Warlock has always been a class with a special place in my heart. The very first character I played was a Warlock and from both a role playing and machanics standpoint I really liked Warlocks in almost all they're variations (4e Binder I'm looking at you). As such I was very interested how Warlocks would work in 5e. After looking it over I found that with spells like Eldritch Blast and Hex the Warlock could put out a lot of damage without spending the few spell slots they had. But then I realized something, most of that Warlocks get at level two, so can't a Bard or Sorcerer just level dip and be just as good?
Is there any point, from a mechanics standpoint, that it would be worth it to be a Warlock? It seemed to me that other classes can get everything they want without giving up much of anything in exchange. It's really a shame too, because Warlocks have some really flavorful abilities like mind control and chucking people through hell that mechanically just seem completely inferior to other options.
blazeninja wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
mellored wrote:
Invocations, spell slots that return on a short rest and scale up with your level to further maximize their impact, and the patron features are plenty of reason to stick with the Warlock class.
I think too many dismiss warlock because they are only looking at the final lvl 20 product they can make instead of how the character will play as it progresses to lvl 20.
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Pretty much all the classes have a good chunk of their value front loaded. For warlock, there are lots of reasons to stick around to level three and beyond, but yes, if all want is EB spam, 2 levels of warlock is good.
mellored wrote:
You're massively understating the impact of Pact Magic, and thus undervaluing the class as a whole.
Yunru wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
mellored wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
I think one of the things you always need to think about when doing builds is whether or not you're thinking about practical play or theoretical play.
It might sound cool to be a Sorcerer who dips Warlock for 2 levels, but it won't necessarily be fun for your party when you're 5th level and can't cast a 3rd level spell. Or 11th level and can't cast a 6th. Or 17th and not be able to cast a 9th level spell. Etc...
Yes, the OP is undervaluing being on time for spells. He is also undervaluing the fiend pact temp hp on kill.
No other class can stay on time for spells and get a good amount of temp hp every kill while still getting eldritch blast.
blazeninja wrote:
The Warlock deals damage, it's its job. As such, we'll assume it burns through all 4 spell slots between rests. The Warlock gets 12 spell slots, all level 5, vs other casters 13 spell slots of varying (but mostly lower) levels.
Mommy_was_an_Orc wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
mellored wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
Fake-Healer wrote:
Kalani wrote:
mellored wrote:
I'd still argue that warlocks are the most combat versatile of the casters. Out of combat versatility goes to the other casters.
blazeninja wrote:
Should probably calculate warlock spells as either 2 or 3 spells before rest and not the cap at 4. Gives a better perspective of them throughout the majority of levels.
Warlocks can fill almost any niche except healer.
Social warlocks can combine beguiling influence and mask of many faces to create a true social chameleon that few others can match, changing their appearance at will.
Deceptive warlocks can use misty visions and dreadful word to toy with the enemy's perception of reality.
Recon Warlocks can combine pact of the chain (sprite), Voice of the chain master, Devil's sight, Eldrich sight, Witch sight, and Visions of distant realms to become all-seeing powerhouses of perception.
Combat warlocks can combine melee power from pact of the blade, ranged power from eldrich blast, defenses like Armor of shadows and Fiendish Vigor and debuffs like Mire the mind to become a true combat powerhouse.
Just saying, the class is very flexible.
Compare Warlock recovery to Sorc/Wizard:
Warlock gets two level 1-5 slots back at low levels every rest.
Wizard gets W/2 rounded down per short rest (ONCE A DAY).
Sorc gets jack squat per short rest.
That means that the Warlock can use one level 5 spell per battle per short rest, and then 1/2 per short rest at 3 spell slots, per battle, if you go by the 2 battle, rest, etc. Wizards and Sorcerers cannot do that. They have to consider the long game, as they have to make due until the next long rest. A Warlock can blow his spells, short rest before the dungeon boss, and be good as gold, so long as he has the arcanums he needs. The thing with picking spells for the Warlock is that you pick spells that increase in usefulness when cast at a higher slot. Leave the spells that don't increase in power to the other casters. Get your niche on.
Warlock can get Ritual Caster from Pact of Tome, getting two extra help cantrips and the ability to cast any ritual spell at his level. He can also do a lot of VERY USEFUL support stuff at will (disguise, alter self, arcane eye, etc.), and gets to change his invocations each level till he gets what he feels is good for his playstyle. Invocations can be very gamechanging, while sorc spells are normally not, yet you get to trade out each level. Or you can get a pet that levels with you, doing some cool stuff. Or you can get pact of weapon, and gg with that, pick another pact.
So, you have a caster that always fires spells as AT LEAST 5th level. He can't power up spells past level 5, as his arcanums are set, but hey, you rarely need to turn an 8th level spell into a 9th level, or a 1st level into a 6th, though I can see the limitation in that. Guess what? All classes get some sort of limitation.
But then you look at stuff like the Old One Enthrall, which lets you turn any powerful humanoid that you meet in your campaign into your meat puppet, so long as that humanoid is incapped (which can be done with a variety of spells, or just beating the crap out of him). Beat up the BBEG's lieutenant, make him HAIL CTHULHU, and then turn him against the BBEG with your party as your personal slave. Don't overlook the utility of the pact stuff. The Archfey features are crap, but the Fiend and Old One have some good stuff, like making you practically immune to psychic damage, which makes an Old One Warlock my go-to for messing up a mindflayer.
blazeninja wrote:
FuelDrop wrote:
pudd wrote:
Which is questionable whether magic initiate can be used with spell slots
penguinmane wrote:
SpinG22 wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
If my memory serves me correctly, Cantrips only level to the class levels associated with them. Which means EB for a Warlock 15, Sorcerer 3 will be cast as a Warlock 15 or 18 if Tome Pact. Whereas a Sorcerer 15 Warlock 3 would cast a Fire Bolt at a high level but would only cast EB as a 3rd level Warlock.
I may be incorrect, alas I have not got the time today to fully check, but it should be answerable on Twitter or the FAQ forums.
Warlocks are really versatile, for those who feel the need for more slots take a level or few in Bard or Sorcerer. But also do it for the features they bring such as Expertise, Spell Points etc.
Really it should be about the character and the party. My Fey Tome pact initially took the feat Magic Initiate Bard, for a couple of Cantrips and a Cure Wounds spell. Later she traded it out to give her advantage in dungeoneering and trap spotting, as our party hasn't got a rogue. Upon a later level increase, she took spell sniper replacing her earlier feat. But she took a level of Bard. This gave her 2 extra Cantrips, 4 bard spells and 2 1st level spell slots, on top of her 2 2nd level pact slots. Her bard spells have helped the party, even when her Fey Presence failed her ( unfortunate roll of the die). She isn't a combat monkey, but she does the damage even with a plain EB, her invocations are Book of Ancient Secrets and Devils Sight. She intends to go for a few At Will spell Invocations, before taking (once more) EB effective ones due to the need that she has to cover the Arcane and Rogue roles within the party, and is another Party Face (Persuasion and Feception).
Really the viability of a character is who they are, how they are played and how much fun you are having. I don't feel left out in the cold with my versatile Warlock, she saved her Fighter companion from being squished by a Dragon Cultist wearer of purple, through Social Combat, persuasion, deception and graceful glibness. He may do more damage with his sword, but most fighters can't walk as far or with as much style as a Misty Stepping Warlock. The effect of fogging out and appearing closer would be and is intimidating to an opponent. who would be worried at this calm person casually walking towards them then appearing in their face to give them Agro ( Fiend Pact Warhammer would be fun with this).
MonsterEnvy wrote:
The general assumption is 2 short rests per day according to the DMG. That generally gives about 3 times as many of the highest level slots per day as other casters have to make up for with lower level slots but the warlocks still have lower level spells in which to spend those slots as most appropriate so it works out fairly well. I find warlock get by on 1 short rest and do well with 2 short rests but I that's also generally because tome has extra cantrips and rituals while blade is relying on extra attacks and weapons instead and chain is using the superior familiar.
Less lower level spell slots is also a bit meaningless if a warlock can also make several invocation choices for spells at will. The don't need lower level slots for damage so much because they have that covered in cantrips.
The capstone is better than it looks because it specificially address the longer times missing a short rest.
At 20th level with the 2 short rest assumption provided to us gives 16 5th-level slots and 4 arcana for 20 spells per day. A strong damage cantrip and at-will spell options like alter self, levitate, and arcane eye to go with them keeps them pretty competitive.
Arcane casters roughly break down to:
Bards have versatile selection in learning spells with a pretty diverse list plus magical secrets, and supplement magic with skills and inspiration. (high versatility)
Sorcerers have sorcery point slot conversion and metagic for significant use on spells. (high impact)
Warlocks have short rest recovery and the best at-will potential in spells. (high sustainability)
Wizards have the spell preparation mechanic with some recovery options and a wide list plus a strong ritual mechanic. (high diverisification)
I don't think any of the arcane caster classes are missing strong points in the mechanics that are worth taking the any of each.
Talreign wrote:
Our AL 'regular' group has another character playing a Warlock, and me playing an Evocation Wizard....We are only lv 5 atm, but both classes seem to be pretty balanced. He is a little less squishy than me, but I am a better blaster in terms of damage. We tease each other about how each of us would be SO much better if we had rolled the opposite class.
The value of being able to drop AE spells in the middle of melee and not nuke my friends is my most valuable asset. Fireball in a courtyard full of 3hd soldiers is a whole lot of pain!
We usually see 1 short rest and 1 long rest per session. I took both Rope trick and Leomund's tiny hut to ensure we can have rests if we really need them....Our DM seemed to like stopping us from resting with endless random encounters before....now he just says we can rest, lol.
FrogReaver wrote:
A warlock is not a wizard. Better HD, armor proficiency... A warlock is closer to a bard than a wizard, and comparing a gish class to the most dedicated full caster class in the game, the gish is always going to come out worst as a caster.
As a whole package the warlock is one of the best blasty gish classes in the game, with the potential for a reliable ranged and melee damage output from their class features. They're single target focused because of their hex, but they remain solid combatants throughout the game. Add in an infernal pact and you're talking about a solid crowd controller in addition to their combat skills, with spells like fireball allowing them to demolish minions with ease before focusing down on the leader.
Alternatively, a pact of the archfey warlock is a master of bluring reality and unreality. From misty visions giving unlimited castings of silent image, to the ability to put out area effect fear, to the ability to vanish out of harms way if hit, the Archfey warlock is a solid build for an aspiring manipulator.
FrogReaver wrote:
spanglemaker wrote:
As many here have pointed out, the effectiveness of the warlock will depend heavily on the individual table, namely, how often there are short rests. Second, since multiclassing is in fact an option and not the default (although and option which I suppose is widely used!), you can't judge a class based on whether it's only worth "dipping" into. It should first be evaluated as though everyone is only one class, and how that class actually plays.
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Thanks for everyone's feedback and responses to my question. Looks like warlocks got some awesome stuff on its own after all. One of my players is playing a great old one warlock who's parton is the "Great Space Butterfly" so I better be careful what incapacitated humanoids I leave laying around huh 
I was reading this due to the fact that I am creating a warlock as well, and was curious about the tomes. I noticed that you guys don't mention the tome that gives you a imp or pixie or ect, and while i was looking at it I thought it would be cool but seemed as I looked into it that it would slowly become useless as you level. Whats your guys opinions on the tomes and the different choices, I believe they would be good for rp purposes but combat wouldn't be as good.
Thanks,
mellored wrote:
FuelDrop wrote:
jaappleton wrote:
Deathsec wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Ever tried a wizard in melee? Ever tried to get through a battle primarily with cantrips?
SilentSin wrote:
a wizard is a better caster. A wizard is more versatile with his spells than a warlock is.
A warlock is more versatile than a wizard. Take a wizards spells away and watch him be terrible. Take a warlocks spells away and he will be a lot better off. More hp. Much better at melee. If cantrips are still available he has a much better ranged option as well.
SilentSin wrote:
jaappleton wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
jaappleton wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
You our are not a versatile athlete if you can play basketball but absolutely suck at soccer. Sure you can play it but versatility implies a certain base level of effectiveness.
Wizards lack any non magic versatility. They absolutely suck at anything non magic related.
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
and yet you left off the most important thing. Wizards fail to get an extra attack.
SilentSin wrote:
and yet you left off the most important thing. Wizards fail to get an extra attack.
SilentSin wrote:
Wizards do spells. That's it. Taken as a vanilla class... they're the single most boring character in the game. The tiny school features don't change that, and there are enough other casters in the game that usually they won't bring anything particularly vital to the table. Sorcerers do more damage, Clerics are more party-friendly, Druids better summoners.
Both Wizards and Warlocks generally benefit from multiclassing... Wizard usually Cleric for armor and the capability to heal, Warlock for either high consistent damage output with Sorcerer or as a splash for other builds looking to increase their capabilities. Chances are, if you're going full Warlock, you're missing out... 4 spell slots, even with invocations and short rest recharge, is pretty limiting. That said, it has synergy with melee, ranged, and other caster builds, which means more options than being a caster alone. To me, that's greater versatility.
A character who is rendered useless by an anti-magic field/sphere is hardly versatile. They have a lot of tricks, yes - and effective ones - but they come from a single, limited power source.
Either build needs more than what's on paper for the base class to truly excel.
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Can a Wizard? No.
Thus Warlocks are more versatile.
Can a silenced, bound wizard break his binds? No.
Can a Pact Warlock summon a dagger and cut himself free? Yes.
Thus the Warlock is more versatile.
Is there enough non-combat spells to make the Wizards massive prep list outwiegh this? No.
Warlock multiclasses very well. I have seen the Sorlock in action and a blade lock (fighter/warlock) and a Barb/Warlock. A pure warlock would be good at level 9 or 10 I think along with maybe lvl 5. Pure warlock would be more of a archer than arcane caster IMHO.
FrogReaver wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Edit: Ninja'd.
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin,
1. Would you say that warlocks are more tanky than wizards (better armor proficiency, more base hp, good temp hp generation)?
2. Would you say that warlocks have a better ranged attack (Eldritch Blast) than wizards?
3. Would you say that warlocks are alot better with weapons than wizards (better proficiences and 2 attacks for warlock vs 1 attack for wizard)?
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Being an an adventurer has nothing at all to do with melee combat effectiveness.
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Sometimes having more options has little to no impact on versatility.
Fir example there is little difference in burning hands and thunder wave. Both are a short range aoe blast with slightly different drawbacks.
Heck sleep rarely accomplishes something that one of those other spells can't accomplish.
So with burning hands the warlock can accomplish most of what the wizard can.....
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
It's not as ridiculous as trying to argue that a wizard is effective at melee combat.
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Holy crap you guys, you've managed to completly hijack the topic from "is the warlock completly obsolete" to bickering over versatility. How versatile you think a spellcaster is is almost entirely dependent on the circumstances. Simply as my opinion, wizards are more versatile, because of the amount of options they have at their disposal (I think this is the wizards main upside compared to other classes). The warlock can certainly do things the wizard can't but wizards can do things the warlock can't, such as buffing. Eather way how versitile a class is depends on what the situation is, even moreso for warlocks who need their short rests. You can each have your opinions, but please give it a rest already.
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Can you people seriously stop arguing over a vague term that has a different meaning from person to person, the original question that was asked has already been answered just fine, we don't need people banging their heads against each other.
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
Yunru wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
What is it to you if we want to use our time to debate meaningless stuff that will change nothing?
I actually find it very ironic that someone that plays D&D and talks about it on a forum would accuse others of doing something meaningless that changes nothing.......
blazeninja wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
blazeninja wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Being versatile in combat is about being able to overcome a large variety of combat challenges. Warlocks are equipped with the necessary tools to overcome a large variety of combat situations.
A warlock completes combat challenges primarily with eldritch blast. When he kills an enemy he gets a good amount of temp hp. This along with his armor and weapon proficiences help him when an enemy gets to close. He doesn't look to disengage like many ranged characters would, instead he is good enough that he barely slows down by fighting the enemy in melee. If the odds look overwhelming he has just enough aoe and control to turn the fight to his favor.
FYI: (I assume fiend patron and blade pact)
Keep in mind combat is primarily about killing the enemy, having them surrender or having them retreat before they kill you. As long as you can accomplish that goal it doesn't matter what tools you use to complete that goal. Your versatility in combat is not measured in the number of ways you can win a particular combat but in the number of different combat situations you can overcome.
Yunru wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
So lets talk about some basic combat situations: Let's assume a day is 6 encounters with 1 short rest between (2 would have benefited the warlock too much). Let's assume a level 5 wizard and a level 5 warlock.
Let's assume we are halfway through the day and just finished a short rest. Let's assume half of the wizards spells are expended rounded down but that the wizard recovered 1 level 3 spell.
The wizard has 2 lvl 1 spells, 1 lvl 2 spell and 2 lvl 3 spells left. (optimize the spell picks however you like)
The warlock has 2 lvl 3 spells. And better melee and eldritch blast options.
Let's assume we are in an arena and have 3 combats left tell we are free assuming we win. Will the party take the wizard or the warlock?
Which character offers the party a higher chance of success? Who would you pick?
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Kalani wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Kalani wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Yunru wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
LOL wizard can't push 4 different guys at 12 o'clock, 6'oclock, 3 oclock and 9 oclock that are all 120 ft from him with a cantrip..... i mean what if your on a huge airship and it would be really good to push them all of the edge at once like that........
If you want to get super specific I can make the warlocks abilities be sooo specific the wizard can't compete. Heck I've already thought of a countably infinite amount of such situations...
the enemies can be 119.9 or 119.99 or 119.999 or 119.9999 and so on away and my warlock can still always push them off the flying airshop that has a 120 ft radius even if they are on all different sides of him.... OMG your wizard won't be able to match my super specific situation where my warlock is always better because I set up the situation to make that point. And heck, I've just listed an infinite number of such situations..... Can your wizard top that?
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
@SilentSin... What did you think of my comparison between the classes a few posts back (I admit it took a while to type up).
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Kalani wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Yunru wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
How many actions does it take if a wizard dumps a bag of coins on the ground? One action for each coin?
Miladoon wrote:
Thats how I read it also, tks. BTW, thanks for you efforts in this thread.
I am new to D&D and just started playing 5e. I am going for fighter 1 warlock rest, for a strength based blade lock. I have a question about the Hallow spell I know in earlier editions it spelled out that it had to be ground or a building but in 5e the spell says you touch a point and the area around the point is affected by the spell. The wording of the darkness spell also says you touch a point but goes on to talk about casting darkness on objects. Could the "point" mentioned in the Hallow spell be my pact weapon? Just wondering how more experienced players/DMs would interpret this.
Thank you!
Back to the versatile thing
Warlocks are capable in almost any combat role that a party would need.
Combat Roles:
In combat, if you don't have a melee warrior a warlock can fill that role.
In combat, if you don't have an archer a warlock can fill that role.
In combat, if you don't have a caster with aoe attacks and control a warlock can fill that role.
The warlock may not be able to handle every combat situation the same as a barbarian but he can function close enough to one that in most situations it doesn't matter.
The warlock may not be able to handle every combat situation the same as an archer but he can function close enough to one that in most sitautions it doesn't matter.
The warlock may not be able to handle every combat situation them same as a wizard but he can function close enough to one that in most situations it doesn't matter.
Combat versatility is about being capable at any combat role a party may need.
Magic versatility during combat is about being capable at any magic role during combat a party may need.
The wizard is more versatile at magic during combat because he can fill any magic role during combat that the party currently needs. He may not be the best at all of those roles but he is capable at them all (for example a sorceror is typically better at aoe damage)
The warlock is more versatile at combat because he can fill in for any combat role that the party currently needs. He may not be the best at any of those roles but he is capable at them all. (for example the sorceror is typically better at aoe damage).
SoYouWantToBeAHero wrote:
It really doesn't matter who is the best at what, or whose daddy is the biggest, fastest, meanest etc. This is about a FANTASY GAME, in earlier editions you had Magic User, then Wizard which was my personal favourite class, even when I had cast my spell for the day. I would loot the fallen before the rogue got a chance or get in cover and hope I would survive.
Then Sorcerers came on the scene, who were that bit more magical, not as smart but more persuasive and for me it was magic users are even more fun to play and they are less fragile. Warlocks appeared and for me, at will Eldritch Blast was alright, but a Warlock was not as magical as a Wizard or a Sorcerer.
Then 4th had short range teleporting Warlocks, who for me were more fun than the blaster sorcerer or the control wizard. If I had wanted control I'd go martial. A striker who was magical was fun.
5th is here and we have Wizards with a lot of choices, there are more potential for schools and Traditions, than the classic ones provided. Ley and Node Wizards, Healer Mages, MtG style Magi with Mana and much much more. Sorcerers who excel in damage and do meta magic, they can be subtle or more destructive, plus the future holds potential for other types of sorcerer, from Storm, Elemental, Primordial and more. Warlocks are folk who pact with an extra planar power, they get choices of Blade, Book and Chain, plus a choice of Infernal, Fey or GOO. There is future potential for many more Patrons, for more Invocations, for much more.
Wizards are usually the smartest kid on the block, they may also be the most annoying, so will probably get picked on by martial characters, robbed blind by rogues and Swindled by the more charismatic.
The martial characters are typically focused on strength, constitution, dexterity, taking wisdom to cover street smarts and perception. So tend to persuade folk with their fists and would probably be easy prey for the wizards retaliation ( the one they hit for being an annoying magic user).
Charisma can intimidate, persuade and charm naturally. Fighters want to friends with the persuasive, friendly and the hot good looking folk. Wizards will forgive the lack of knowledge of the charismatic, will probably do their homework for them to.
A Fighter will think they are the best, a Wizard will think they are the best and a Warlock or Sorcerer will charm, intimidate, persuade the Fighter and the Wizard, that they are their best friend without the use of magic or bardic tricks. Everyone knows Bards are tricky, so will be more guarded against those flashy NLP, Derrin Brown, Svengali types ( apart from Roadies, fans etc). Bards will most probably like Warlocks and Sorcerers, because they want to be liked and loved, so will be aware of folk worthy of it in return.
So the battle between Wizard and Warlock was won, by the smarts of the Wizard and the personality of the Warlock, who openly admitted that the Wizard was a better wizard than they, and that they didn't want to talk about their past at magic academy as its to painful. Wizard and Warlock go for a flaggon of mead, wizard leaves when she thinks she has had enough usually with a lighter purs. The Warlock goes on all nighter, she ends up sleeping with the in keeps 23 year old daughter. Wakes in the morning with more money in her purse ( folk kept giving her drinks). Then a Wizard and Warlock go out adventuring with party, Wizard wants to know warlocks secret. The truth is a good player can make a wizard or a warlock character work well. A great player will be amazing, it's loving the character which is important.
I love my AL tome Fey Pact Warlock 3, with her 1 Bard level. She is more magical than a 4th level Wizard, to me because I have made her so. She's a spy, she spent gold and time transcribing Bard rituals into her Book of Ancient Secrets. She's a travelling librarian so always gets the drinks in for Wizards, Clerics, Sorcerers and Bards in exchange for knowledge and friendship. Yes she mostly uses EB, but she can snipe it in magical darkness thanks to Devils Sight. Looking through her owl familiars eyes dulls her vision, but can give a different perspective. She's tricky, and fun. My next magic user may be a Wizard, probably a Diviner, probably with some Rogue levels for evasion to represent being protected by Wyrd.
So play a Wizard or a Warlock and play well with them.
spanglemaker wrote: