritch Blasts are invocations. Invocations are spell-like abilities. Unless otherwise stated spell-like abilities require a standard action to activiate. Complete Arcane mentions no exceptions. Without being a Thrall of Demogorgon or a certain creature (whose name escapes me right now), a character only gets one standard action per turn. "A warlock's invocations are spell-like abilities; using an invocation is therefore a standard action that provokes attacks of opportunity." Complete Arcane page 7. Is it still just a 'theory'?
Grand Theft Otto 01-13-06, 05:31 PM	I have to disagree about the warlock being balanced, but for different reasons than what has been mentioned here. (and before anyone decides to shoot down my argument with a silly authority-attack, yes I have both played and DMed a warlock) Eldtritch Blast has two problems: 1) in some campaigns, it gives them an advantage over other classes, and 2) warlock class features make Eldritch Blast more powerful than options available to other classes. People get most upset about the Eldritch Blast possibly outshining other spell-casters. However, Eldritch blast is only a problem in certain camapign types. In dungeon-crawls or other campaign types where combat is of primary importance and all other things are secondary. As was already pointed out, the Eldritch Blast doesnt do as damage as a Meteor Swarm or similar 9th level spells; the only advantage to Eldritch Blast is that it only requires 1 ranged touch attack and has no save (unlike Meteor Swarm, which requires 4 ranged touch attacks or a Reflex save). While a typical magic-user can only cast these spells a handful of times per day, they have other spells of lower level that do damage similar to the warlock's Eldritch Blast they can fall back upon. In the kinds of campigns I described, there is no problem with the magic-user having nothing but combat spells all day; when the magic-user exhausts his spells, there is no problem with taking a break and resting to get spells back so there is no problem with the warlock being able to blast more than the magic-user. In short, Eldtritch Blast isn't a problem as written in a combat-focused game. Eldritch Blast becomes a problem in campaigns where combat is important, but only in the framework of the story. Without the framework of the story, spellcasters can memorize or learn only combat spells to cast all day and can rest whenever they wish. When the story interferes with strategy by creating goals other than "kill the monsters", spellcasters have to spend valuable spell slots or spells known on less offense-oriented spells; further, they frequently lose the option of resting whenever thier spell selection is exhausted. Warlocks do not have these concerns and thus have an advantage in achieving these non-kill-the-monsters goals compared to other characters. Let me give an example: I recently ran a game where the 15th level PCs were trying to track down some thieves to retrieve a valuable antidote before many people died. They had to push hard through the night with no rest. The wizard had to be very judicious in both his spell selection and in his use of what offensive spells he had memorized; the player made some excellent choices and did his best to adapt to the story's challenge. Most everyone else similarly had to adapt to the limited rest, healing, and other resources affected by time. Not the warlock- while everyone else was worried about how to last, he was flying, invisible, and doing the same damage as the rogue from further away without flanking or flat-footedness. This brings up the other big problem: ability to use the Eldritch Blast. While the blast isnt more powerful than wizard spells, the characteristics of its use give warlocks a considerable advantage. Sure, wizards and sorcerers have ranged touch attack spells; they also have the worst Base Attack Bonus of all the classes. The warlock has an easier time of hitting targets compared to arcane spellcasters using thier ranged touch spells. Sure, warlocks do the same damage with the same Base Attack Bonus as rogues with sneak attack; but warlocks deal thier damage every round no matter what from further away while rogues must maintain flanking position (which automatically fails if the target is flying). When this is combined with other invocations allowing them to fly, be invisible, affect constructs at full strength (albeit with a save), etc, all day thier advantages over other classes increase. One could argue that magic items can bestow these same abilites upon other classes,. but warlocks get magic items too, so they keep thier advantage. The warlock's blast isnt unsavable; it just needs some limits. I intend to experiment with limiting the number of simultaneous invocations usable at one time (forcing warlocks to manage thier powers, turning them on and off as necessary) and with making the Eldritch Blast a ranged attack roll instead of ranged touch (objects take only half damage from Eldritch Blast, implying that armor should provide some resistance; also, they have medium attack bonus so might as well make them use it). I am also open to other suggestions. Sorry to disagree with so many of you, but warlocks do have advantages over other classes and, in campaigns where non-combat goals affect combat tactics, those advantages can really overwhelm other characters. So basically, in a game that doesnt focus onm combat, where a wizard contribute's more to the overall plot, by scrying, charming, and using varied other utility spells, the warlock gets to outshine them in combat. And this is an issue because....? That he deals about as much damage as a badly designed rogue, but doesnt have the benefit of 8 skill points a level to help out in the meat of the campaign. That, in the rare combats, he whips up? He should, since he's not contributing as much in the other parts of the game. The majority of the time... HE's the one on the sidelines.
Seeker of Undeath 01-13-06, 05:33 PM	Warlocks really shine outside combat. It's beautiful.
Lina_Inverse 01-13-06, 05:40 PM	Warlocks really shine outside combat. It's beautiful. *chuckles* no they dont. Any out of combat challenges should be scaled for your level just as combat challenges should be. And thus warlocks will be even worse. When your 9th level, out of combat challenges will involve 5th level spells or similiar effort, when your 17th level youll need 9th level spells. Warlocks wont even be able to HELP out of combat.
phelanarcetus 01-13-06, 06:13 PM	That depends on what the non-combat challenge is. With a decent Int score, a Warlock can do pretty well on an a selection of skills, and he has a Least Invocation to buff some as well, if he wants to. With the right selection of Invocations, a Warlock can do fairly well as a scout, or a party face. And never forget that he can take full advantage of UMD to use those high level spells. Anyway, I don't think it's right to compare Warlocks to actual casters. Warlocks are like an arcane rogue/archer sort of thing. Some skills (I think the class cries out for more skill points, myself), a lot of assorted utility, and some punch in combat. If a challenge needs 9th level spells, the Fighter will be standing around picking his nails with a dagger... which is just what you're saying the Warlock will be doing. The Warlock is not there to dominate in a role, like the Barbarian is king of melee damage (aside from heavily buffed Clerics, and such), or the Wizard is king of having a spell for every situation, even if he might not have it prepped right now. The Warlock is there to fill a couple of roles well. He's a class whose portfolio isn't covered exactly by some other class that does it bette, and he doesn't have a portfolio he dominates in. But he can, in a pinch, fill a lot of different roles. Meaning he makes a good member of a small party (where roles need to be doubled up) or a large party (where roles are all filled more than once).
Seeker of Undeath 01-13-06, 06:33 PM	*chuckles* no they dont. Any out of combat challenges should be scaled for your level just as combat challenges should be. And thus warlocks will be even worse. When your 9th level, out of combat challenges will involve 5th level spells or similiar effort, when your 17th level youll need 9th level spells. Warlocks wont even be able to HELP out of combat.Clueless as usual, I see.
Neeek 01-13-06, 07:36 PM	Just to offer a specific example, I'm in a campaign where I play a 12th level Warlock and another player has a Ranger 6/OotBI 6. The archer almost never misses either. His bow does 1d8+6. There is a 12th level archer in your campaign that only deals 1d8+6 damage a hit? That's seems a bit low. Why hasn't he picked up a fire/frost/shock bow yet?
Kurotowa 01-13-06, 11:51 PM	There is a 12th level archer in your campaign that only deals 1d8+6 damage a hit? That's seems a bit low. Why hasn't he picked up a fire/frost/shock bow yet? He went with accuracy over damage and took a plain +3 bow over one with an energy ability. As for the use of a warlock, I can only speak for what I know. My warlock has found a number of highly useful non-combat uses. With Baleful Utterance I'm the lockpick (no rogue). With Beguiling Influance I'm the face (+27 to Bluff and Intimidate). With Fell Flight and Flee the Scene I'm the mobility guy (teleporting the party around obstacles or stringing rope bridges). My UMD is now high enough to make every check and I picked up Scribe Scroll, so I've got a backup bag of tricks for tight situations. It's not a powerful class. I can't come close to the damage of the paladin weilding her keen bastard sword while using Power Attack and Smite Evil. I don't have the durability of the archer or the spellpower of the cleric. But I have a strong bag of tricks and I know how to use them well.
Seeker of Undeath 01-14-06, 01:10 AM	He went with accuracy over damage and took a plain +3 bow over one with an energy ability. As for the use of a warlock, I can only speak for what I know. My warlock has found a number of highly useful non-combat uses. With Baleful Utterance I'm the lockpick (no rogue). With Beguiling Influance I'm the face (+27 to Bluff and Intimidate). With Fell Flight and Flee the Scene I'm the mobility guy (teleporting the party around obstacles or stringing rope bridges). My UMD is now high enough to make every check and I picked up Scribe Scroll, so I've got a backup bag of tricks for tight situations. It's not a powerful class. I can't come close to the damage of the paladin weilding her keen bastard sword while using Power Attack and Smite Evil. I don't have the durability of the archer or the spellpower of the cleric. But I have a strong bag of tricks and I know how to use them well.Thank you! This is precisely what I was talking about. (Take notes Lina.) Thoughtful use of what you have is what keeps adventurers going. After all we can't all have the +17 bastard sword of god-smiting or the 23-level spell of ultimate save-or-suffer. Yet that isn't a preventative in the least.
K_Man 01-14-06, 02:06 AM	I have two beefs with it...the Unlimited Blasts per day, and the unlimited Invocations. I mean, fly, invisible, and do a ranged touch that drains levels, infinitely? The Touch to hit is easy, as they'll be flatfooted, too. Granted, every class has it's ludicrous builds that are just plain effective, so other classes can get just as ridiculous. Additionally, whomever said Archer-warriors are less feat intensive, I disagree. To be even remotely effective, you need: PBS, Precise, and Rapid. Then, toss in utility ones of Weap Focus and Manyshot, and it gets up there in the feat dedication!
Seeker of Undeath 01-14-06, 02:22 AM	I have two beefs with it...the Unlimited Blasts per day, and the unlimited Invocations.You won't once you see them in play.I mean, fly, invisible, and do a ranged touch that drains levels, infinitely?Yep. Flight. Invisibility as long as it's not seen through or bypassed with Blindsense, Blindsight, or Scent. I know of the three only Blindsight would pinpoint the 'lock, but the other two are fine for aiming breath weapons.The Touch to hit is easy, as they'll be flatfooted, too.I've noticed. Thank gods they only get one shot per turn, eh? Granted, every class has it's ludicrous builds that are just plain effective, so other classes can get just as ridiculous.I'm glad you see that. Additionally, whomever said Archer-warriors are less feat intensive, I disagree. To be even remotely effective, you need: PBS, Precise, and Rapid. Then, toss in utility ones of Weap Focus and Manyshot, and it gets up there in the feat dedication!Similarly, blast-focused Warlocks (yes there are sadly some out there), need Pointblank Shot, Precise Shot, Spell Penetration, and Greater Spell Penetration. Other nice ones to have are Improved Precise Shot, and Arcane Mastery. As a back up they should probably learn Vitriolic Blast and Eldritch Spear. To be completely mobile they should learn Fell Flight. To avoid retaliation they need invisibility (two options there) and most likely Entropic Warding. For crowd control it's good to also have Eldritch Chain. You'll need to see the target, so See the Unseen and Devil's Sight (for the darkness users) are almost required. Already that build has begun to eat up most of the Warlock's feats and invocations. On the up side it's still okay outside of battle since acid tends to be nasty for objects, and the flight makes it a great shuttle. The invisibility and Entropic Warding makes for great spying/scouting. So you're not useless, but you're not the most versatile. To keep up your damage you'll also want to invest in a Greater Chasuble of Fell Power and a Warlock's Scepter. Time to shell out the cash or bite the bullet and nab a couple of item crafting feats. But that's just one way to build a warlock. The blaster's not my particular favorite. So I'd have to agree that the ranged fighters don't necessarily have it easy.
Marix 01-14-06, 03:11 AM	ok. look. compare the number of times EB is NORMALLY used in a round, with the possibility of using Quicken Spell Like Ability x 3 a day: TWICE A ROUND, FOR THREE SEPARATE ROUNDS. a rogue's sneak attack with flanking, OR using a high bluff, OR invisible, OR class abilities: SNEAK ATTACK WITH EVERY ATTACK HE/SHE/IT CAN GET. a fighter's full round of attacks with feats: BETWEEN FOUR TO TWELVE DEPENDING ON THE SELECTION OF FEATS, EVERY TIME a sorcerer's spellcasting with metamagic feats: UPWARDS TO TWICE A ROUND, GET OUT THREE SPELLS WITH THE RIGHT FEATS a wizard's spellcasting with metamagic feats: THE SAME AS THE SORCERER from a cleric's spellcasting to melee with feats: COULD CAST THE SAME AS THE ARCANE CLASSES, AND STILL SWING A MEAN STICK a barbarians rage with decent feats: ONE HELL OF A WHACKER a ranger with decent feat selections: TWF WITH TEMPEST. NUFF SAID. a monk with the VOIP/ decent feat selection: UGH. YOU KNOW THE DRILL a bard with decent feat selections: HEAL. SING. FIGHT. SING AGAIN. HEAL. MESMERIZE. HMM. all these classes more regularly OUTPERFORMS the 'lock in their moments of singular "shininess" or when they work together as a team. you got upset because of the one time the 'lock took advantage of his abilities and used them correctly, saving the party's bacon. then, others say that EB is unbalanced because you can use it every round. well folks, that may be true that EB is usable every round, but you forget that it's only usable ONCE A ROUND, and that rule can only be bent 3 times a day with Quicken Spell-Like Ability. as for the invocations, there are only so many times constructs are going to be thrown at the characters (and thats because of the high cost of making the damn things) and a lot of creatures are immune (or close to it) to a lot of elemental effects. thats why you dont see a sonic blast based invocation, or a force based invocation. the 'lock is then FORCED to use his secondary ability with UMD (yes, secondary) to cover the situations that his EB cant handle. by the way, so what if he sometimes gets an AoO on him for casting an invocation... with the right armor, and his DR, if he slips up sometimes using HB in later levels, he aint going to drop it easily. that is one of the selling features of that class that really shines, IMHO. if you think that EB is still overpowered, do an actual comparison test with a rogue in an ideal combat situation. im willing to bet the rogue will come out on top a few more times than the 'lock will. but if that wont change your mind, well, i hope this will be the last thread on this. (which is asking for a lot) :mad:
King_Bulba 01-14-06, 03:21 AM	I have two beefs with it...the Unlimited Blasts per day, and the unlimited Invocations. I mean, fly, invisible, and do a ranged touch that drains levels, infinitely? The Touch to hit is easy, as they'll be flatfooted, too. Granted, every class has it's ludicrous builds that are just plain effective, so other classes can get just as ridiculous. Additionally, whomever said Archer-warriors are less feat intensive, I disagree. To be even remotely effective, you need: PBS, Precise, and Rapid. Then, toss in utility ones of Weap Focus and Manyshot, and it gets up there in the feat dedication! Dont forget that Ranger and Fighter get Feats in the class, plus they can mix their classes to get more feats if needed and not lose progression in their dmg. The Warlock can't multi class without sacraficing full dmg out of its blast. This means that they get less feats and the feats they do get makes or breaks the character. You need just as many feats as archers but less feats to do it, hence people see them as feat intensive.
Cadfan 01-14-06, 03:35 AM	My only real complaint is Nauseating Blast. There's just something about a flying, invisible, ranged attacker who denies his opponent anything past a move action. Enemy spellcasters, rogues, and other bad fort classes go down a little too quick. The blast that drains levels might bug me too, but I haven't seen it in action yet. I may just get frustrated with it if it increases bookkeeping too much. A high bookkeeping spell that can be cast once or twice per day is acceptable, one that shows up every combat can be pretty rough. Anyways, in noncombat situations, I've never seen a problem. The ability to fly, be invisible, and have good social skills goes a long way towards contributing something useful to the group.
Earthcrosser599 01-14-06, 03:45 AM	I have two beefs with it...the Unlimited Blasts per day, and the unlimited Invocations. I mean, fly, invisible, and do a ranged touch that drains levels, infinitely? The Touch to hit is easy, as they'll be flatfooted, too. I think you need to play or see one played before passing judgement.
Lina_Inverse 01-14-06, 05:31 AM	That depends on what the non-combat challenge is. With a decent Int score, a Warlock can do pretty well on an a selection of skills, and he has a Least Invocation to buff some as well, if he wants to. With the right selection of Invocations, a Warlock can do fairly well as a scout, or a party face. Most skills are done better via spells. Although yeah, they are good scouts. Cant deny that. As for being a face, any class with diplomacy can be a passable face. But without charm, dominate etc. you cant really be called a good face. And never forget that he can take full advantage of UMD to use those high level spells.] That requires someone in the party capable of crafting said scrolls. So someone could already fill said problem. Anyway, I don't think it's right to compare Warlocks to actual casters. Warlocks are like an arcane rogue/archer sort of thing. Some skills (I think the class cries out for more skill points, myself), a lot of assorted utility, and some punch in combat. Well yes, but someone said they rule out of combat, which they dont. Wizards do. If a challenge needs 9th level spells, the Fighter will be standing around picking his nails with a dagger... which is just what you're saying the Warlock will be doing. Yeah pretty much. The problem is, at 17th level. any skill based challenges can pretty much be overcome with very low level spells. I dont consider something beaten by a level 2 spell at 17th level challengeing, espilly not draining 20% of the partys resourses. The Warlock is not there to dominate in a role, like the Barbarian is king of melee damage (aside from heavily buffed Clerics, and such), or the Wizard is king of having a spell for every situation, even if he might not have it prepped right now. The Warlock is there to fill a couple of roles well. He's a class whose portfolio isn't covered exactly by some other class that does it bette, and he doesn't have a portfolio he dominates in. But he can, in a pinch, fill a lot of different roles. Meaning he makes a good member of a small party (where roles need to be doubled up) or a large party (where roles are all filled more than once). If you arent dominateing in a roll, your not usefull to your party are you.
Seeker of Undeath 01-14-06, 07:12 AM	Well yes, but someone said they rule out of combat, which they dont. Wizards do.Actually I never said they "rule". I said they were good at out of combat endeavors and described the performance as "beautiful". But take from that what you will.
Oliver D'Argent 01-14-06, 10:58 AM	If you aren't dominating in a role, you're not useful to your party are you. [spelling corrections mine] I disagree with this line of thought. Every character is useful to the party in some capacity - some are just more useful than others. Even Wimpy the Barbarian (with a 3 in every stat) could provide a distraction (briefly) that allows another character to successfully use one of their abilities. The game is (or should be) about teamwork.
Arkonth 01-14-06, 01:06 PM	Well, this is Lina we're talking about, so let's please not start arguing class roles and responsibilities as Lina definitely plays a very specific style of game.
Mirikon 01-14-06, 04:24 PM	*chuckles* no they dont. Any out of combat challenges should be scaled for your level just as combat challenges should be. And thus warlocks will be even worse. When your 9th level, out of combat challenges will involve 5th level spells or similiar effort, when your 17th level youll need 9th level spells. Warlocks wont even be able to HELP out of combat. And who said out of combat challenges have to involve spells? You've got Bluff and Intimidate as class skills, CHA as a prime stat, and an invocation that gives an automatic +6 to Bluff, Intimidate, and Diplomacy. I'd say you're doing all right so far for non-combat challenges. It's just like the rogue or bard. Max those social skills (and UMD) and you can make sure combat doesn't even START. Oh, and then there's all these magic items, and you being able to take ten on UMD checks, and make magic items out of any spell in existence. And all you need is really one feat (Scribe Scroll, or Magic Tatoo, depending on your preference). Viola, you get that Heal spell when you need it. Bam, you get Glibness. Alakazam, you get any damn spell the wizard and cleric can cast, as well as those they can't. I'd say you're doing just fine, Lina. As for skills being done better as spells? Charm, Dominate, and other enchantments aren't foolproof. Skills (and glibness), however, work on everyone. Bards never get above 6th level spells, but they make a much better party face than the wizard. Rogues make a much better party face than the wizard (if they spend the skills right). Warlocks are just as good as either of these classes at being a party face. Especially in the higher levels, when you can expect people to have access to things like Antimagic field or Zone of Truth or Protection from Evil. Your charm and dominate spells don't do so well when Prot. from Evil is up. And Mind Blank kills them straight away. Not to mention how many sentient creatures are straight up immune to charms and mind-influencing effects. Dragons, Fey, and undead, just to name three major groups. Then there's spell resistance, and the fact that the guy might have a good will save. Spells are nice, but Skills always work. I pick 'always work' over 'if it fails they're going to kill us'.
BarbeChenue 01-14-06, 08:55 PM	Warlocks are beyond weak when compared to full spellcasters. People need to stop looking at the "no limit per day" and consider the "impact" of Eldritch Blast (and all invocations). At high level, you only get a few actions in a day (3 to 5 fights, with an average of roughtly 5-7 rounds in each), and too many spells to be concerned with "stamina" in terms of spellcasting. You have between 15 and 35 rounds per day of combat action, so maximum impact in those rounds becomes much more important than stamina as soon as you have something to do in them. Spellcaster get much more than 35 spells per day at higher level, between buffing and offense/defense spells, so Warlocks end up behind them in the power curve because most spellcaster have a greater impact than warlock invocations (disintegrate deals 40d6 at CL 20, for example, maximize it for 240 damage). Furthermore, they have a lot less versatility when it comes to adapting to different situations. Clerics, Druids, Wizards and even Sorcerers are better than Warlocks. The same could be said of Incarnum classes actually. YMMV
Mirikon 01-14-06, 09:32 PM	Oh, nobody is saying that they're as powerful as spellcasters, especially at the high levels. We are, however, saying that they are balanced. A warlock will lose to a prepared wizard of the same level (past level 10) any day of the week, barring a minor miracle or situational things in his favor. In the low levels, the wizard has to be extraordinarily lucky, since with crap AC and low HP, the warlock is gonna blast that wizard into the afterlife. But, like most considerations of whether a class is balanced or not, sheer combat power is only part of the equation. The Warlock is a balanced class, and has some pretty nifty abilities that allow it to do well in combat or out, if the player has his wits about him.
Votan 01-14-06, 10:07 PM	I found the warlock a bit too strong when I had one in my game. I think if I ever DMed again, I would add the following things: 1) Only one invocation can be used at a time 2) Using Eldritch blast dazes the warlock for the rest fot he round and the next round I think that this would make the class work a lot more balanced with the classes I've been able to compare it to from that game (cleric, monk, wizard and bard are all definitely weaker).
Mirikon 01-14-06, 11:21 PM	I found the warlock a bit too strong when I had one in my game. I think if I ever DMed again, I would add the following things: 1) Only one invocation can be used at a time 2) Using Eldritch blast dazes the warlock for the rest fot he round and the next round I think that this would make the class work a lot more balanced with the classes I've been able to compare it to from that game (cleric, monk, wizard and bard are all definitely weaker). Clearly, you were in the low levels when you made these findings. The Warlock is like an arcane version of the fighter core class. They rule supreme in the low levels, but by the high levels they're lagging behind the heavy hitters. If you're saying the wizard and cleric were weaker than the warlock, you clearly didn't get past level 5, or had someone who couldn't even build a decent (not optimal, just not sucking) wizard. After level 5, the wizard can hit harder, and hit more things at once than the warlock can. The Warlock, however, has staying power. Which means that on long dungeon crawls, or other situations where the party has to fight quite a few battles without resting, the warlock again shines supreme. If the warlock is looking overpowered compared to the wizard and the cleric (universally agreed upon to be two of the top three classes power-wise in the game) then one or more of the following things is happening. 1) Your campaign style includes long dungeon crawls and other situations that greatly favor the warlock. 2) The players of the Wizard and Cleric are new/inexperienced/bad. 3) The player of the Warlock is cheating.
Votan 01-14-06, 11:38 PM	Clearly, you were in the low levels when you made these findings. The Warlock is like an arcane version of the fighter core class. They rule supreme in the low levels, but by the high levels they're lagging behind the heavy hitters. If you're saying the wizard and cleric were weaker than the warlock, you clearly didn't get past level 5, or had someone who couldn't even build a decent (not optimal, just not sucking) wizard. After level 5, the wizard can hit harder, and hit more things at once than the warlock can. The Warlock, however, has staying power. Which means that on long dungeon crawls, or other situations where the party has to fight quite a few battles without resting, the warlock again shines supreme. If the warlock is looking overpowered compared to the wizard and the cleric (universally agreed upon to be two of the top three classes power-wise in the game) then one or more of the following things is happening. 1) Your campaign style includes long dungeon crawls and other situations that greatly favor the warlock. 2) The players of the Wizard and Cleric are new/inexperienced/bad. 3) The player of the Warlock is cheating. You are correct in that we didn't get much past level 5 and it is true that the game was heavily dungeon crawl based. So it is possible that things would have evened out eventually. I did try playing in a party with a warlock. He was pretty dominant and I was playing a psion and then a druid (after the psion died -- carefully note the warlock lived). In the end it was the Warlock versus the entire party (Druid, cleric and bard). The warlock did lose but not by so much that I feel happy about it. That was at 200 XP before 5th level. I am convinced it would have been a much less desperate fight if I could have wildshaped into bear form at the beginning of the battle (elf druid usually archer who was in close quarters). It wasn't the most optimal druid either -- I was seriously considering another archery feat instead of natural spell and I had a 10 con (it was an elf after all . . .) But it left me extremely leery about the warlock class given these experiences.
Roatso 01-15-06, 12:27 AM	I'm sorry, but I'm not buying this "Warlocks are weak" business. (keep in mind I feel they are completely balanced) You may not have a wizard's versatility, but you're hardly weak. 14 Spell like abilities (level 20: Invocations + Blast + Detect Magic) Several minor defenses At 4th you can use almost any magic item (thanks to that handy take 10 UMD ability) At 12th you can make almost any magic item (scrolls/wands or staves = comparable power to any other spellcaster... plus the benefit of having access to "any" spell out there) That's hardly weak... any spell a Wizard can cast the Warlock can have in his premade staff.. along with Bard spells... Cleric spells... Druid spells... yadda yadda... A Warlock's strength depends on how much thought and preparation the player is willing to put into it. A warlock will lose to a prepared wizard of the same level (past level 10) any day of the week, barring a minor miracle or situational things in his favor. I'm not buying this either. Define prepared. Strip a Wizard of everything but his spells and a Warlock of everything but his Invocations and I'm putting my money on whoever gets initiative. If they can have equipment, then the Warlock has an edge there too since he can make and use anything.
Dracspero 01-15-06, 01:33 AM	Some people think the warlock is overpowered...some think he us underpowered...and some think he is just right. Even if I knew nothing about the class, this would suggest to me that it's probably well balanced :)
Roatso 01-15-06, 01:38 AM	Ha :) You've got a point there :D
Neeek 01-15-06, 02:24 AM	I'm not buying this either. Define prepared. Strip a Wizard of everything but his spells and a Warlock of everything but his Invocations and I'm putting my money on whoever gets initiative. Exactly what invocation do you have at 10th level that can drop a 10th level wizard in a round?
Tetsubo 01-15-06, 02:45 AM	Although I respect the opinions of those who disagree with me, I must point out that it isnt fair to compare the damage dealt and all-day quality of a warlock's eldritch blast to melee combatant's melee attacks. Melee combatants must be in harm's way to deal thier damage and must contend with missing more often (more attacks = more chances to miss; each attack has less attack bonus than the last). The fact that a warlock can deal remotely similar damage to a melee combatant more reliably, at a distance, and with magical safeguards- before counting the effect of magic items- only reinforces my belief that the warlock's eldritch blast is imbalanced. Many of you disagree with this conclusion; maybe I am not considering something and you are right. But you are not going to prove your point by making comparisons between warlocks and melee combatants. The Warlock can only use his Eldritch Blast ONCE per round. Let me repeat that, the Warlock can only use his Eldritch Blast ONCE per round. A straight up Barbarian or Fighter will be attacking at least four times per round by level 20. And an archer build will be in no more danger than a Warlock. Making the Eldritch Blast a ranged attack rather than a ranged touch attack hamstrings the class. The class already balances out nicely. Why make it unplayable? And none of the Warlocks Invocations are going to help anyone but the Warlock. The UMD skill boost is nice. But that just makes the class slightly more versatile. Not nearly as versatile as a Wizard or Cleric or Bard or Sorcerer... I think that the Warlock is one of the best class ideas that D&D has come up with in decades... play it for awhile...
Roatso 01-15-06, 02:48 AM	Exactly what invocation do you have at 10th level that can drop a 10th level wizard in a round? Depending on the HPs of the wizard, a 5d6 Brimstone blast could do it and light him on fire for a few rounds.
Joachim 01-15-06, 09:14 AM	Depending on the HPs of the wizard, a 5d6 Brimstone blast could do it and light him on fire for a few rounds. At 10th, you could have it maximized, empowered, and mortalbaned for an average of 70 damage. Most wizards couldn't take that.
Kurotowa 01-15-06, 10:59 AM	At 10th, you could have it maximized, empowered, and mortalbaned for an average of 70 damage. Most wizards couldn't take that. Sure. And a wizard with a Lesser Rod of Empower and a Maximized Scorching Ray can do an average of 62 points of damage. Most warlocks couldn't take that. If you leave off Mortalbane (I have yet to play in a game where the BoED or BoVD was on the allowed list) the wizard is doing 62 to the warlock's 46. (I'm assuming a Lesser Rod of Empower and a Lesser Chasibule of Fell Power here, both easily obtainable by 10th level.) The warlock is never going to be the best damage dealer in the party, not after the first few levels. Sure, with the SLA feats they can spike up for a few rounds a day. But three rounds per day is not a lot, not if you're doing more than one or two encounters. And even then it's nothing compared to a raging barbarian with great cleave and power attack, or a well tricked out wizard.
Mirikon 01-15-06, 11:52 AM	You are correct in that we didn't get much past level 5 and it is true that the game was heavily dungeon crawl based. So it is possible that things would have evened out eventually. Trust me on this. Just like a fighter is head and shoulders above a wizard before they get Fireball, the same goes for the Warlock. And I've played them in a game that started at 1, and went until the high levels before the DM got sent to Iraq. The warlock fits in much the same niche as the Bard. I.E. Backup caster and backup damage dealer. He's not a great caster, but what he does he can do all day. He's not a great damage dealer, but he can do it all day, and has better defense than a pure caster. I did try playing in a party with a warlock. He was pretty dominant and I was playing a psion and then a druid (after the psion died -- carefully note the warlock lived). In the end it was the Warlock versus the entire party (Druid, cleric and bard). The warlock did lose but not by so much that I feel happy about it. That was at 200 XP before 5th level. I am convinced it would have been a much less desperate fight if I could have wildshaped into bear form at the beginning of the battle (elf druid usually archer who was in close quarters). It wasn't the most optimal druid either -- I was seriously considering another archery feat instead of natural spell and I had a 10 con (it was an elf after all . . .) Actually, in the campaign I was mentioning earlier, I think there were only three times where my character took more than 1/10 her hit points in damage. Those times were: 1) when we were ambushed by a wraith, 2) When she was alone and ambushed by a rogue, 3) when they were attacked by a group of vampire spawn, and she was taking on four of them at once. The reason for this was pretty simple. She used the meatshields provided, and she could fly. Which also, along with the detect magic, decieve item, and a scroll of teleport, allowed them to find some nice magical items in the lich's lair, and to get past a trap where the room was contained in a wall of force, and was slowly filling with water. In fact, in combat she was pretty unremarkable, except for providing consistent (if low) damage. But out of combat, thanks to high int, and some good social skills, she was able to help guide the party through some of the challenges. Of course, she was so good at lying, that when she betrayed the group, and tried to kill the paladin, she was able to blame it on a gold dragon they had met (she was the only one who could speak draconic) and also on the lich having placed her under an enchantment. And they believed her. Fun times. But it left me extremely leery about the warlock class given these experiences. Try gaming with one in the mid levels, where there's also a wizard and a cleric in the party. The warlock will shine when the wizard runs low on spells, but otherwise, he's just a backup. Though if the wizard has some scrolls, the warlock can use them. And a wand of Cure Light can make the healer's job easier. Basically, past the low levels a warlock has to focus on utility rather than brute power in order to be of use. But if you combo things well (Fell Flight + Entropic Ward + Walk Unseen means you can only be detected with Blindsense or some similar ability, until you attack, perfect for some aerial surveilance) then you can be very effective. Just whatever you do, keep that UMD maxed out.
Roatso 01-15-06, 04:03 PM	At 10th, you could have it maximized, empowered, and mortalbaned for an average of 70 damage. Most wizards couldn't take that. Very, very, very true :) I was just taking the Blast/Invocation by itself :) But this just proves even more that in Wizard vs Warlock combat Warlocks are definately not gimped.
Roatso 01-15-06, 04:06 PM	Sure. And a wizard with a <snip> The case here is Wizard with just spells and Warlock with just Invocation. Again, it comes down to just initiative. Not what they might be carrying. Not what they could have prepared. etc..etc..
Arkonth 01-15-06, 06:45 PM	The case here is Wizard with just spells and Warlock with just Invocation. Again, it comes down to just initiative. Not what they might be carrying. Not what they could have prepared. etc..etc.. I disagree for two reasons. 1) At higher levels a wizard simply has more options available. Save or die spells, disintegrate etc, will always outlcass the damage potential of the warlock. 2) Feats. Any Meta-Spell Like Abilities the warlock can apply will be feats. And a warlock is feat starved, having many many other avenues that are worth feats including the ranged weapon tree, battlecaster for better armor potential and of course extra invocation. A wizard conversly can substitute metamagic rods for his metamagic and gets extra feats, and isn't torn nearly as many directions over which feats to take. Warlocks are fun, and I love mine. But wizards hurt more.
Roatso 01-15-06, 07:00 PM	A wizard conversly can substitute metamagic rods for his metamagic and gets extra feats, and isn't torn nearly as many directions over which feats to take. Again this is a case of "adding" to the equation. If we're going to go about adding items.... Ok, the warlock can make, own, and use a staff with Monstrous Thrall in it... If he gets initiative he can have his own pet wizard. A lot of the arguments I've seen about how the Wizard is "better" usually come down to "if he had" and "if he already has"... we can if, if, if until eternity... break it down to the basics and I still don't see this supposed superiority. Edit: Disclaimer: I'm not trying to turn this into a "this" vs "that" kinda deal... I just don't feel a Warlock is as gimped as some would indicate.
Talen Lee 01-15-06, 07:22 PM	I'm seeing a lot of 'this class is broken because my campaign isn't flexible' kinda complaints. It sounds, honestly, like a DM who has his own experience, is stubbornly of the opinion that It's The Only Way. Warlocks are akin to fighters. They can go all day and plug along. They can deal damage consistantly. They can't do much else. They're not outshining any wizard or druid worth its salt - so what's the problem?
Arkonth 01-15-06, 07:53 PM	Edit: Disclaimer: I'm not trying to turn this into a "this" vs "that" kinda deal... I just don't feel a Warlock is as gimped as some would indicate. Pardon, I'm going to elevate this becasue I disagree with your stance. Again this is a case of "adding" to the equation. If we're going to go about adding items.... Ok, the warlock can make, own, and use a staff with Monstrous Thrall in it... If he gets initiative he can have his own pet wizard. And a wizard could just as easily have such a staff. A lot of the arguments I've seen about how the Wizard is "better" usually come down to "if he had" and "if he already has"... we can if, if, if until eternity... break it down to the basics and I still don't see this supposed superiority. Okay, lets try some basics. How about some numbers? A warlock has a 9d6 eldritch blast at 20th level. Lets assume he's using the vitrolic blast invocation for an extra 2d6 damage. So we take the average 3.5*11=38.5 How about a wizard on the other hand? If he's willing to risk a Fort save he has Disintegrate with an average damage of 3.5*40=140 If not willing to offer up a save then how about Polar Ray? 3.5*20=70 Then we have all the other things wizards can do. How about Polymorph? Power-Word Kill, Finger of Death, Timestop? It will come down to initiative, your correct. But that's not how DnD is played. Player's don't fight each other, they fight monsters and NPC's. And in such a situation a wizard will be more effective. The only case the warlock holds the advantage is when there are more than the recommended number of encounters per day. Otherwise, a wizard will have far more effective abilities.
Roatso 01-15-06, 08:06 PM	And a wizard could just as easily have such a staff. How are you giving him that divine spell? :P Have? Yes. Easily? No.
Roatso 01-15-06, 08:14 PM	And in such a situation a wizard will be more effective. Let's look at that for a second. Let's say we have a level 20 Warlock and a level 20 Wizard tag teaming against "whatever" and not each other. Each can have whatever they want and prepare whatever they want. I still say the advantage is the Warlocks because the Warlock has access to every spell in the game. I say that again, the Warlock has access to every spell in the game. 1 feat lets him make Staffs that can hold any spell in the game after level 12 (limited by class level) A wizard has all those wicked wizard spells :) A warlock will have those wizard spells... and priest spells... and druid spells.. and bard spells.. and shukenja spells... etc.. etc.. etc.. I've said it once, I'll say it again... a Warlock's strength comes from how much you're willing to put into it. The more effort you put into it, the more you get out of it. And that's why a Warlock will stand equal to a wizard or cleric. Diversity of power. Anything a Wizard can do, a Warlock can do.. he just needs to prepare for it way ahead of time. The balance to this is that those preparations can be stripped from him, but that can be said of any other class. So that brings us back to innate abilities only again.
Lady Maedhros 01-15-06, 09:34 PM	So that brings us back to innate abilities only again. And in innate abilities, the Wizard clearly outstrips the Warlock, because you just made the warlock even with the wizard by saying "he has access to the wizard's stuff."
Todd 01-15-06, 09:45 PM	And in innate abilities, the Wizard clearly outstrips the Warlock, because you just made the warlock even with the wizard by saying "he has access to the wizard's stuff." With this I have to agree. You have Warlock + Equipment (which will be a lot of wizard or cleric spells via scroll, staff, or crafted contingent spell) You have Wizard + the same. There are situations where the warlock will shine ... like if you have a ton of tough battles in a single day that can't be bypassed. But, by and large, the wizard will be more useful in more situations. The warlock isn't a bad class ... it just isn't as powerful as some others. I personally love the flavor and had fun playing one. I just have seen other, actual spellcasting, builds be a lot more effective and this even in games where magic items seem to rain down from the sky.
Arkonth 01-15-06, 10:21 PM	So I can be effective as a Warlock if I spend all my money on spell trigger items, or craft them myself, wasting more of my precious, precious feats. So can a rogue, who's even more likely to have an even higher initiative and kill us both! Or even better an artificer can swoop down and unleash metamagic item power on us! UMD is great, but hardly warlock exclusive, even with their ability to take 10. Crafting is great, but the necessary feats gimp you somewhere else. So yes, a warlock with a bazillion and one staves could kill a wizard. So could anyone else with UMD. The UMD abilities are flavorful, cool, but doesn't make them any better than a wizard than a rogue is.
Roatso 01-15-06, 10:27 PM	And in innate abilities, the Wizard clearly outstrips the Warlock, because you just made the warlock even with the wizard by saying "he has access to the wizard's stuff." I didn't say that a warlock is equal to the wizard because "he has access to the wizard's stuff" I said that he's equal to a Wizard or Cleric because he has a diversity of power that he can exploit in the form of prepared items, which is an entirely different thing. Again this comes down to effort on the part of the Warlock player, more effort and preparation equals more power and more options for the player. And even if we take into account that the Warlock can duplicate almost anything the Wizard can do or cast to get a similar level of "spellcasting" power, that doesn't change the fact the wizard can't really do the same thing in reverse... so the Warlock can use items that give him the spells of a Wizard AND gets all of his innate invocations on top of it. Quite the benefit the Warlock has going for him. ;) And since he can make items the Wizard most likely won't be able to, he has an edge over the class in that regard too. The Warlock has options the Wizard doesn't have.
Roatso 01-15-06, 10:36 PM	UMD is great, but hardly warlock exclusive, even with their ability to take 10. Crafting is great, but the necessary feats gimp you somewhere else. I never said it was an exclusive, but that take 10 really comes in handy at times :p And one feat isn't going to kill you. Every warlock who hits level 12 should take at least 1 item creation feat anyway, or you're wasting an extremely useful ability and needlessly limiting yourself. Scrolls, staffs or wands, it doesn't matter, but being able to create your own spellcasting items is beyond useful. And even using just one feat for crafting increases your options considerably.
Arkonth 01-15-06, 10:41 PM	Under the same logic a rogue can do everything a wizard can and get's sneak attack, a host of useful abilites and 8 skill points. Would you consider him equal to a wizard?
Roatso 01-15-06, 10:48 PM	I don't see a rogue making his own items :P But then I don't play rogues so I can't really comment one way or the other, though I would assume they are a balanced class. Maybe this is all my time playing Wizards working against me, I tended to focus on using items for most of my "spellcasting" and saved my slots for when I knew I'd be resting soon (so I wouldn't get caught without spells) or for emergencies (when it was do or die). Once I got access to the Warlock I just applied what I had learned as a Wizard player to that.... so maybe I am a little too focused on the benefits of having spell items as opposed to raw casting.
Arkonth 01-15-06, 10:57 PM	And my own playing preferences may be biasing my views, as I'm currently playing a warlock with no item creation feats and no spell completion items of note except two staves of heal. Well, to each his/her own.
Roatso 01-15-06, 11:04 PM	Yeah, this is true, personal preference goes a long way. Looking back at most of my arguments, it occured to me that I pretty much play a warlock the same way as I've always played a mage (except having invocations rather than spellslots) so my view is probably unique. :doh:
Dante al'Tronc 01-15-06, 11:42 PM	Stepping aside from the issue of whether the Warlock as a class is balanced, some might question whether feats could unbalance a Warlock. Supernatural Transformation (Savage Species) can make the eldrich blast a supernatural ability instead of a spell-like one. It can now bypass spell resistance and damage reduction, does not provoke an attack of opportunity, and the caster level increases to the Warlock's HD, instead of 1/2 HD. Mortalbane (Book of Vile Darkness) adds 2d6 damage to the eldrich blast when directed against non-outsiders. As neither feat has any prerequisites, a 1st level Human Warlock can have an eldrich blast that deals 3d6, does not provoke attacks of opportunity, and bypasses spell resistance. The closest I can come to that with another build is a Half-Orc with 20 Str weilding a greatsword. That's 7-17 damage, compared to the 3-18 damage of the Warlock. The Orc averages 12.5 damage, while the warlock averages 10.5. While the Orc still has to deal with damage reduction, at first level the only creature (that I'm aware of) that'll have damage reduction is a Warforged (Eberron) with Adamantine Body, which gives it DR 2/Adamantine, thus evening out the two. To sum up, I think that the Warlock cannot be unbalanced by taking esoteric feats. Those who think the Warlock is unbalanced just aren't used to a magic user dealing damage like a fighter.
Neeek 01-15-06, 11:54 PM	The closest I can come to that with another build is a Half-Orc with 20 Str weilding a greatsword. That's 7-17 damage, compared to the 3-18 damage of the Warlock. The Orc averages 12.5 damage, while the warlock averages 10.5. Then you *really* aren't trying very hard. Let's take an obvious one: An raging Orc Barbarian with PA using a Greatsword. That's a 26 Str(+8 to hit, +12 to damage), so we have 2d6 +12+2(PA) for an average of 21 damage. Without the rage it's still 18, so slightly less than double. BTW, the average damage on greatsword with 20 str is 14, not 12.5, also 2d6+7 is 9-17, not 7-17.
Todd 01-16-06, 12:26 AM	Stepping aside from the issue of whether the Warlock as a class is balanced, some might question whether feats could unbalance a Warlock. Supernatural Transformation (Savage Species) Mortalbane (Book of Vile Darkness) Supernatural Transformation has been explicitly disallowed both in the Ask Rich Baker thread and in the game FAQ on the main web page. BoVD isn't fully 3.5. That would nix it from a lot of existing games.
Joachim 01-16-06, 12:35 PM	Sure. And a wizard with a Lesser Rod of Empower and a Maximized Scorching Ray can do an average of 62 points of damage. Most warlocks couldn't take that. If you leave off Mortalbane (I have yet to play in a game where the BoED or BoVD was on the allowed list) the wizard is doing 62 to the warlock's 46. (I'm assuming a Lesser Rod of Empower and a Lesser Chasibule of Fell Power here, both easily obtainable by 10th level.) The warlock is never going to be the best damage dealer in the party, not after the first few levels. Sure, with the SLA feats they can spike up for a few rounds a day. But three rounds per day is not a lot, not if you're doing more than one or two encounters. And even then it's nothing compared to a raging barbarian with great cleave and power attack, or a well tricked out wizard. Sorry, been gone from the for a couple days and didn't respond to this quicker. The purpose of my post that a Max/Emp/MB blast would do about 70 damage was simply to respond to a blanket statement that a 10th level warlock couldn't take down a 10th level wizard with one standard action. With your example you show that a 10th level wizard could take down a 10th level warlock in one shot, which we pretty much already knew. What's funny about the many, many warlock threads is that it always comes down to the same argument: Warlocks vs. Wizards. Not appropriate. No more appropriate than Rogues vs. Wizards or Sorcerors vs. Bards. Warlocks should not be compared directly to other arcanists to see 'who is more powerful'.
Kurotowa 01-16-06, 01:56 PM	The purpose of my post that a Max/Emp/MB blast would do about 70 damage was simply to respond to a blanket statement that a 10th level warlock couldn't take down a 10th level wizard with one standard action. Was that the purpose? It's hard to tell with so many posts flying around. I thought you were arguing on the "too powerful" side. What's funny about the many, many warlock threads is that it always comes down to the same argument: Warlocks vs. Wizards. Not appropriate. No more appropriate than Rogues vs. Wizards or Sorcerors vs. Bards. Warlocks should not be compared directly to other arcanists to see 'who is more powerful'. A good point. Which is why I was comparing my warlock to my fellow player's archer uptread. We do share the most similarities, especially now that he's picked up a pair of Winged Boots.
The_Ditto 01-16-06, 01:58 PM	That requires someone in the party capable of crafting said scrolls. So someone could already fill said problem. I gotta disagree with this: I'm playing a Warlock in a 4th level party right now (2 clerics, 1 rogue, 1 barb/ftr, and myself) ... and nobody has craft scroll - nor is anyone going to take it. However, I have a collection of about 10 scrolls already (albeit low level misc things) and can use them with no difficulty. I plan on purchasing (cheap) scrolls (and wands) for quite a while until I hit 12th(?) and start making my own ... So no, the Warlock doesn't need anyone to make them for him .. they're quite capable (actually more capable) of making scrolls and such than anyone else!! Warlocks are beyond weak when compared to full spellcasters. People need to stop looking at the "no limit per day" and consider the "impact" of Eldritch Blast (and all invocations). Just a case in point: ... at 4th level, I'm hardly dominating the party .. in fact, the 2 clerics are more fully "optimized" than I am ... and tend to "dominate" the party at the point ... Am I useful? Oh yeah ... the damage is consistent, and we can generally rely on it ... but at this level, I still miss once in a while .. (I'm notorious for rolling bad .. heh) Do I think Warlock's are too strong? No Do I think Warlock's are too weak? No .. I think they're fine ... and I feel I'm talking for real experience ... we'll see if my opinion changes as time goes on ... (I'm planning on getting a few craft feats going later on, and we'll see how bad things get when I get my chilling tentacles .. :evillaugh ) Even if I knew nothing about the class, this would suggest to me that it's probably well balanced :cheer:
Mirikon 01-16-06, 02:33 PM	I guess I should preface this by saying that I tend to play my warlocks a lot like a blaster mage, with the exception that I'm also not afraid to jump into melee against the weaker opponents. Typically, I ignore almost all of the blast shape and eldritch essence invocations, with the exception of three. I will get Hideous Blow, either hellrime blast or the fire one, and Vitrolic Blast. All the other invocations go for the 'other' category. You know what I've found? My warlock, while not as impressive in combat compared to a wizard or cleric, provides a lot of benefit outside of combat. Maxed bluff, high intimidate, and Beguiling Influence can go a long way. In one campaign, my warlock once killed someone with a CDG Hideous Blow kiss. Very Sonya Blade of her. I go high cha, high Dex, and use cunning to manipulate situations. So while I never did ungodly ammounts of damage, I did keep a few combats from happening, as well as getting some nice info from people. Oddly enough, there were only about four or five times the whole campaign where I took damage, at all.
Joachim 01-16-06, 03:13 PM	Was that the purpose? It's hard to tell with so many posts flying around. I thought you were arguing on the "too powerful" side. No...I like warlocks the way they are :) . I am playing one right now at 11th level, and I think that they are balanced.
Roatso 01-16-06, 04:33 PM	What's funny about the many, many warlock threads is that it always comes down to the same argument: Warlocks vs. Wizards. Not appropriate. No more appropriate than Rogues vs. Wizards or Sorcerors vs. Bards. Warlocks should not be compared directly to other arcanists to see 'who is more powerful'. I think the reason this happens is because they're both Arcane classes, and the Wizard is the standard which the others seem to be built from. Example: Sorcerer. Fewer spells know, but more uses per day thus being "balanced" against the Wizard who has fewer uses, more spells (+feats) Thus it's hard not to compare the two. And if my posts have in any way affected your reply, let me say my goal wasn't to show/prove or whatever that Warlocks are "more powerful"... it was to show that Warlocks aren't as weak as some keep trying to point out. Overall I can't really see why people don't see the class as being balanced and equal, it's a simple setup. Wizard: Unlimited spells, few uses per day Sorcerer: Fewer spells know, more uses per day Warlock: Tiny selection from a tiny list, unlimited uses per day Maybe it's so obvious it's hard to see. :eek:
Mirikon 01-17-06, 01:05 AM	I'll tell you exactly why people don't get it. Some people look at the class and say "OMG! INFINITE SPELLS! THIS IS BROKENZ!!!!!!111111oneone" Other people look at the invocations, see that the 'dark' invocations don't go above 5th or 6th level spells, and start talking about how weak the warlock is. Neither group takes the time to examine the class as a whole, objectively. It is the same reason you have the endless wizard vs. sorcerer or wizard vs. cleric or cleric vs. druid threads. People focus on one item of the class that they like and ignore everything that balances it out. There are also people who have seen a warlock in situations that favor them, and from that believe that they are massively broken. Case in point would be the guy who only saw one in a campaign that only lasted up to about 5th level. Another would be shortly after Complete Arcane just came out, I saw a thread where the poster was saying how warlocks were broken from seeing how a player used it in a game he ran. Of course, he said his campaign style frequently featured long, gauntlet style battles where the party has to continue on without resting. It was pointed out to him that pretty much for the warlock not to shine in that situation was to have the entire area under a constant antimagic field. But for the people who still just don't get it, when there are as many people saying that the class/feat/skill/spell/race/whatever is broken as there are that say it is weak, then it is most likely well balanced.
Hallavast 01-23-06, 11:51 PM	I'd just like to say: It sounds silly to me to compare the Warlock to another class, because they have several abilities that are fairly unique. thus they fit into their own little niche in the party. In my experience both dming and playing warlocks, i havent seen anything too underpowered or overpowered about them... they have talent for adventuring as much as any other class, and they are consistent through an entire adventure and then some. Plus, their Eldritch balsts are nigh unstoppable, so they can carry the party through some tough situations without draining their resources. They are simply a good, balanced class.
Fox Lee 01-24-06, 03:54 AM	There is no limit on eldritch blast uses... and it's not that powerful, anyway. Sure, it looks overpowered at first glance, but it's really not. Edit: you should try playing it before "balancing" it. I know it's too late to be relevant - as always - but put me down for another "I second that". I'm playing a Warlock in a level-10 party, and while he certainly isn't the weakest member of the party, he's certainly not the strongest. Even with that many damage dice, you have virtually no source of reliable/constant damage (STR bonus, weapon enchantment, etc), which means your max damage is good, but your average is lacking and your minimum is pathetic. Plus, getting one attack a round, even with that many dice, means you're just never be that crazy with the damage output. *shrug* Sure, they're tremendously fun to play, and I sure as hell don't think they're a weak class, but the blast just isn't the game-breaking effect folks make it out to be.
phelanarcetus 01-24-06, 10:19 AM	I'd just like to say: It sounds silly to me to compare the Warlock to another class, because they have several abilities that are fairly unique. thus they fit into their own little niche in the party. Well, everybody likes to compare, and it tends to be a good way to track down if a class might be horribly overpowered. The problem is that people consistently select entirely the wrong class to compare Warlocks to. Wizards, they say, the base arcane spellcaster. But there's no similarity between them aside from the word arcane. Comparing is a good way to get a feel for a class's power level compared to other classes, especially if you don't have an opportunity to play it. (I really want to play a Warlock, but have no games on the horizon for a bit.) I find it fun, too. Eldritch Blast is the sort of ability that I can understand people thinking is game-breaking at first glance. Unlimited use, ranged touch attack, not physical damage so ignores DR... sounds decent. Can be enhanced in all sorts of ways... wow. But in freaking out about this, they tend to neglect the fact that it's a standard action, as well as the vulnerability to SR. And the equivalency to a 1st-level spell giving ways to protect against it. The Warlock has spectacular flavor, and with a wide variety of abilities powered by Invocations and Deceive Item, can fit nicely into just about any party.