| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1XenogearsNov 06, 2014 0:14:09 | Am I wrong to think that the Warlock feels almost unplayable. With the low number of spell slots and that Warlocks feel like their only in the book to multi class into or out of. Why is this class here am I missing somthing? |
| #2NovacatNov 06, 2014 0:21:51 | You're missing the part where warlocks have the highest sustainable damage of all the casters, not to mention armor proficiencies and invocations. Multiclassing a quick dip into warlock is indeed powerful, arguably the best single level dip class in the game, but Warlock has much to offer even at higher level. |
| #3akaddkNov 06, 2014 0:30:58 | Warlocks pack a lot of flavour into their very nature and that needs to be taken advantage of as a player. They are a lot of fun to play and can be made to suit a lot of playstyles.
On a pure power basis, they can be underpowered or overpowered depending on how many short rests the DM allows. Now that the DM Basic PDF revision 3 is out, there is a recommendation of an expectation of 2 short rests a day. That makes the warlock actually a little overpowered in comparison to other classes. |
| #4Luis_CarlosNov 06, 2014 0:35:52 | I imagine warlock like a remake of 3.5 version, with some things from Vestige binder. She would be like the wizard but only could get static list of powers by each vestige. It would be like cleric's domains, you could choose a different domain but only spells from those domains. A warlock couldn´t choose spell A, B and C, or B, D and E but "vestige Amon, Aym, Leraje, Naberius or Ronove".
And I imagine warlock like a single-use magic item craftman, a lighter version of artificier. The warlocks could craft scrolls, potions, talismans, runes and tatoos, but she would need a spellbook (like a recipe book, the "shadow book") and a special place (a sanctum)... and to active the single-use item the warlock must spend a spell slot (sorcerers also can spend spell slots to "active" a single use magic item crafted by a warlock).
|
| #5NovacatNov 06, 2014 0:44:59 |
|
| #6Luis_CarlosNov 06, 2014 2:27:33 | I talk about how I would create my own version of warlock class. I would mixture the 3.5 warlock and the vestige binder from "Tome of magic: pact, shadow and truename".
|
| #7Ard3Nov 06, 2014 6:19:52 | I dont think warlocks as casters. They are artillery with a dash of casting plus some neat tricks granted by patron and invocations. For example if you campaign isnt pure combat just think the possibilities of at will disguise self and silent image. Stuff like Fey Presense "These are not the constructs you are looking for". Sure they dont have that many spells, but they scale automatically. They are specialists, not full casters. Everything they have recharges at short rests so it depends on team and gm how well they can use stuff. But so does battlemaster fighter and monk. |
| #8iserithNov 06, 2014 6:40:01 | I love my warlock. It's quite an effective character class. |
| #9melloredNov 06, 2014 6:54:14 |
|
| #10bengrayawhileNov 06, 2014 7:01:37 | One of the player charcters in my game is a warlock and loves it. He is usualy one of our most efective fighters (just behind the monk) and is having a great time with his pact. He has been planing a slow transition from lawful evil to good as his Archfeind master is waining in power and getting more and more desperate and demanding. |
| #11ChrisCarlsonNov 06, 2014 7:07:30 |
|
| #12ElfcrusherNov 06, 2014 7:22:07 | I just wish they had left out "Eldritch Blast". Or left it for a filler utility, at best. I mean, what does "Eldritch Blast" even mean? "Magic Bolt"? "Arcane Zap"?
(I wrote a tongue in cheek post where I suggested that "Eldritch Blast" mean that the warlock throws an all-night roof burner of a party at which various supernatural beings would show up, from whom the Warlock could request boons.)
D&D already has a class that throws around damaging magic spells, the Wizard. Oh wait, and the Sorceror. That's plenty.
I love the pacts, I love the invocations, I just wish they could have thought of something more creative than a refluffed fire bolt. Yes, I know that nobody agrees with me.
Personally I would have given the warlock: - Lots of nasty debuffs ('curses'), some of which do damage indirectly. - Pact of the Chain and Pact of the Blade as default class abilities; no need to choose between them. - Pact features as actual physical changes (horns/antlers, wings, third eyes, hooves, tentacles, claws, scales, etc.) that grant permanent abilities. |
| #13melloredNov 06, 2014 7:29:07 |
|
| #14PolarisNov 06, 2014 7:31:45 | The warlock as is, is simply badly designed. The big reason to play the warlock (hypothetically) over other casters amount to three things:
1. You have the highest at-will damage of all the spellcasters including the ability to have multiple attacks that scale like a fighter's. 2. Your spell slots refresh after each short rest rather than long rests. This can be big if you can dictate when you short rest (like a Tome Warlock can after fifth level). 3. You gain access to a bunch of invocations with cool abilities both in flavor and game mechanics (like Devil's Sight, at-will Levitation, Book of Ancient Secrets) that no one else can get.
The problem is that because the warlock doesn't get more than two slots until after level ten (!!), but you get them at level 2, and because Eldritch Blast is a cantrip and not a signature Warlock ability (like it needs to be), and because many of the best invocations are available starting at level 2, there is almost no incentive to stay with being a warlock past level 3.
Let's look at the big three and how little is lost by MCing.
1. Highest at-will damage. This comes about from a combination of Eldritch Blast (which actually scales by gaining more attacks rather than more damage like other cantrips) + Agonizing Blast (+Cha per attack with EB). This gives you a ranged attack form that scales roughly as well as a fighter-archer's and far better than any other caster. The problem is that because Eldritch Blast is a cantrip it scales by character level. That means to get the full benefit, you only need to have two warlock levels (just enough to get Agonizing Blast as one of your two invocations.
2. Warlock slots don't stack with slots from other classes when it comes to multiclassing. That means you'll have two slots that refresh after a short rest regardless whether you have 2 warlock levels or 10. Granted the strength (level) of those slots will be different, but I also point out that the MCed warlock can put ANY spell into those slots, not just warlock spells (and vice versa). Also many DMs will make it incredibly hard to take a meaningful number of short rests when you need them most (short level), and you have to take specific builds with specific spells to help change that (and the DM in 5e can easily stop this too).
3. Many of the best invocations (Agonizing Blast, Devil's Sight) don't have any rerequisits at all, and many of the better ones (like Book of Secrets) only require the Tome Warlock Feature (choosable at warlock three....at which point you can switch your second invocation to this invocation right away). That means to get what you really want from invocations might not require many warlock levels (no more than 2 or 3 in many cases).
-Polaris |
| #15SynjinNov 06, 2014 8:12:08 |
|
| (Reply to #15)Azzy1974 |
|
| #17ElfcrusherNov 06, 2014 9:25:09 | Evidence that the warlock design is flawed lies in the forum discussion: it's almost always a mix-in to another class. A well-designed class should be appealing on its own.
I really wish they had included the warlock in the playtest; they might have gotten some useful feedback. |
| #18Eric888Nov 06, 2014 9:27:30 |
|
| #19ElfcrusherNov 06, 2014 9:27:43 |
|
| #20melloredNov 06, 2014 9:29:43 |
|
| #21SynjinNov 06, 2014 9:43:10 |
|
| #22ElfcrusherNov 06, 2014 9:44:10 |
|
| #23SynjinNov 06, 2014 9:45:26 |
|
| #24SandyStrikerNov 06, 2014 10:08:51 | One argument for why warlocks are a poor class is that they are a sub-optimal casters (limited spells dependent on multiple short rests).
I think if you actually play a warlock you will find this less of a problem independent of what type of day you have to contend with. The uniqueness of the class actually adds something special to a party. Additionally, other classes have features that recharge on a short rest so it isn't as if it is only the warlock that is looking for rests once in a while. The main difference is that short rests are more of a boon to the warlock than anyone else. This unique aspect means they add a lot of flexibility to a party and are a useful addition.
We can consider 3 types of days with the availability of short rests and the number of encounters varying.
1. Short day few encounters limited short rests (easy day everyone spams spells, no rationing required) The warlock without hesitation unloads 2-4 powerfull spells. The traditional spell casters in your party can unload in this circumstance, perhaps action economy is the only limiting factor. Party survives quite easily. The warlock didn't shine, but this was a cake walk. Who wants to optimized for easy one offs? I guess the Sorcerer.
2. Long day many encounters, numerous short rests (marathon for everyone else, Warlock plays the same as it does for a short day) Warlock gets to be special. They can unload powerful spells without hesitation and recharge frequently so at the end of the day for the BBEG fight, they are just as powerful as they were for the first fight. The other casters a. rationed all day- Warlock unloading spells allowed the others to not cast spells b. run low on slots at the end of the day- Warlock saves the day at the end with powerful slots still available
3. Long day many encounters limited if any short rests Warlock gets to be special again. If this day is survivable it means there are many small encounters in which case the high at-will damage of the warlock Eldritch Blast will help carry a party.
If instead there are many difficult encounters with no short rests...well that means the party better find ways of avoiding some fights.... guess who has lots of tricky at-will class features and high charisma to avoid some encounters?
The situation where warlocks are disappointing casters is if you only have short days where spell slot management in not an issue. In that case the DM is the issue not the warlock design.
|
| #25durntaurNov 06, 2014 10:22:16 |
|
| #26melloredNov 06, 2014 10:28:12 |
|
| #27ChrisCarlsonNov 06, 2014 10:30:38 |
|
| #28durntaurNov 06, 2014 10:36:51 |
|
| #29SandyStrikerNov 06, 2014 10:39:00 | The second argument for why warlocks are a bad class is that the invocations and cantrips are tied to character level not class level.
Yes if you are going to optimize a high level character and are looking to exploit any possible loopholes, you can grab whatever special feature you want and use it to optimize a paladin build.
Guess what, your DM is not going to let your level 14 paladin level 3 warlock shoot off 4 eldritch blast beams per attack action. Why? because it is broken. Similarly you don't get access to the high level invocations, it is pretty clear that a dabbling paladin should not get as much as the pure warlock. This is silly. Hopefully you work this out with the DM before sitting at the table with the intention of playing such a build.
As was mentioned previously, this aspect of the warlock would have benefited from some play testing so they would have been aware of the problem. Either EB and invocations would specifically and only be tied to warlock level or else the levels of other casters would not count as a full warlock level for the advancement in those features. (perhaps the p165 multiclass spell level / 2, for example level 14 paladin / 3 warlock would be equivalent of level 6 warlock, you would get 2 beams per attack).
If your DM lets you dip for full power into warlock for invocations and cantrips, well the DM is indulgent but it is less a problem of the warlock class being weak or unplayable as it is a problem of that interpretation making a warlock an unreasonably strong, but absurd, multiclass dip.
|
| #30LashanNov 06, 2014 10:40:59 | I see the Warlock as being a lot different than other casters. They get the blasting every round, but other than that, they have a wide variety of Incantations or spells or abilities. It seems that it's highly customizable and you can fit them into a party. I see them as a bit like the Bard. Not a full caster and not a full anything, but with a bunch of useful stuff that can be pulled out of the hat. You can go for the stealth aspect or the persuasion road. There is also the blasting path or combat path. It just doesn't seem right to compare to a Sorceror or a Wizard. They are just different.
Maybe if you want to be a min-maxer you can stop at lvl 3, but there seems to me to be a bunch of cool stuff that makes me want to keep on going with the class. |
| #31durntaurNov 06, 2014 10:53:44 |
|
| #32SandyStrikerNov 06, 2014 11:43:27 | I think the Crawford tweet only talked about the invocation requisites, I would also assume it extends to Eldritch Blast Beams but it does get tricky from the min-max perspective since a sorcerer could theoretically be grabbing EB with spell sniper (or I guess magic initiate). Seems like you could make a better case for beams scaling with character level in that circumstance. Developers are relying on rational DMs to decide how many beams your character deserves. My DM is often rational so I am ok with that.
Anyways, to the OPs question,
Warlocks are a unique, fun and playable as a stand alone class. With an overly indulgent DM a warlock multiclass is a key part of many optimized builds. If you have such a DM I guess you have a party of L3 Warlocks/ L X <insert class that somehow uses Cha>
The discussion is useful, some more clarity than a tweet is appreciated. It wouldn't affect my table but I could see it helping some DMs that don't want to be seen as the bad guy all the time. However, anything more than the tweet does lead to that rabbit hole of erattas that were kind of annoying a few years ago. I haven't seen the DMG yet. Does it have a blanket guideline about how to deal with absurd min-max builds? |
| #33PsikerlordNov 06, 2014 11:54:54 |
|
| #34durntaurNov 06, 2014 12:08:13 |
|
| #35melloredNov 06, 2014 12:04:36 |
|
| #36durntaurNov 06, 2014 12:09:24 |
|
| #37ChrisCarlsonNov 06, 2014 12:37:11 |
|
| (Reply to #34)SandyStriker |
|
| #39ZardnaarNov 06, 2014 13:12:49 |
|
| #40ChrisCarlsonNov 06, 2014 13:04:17 |
|
| (Reply to #13)Timborama |
|
| #42ChrisCarlsonNov 06, 2014 13:12:27 |
|
| #43durntaurNov 06, 2014 13:16:00 |
|
| #44melloredNov 06, 2014 13:17:19 |
|
| #45durntaurNov 06, 2014 13:23:47 |
|
| #46Chiisai_UsagiNov 06, 2014 13:25:32 |
|
| #47durntaurNov 06, 2014 13:35:38 |
|
| (Reply to #41)SandyStriker |
|
| #49akaddkNov 06, 2014 13:45:27 |
|
| (Reply to #43)SandyStriker |
|
| #51durntaurNov 06, 2014 14:12:49 |
|
| #52SandyStrikerNov 06, 2014 14:14:27 | Looked a little more at the basic rules pdf. I think a spell with an attack roll can be used for the extra attack action. I would probably only give one extra roll for that extra attack in a real game. Couldn't there be an argument for a rather ridiculous 8 beams for a high level Palilock? |
| #53durntaurNov 06, 2014 14:31:06 | As I reread the rules for Attack (PHB, p. 192) under the Actions in Combat section, and its reference to Making an Attack (p. 193), I'm convinced that the "Attack action", to which Extra Attack applies, is what is declared when making weapon attacks only. The differentiation could be deduced by the fact that immediately following the Attack subsection is the subsection on Cast a Spell. Making an Attack is just a general section (just as Actions in Combat is a section) on the process of resolving attacks, whether they are from weapons or are spells; the difference here is that it only references lower-case [a]ttack.
Thus, if one takes an Attack action (upper-case/proper rule), they can get further details about resolving that from Making an Attack. Similarly, if one were to Cast a Spell, they can get further details about resolving that from Making an Attack. |
| #54SandyStrikerNov 06, 2014 14:30:32 | With heavy feat investment, warcaster+Polearm master, you can get another 4 beams as an opportunity attack every time a creature walks adjacent to your staff and shield, tome lock, shilelagh exploiting, avenging oath paladin 14/ warlock 3 using Cha for ranged and melee attacks and absolutely spams EB crazy, probably takes the knock back invocation. Pretty much owns the table and has awesome saving throws meaning the hex doesn't actually get interrupted so you can reliably add +1d6 to each hit as well.
Pretty boring to play, ask your friends permission before doing this. |
| #55ZardnaarNov 06, 2014 14:36:17 |
|
| #56PolarisNov 06, 2014 14:40:58 |
|
| #57ZardnaarNov 06, 2014 14:42:10 |
|
| (Reply to #53)SandyStriker |
|
| (Reply to #55)SandyStriker |
|
| #60akaddkNov 06, 2014 14:51:26 |
|
| #61durntaurNov 06, 2014 14:58:46 |
|
| #62PolarisNov 06, 2014 14:59:57 |
|
| #63ChakravantNov 06, 2014 15:11:21 |
|
| #64CCSNov 06, 2014 15:17:04 | I view Warlocks in the same way light I do all other names-you-could-call-an-arcane-caster. As rules bloat. Just because your thesaurus may list 1001 names for a wizard DOESN'T mean you need a separate class in this game for them..... Similar opinion on having 31 flavors of Elf. |
| #65ShasarakNov 06, 2014 15:20:31 |
|
| (Reply to #62)SandyStriker |
|
| #67PolarisNov 06, 2014 16:48:56 |
|
| #68draegnNov 06, 2014 17:12:04 |
|
| #69arnwolf666Nov 06, 2014 18:43:14 | The Warlock with some tweaks is what Specialty Priests should be. The Patrons could be various gods. They completely missed the oppurtunity to differentiate the Cleric and Wizard and bring a real mechanical difference to the two classes that would really enhance their roleplaying. |
| #70durntaurNov 06, 2014 21:47:12 |
|
| #71ElfcrusherNov 06, 2014 22:10:44 |
|
| #72XenogearsNov 06, 2014 22:51:58 | So was I right to think of a Warlock as almost a poor mans Wizard. Its kind of cool to have spell slots that regen after a 1 hour nap but being out done in felxibility, utility, and to some point power. Going 1-20 as a Warlock makes you feel like I should have been a something else. |
| #73durntaurNov 06, 2014 23:23:24 |
|
| #74ZardnaarNov 06, 2014 23:36:14 |
|
| (Reply to #52)1eejit |
|
| (Reply to #75)Timborama |
|
| #77melloredNov 07, 2014 5:40:32 | IMO:
Eldrich Bast = Fine as a cantrip. Agonizing Blast = 1/turn, you can deal +Cha damage with eldrich blast. This increases to 2/turn at warlock level 5, 3/turn at warlock level 11, and 4/turn at warlock level 17.
Blade = At warlock 5 you gain multi-attack. At warlock 11 you gain +Cha to damage on an attack 1/turn. at warlock 17 you gain +Cha to damage on any attack.
Chain = At level 5, you can cast find familiar without paying the component cost if your summoning the same familiar. At level 11 you can can disappear and reapear your familiar as a bonus action. At level 17, you can cast any spell though your familiar while it's in 100' of you. |
| #78IxidorRSNov 07, 2014 7:24:04 |
|
| #79sleypyNov 07, 2014 7:45:46 |
|
| (Reply to #78)Timborama |
|
| #83IxidorRSNov 07, 2014 10:57:57 | How do I see the Warlock? AS PURE AWESOME |
| #84Danny_MontannyNov 07, 2014 19:08:37 | I play my Warlock/Rogue because he's super fun to play. He's maximized for interaction and does ok for the other 2 pillars of play. He gets by in combat with Hex + light crossbow + sneak attack. What makes him fun for me is: Actor + Mask of Many Faces + Awakened Mind + Expertise. He's Wormtonge so hard. All wrapped in the package of a stumbling, bumbling coward. One day he'll be the true power behind every throne. All praise be to Korrok. |
| #85durntaurNov 07, 2014 22:37:47 |
|
| #86XenogearsNov 08, 2014 8:54:38 |
|
| #87ChrisCarlsonNov 08, 2014 9:22:02 | I don't play my warlock to be a DPR robot. How boring. He's a rich, pampered nobleman*, who expects others to do the fighting for him. I mean, that's why there's a fighter, a barbarian, and a rogue in the party. What else are they good for?
(*I even took the "Retainers" alt option for Noble background. Two of the three are dedicated to carrying him around everywhere in a litter. The other runs around fetching him things and doing menial tasks beneath my character's bother.) |
| #88ZardnaarNov 08, 2014 11:53:01 |
|
| #89FuelDropNov 08, 2014 17:52:52 | Our warlock is the party's big DPR source, happily pummeling anything foolish enough to engage us. He's putting out an average of 1d10+1d6+5 damage and 10 foot knockback per turn, normally at advantage due to the party Druid (me) favoring spells such as entangle, faerie fire, and their ilk to give the group an edge in battle.
We're yet to encounter a situation since second level where he's been ineffective in combat. At first he was less potent due to only ever rolling 1s on his d10. |
| (Reply to #89)FrogReaver |
|
| #91Luis_CarlosNov 09, 2014 1:15:47 | The design and creation of each D&D class have three parts:
- The background: the mark of identity. It isn´t only a list of powers.
- The balance of power. Not only for PCs but to be used like enemy nPC, for example the evil boss' bodyguard in the final fight.
- Fun gameplay.
* What is the mark of identity of warlock?
Warlock symbolizes the power by astuteness, trading favours and social skills. Warlocks are from the spellcasters' underground, the D&D version of Grand Thief Auto. Wizard are the power by study and investigation, and the sorcerers by hereditary talent and training. Warlocks are the wannabe wizards who couldn´t pay Howard academy because there were too poor.
The warlock is the D&D version of Halliwell sisters (Charmed TV show).
|
| (Reply to #91)FrogReaver |
|
| #93Luis_CarlosNov 09, 2014 3:23:40 | Maybe we need a variant warloc, or an talent tree with pact magic.. and maybe a little touch of Eberron artificier. The game mechanic about pact magic and vestiges fits really well for warlock's background, but the vestiges are lots of pages. I hope to see the return of the vestiges in the future second player handbook. It would be cool.
How do I imagine the 5th Ed pact magic? Like a mini-list of powers (it can be encounter or dayly also), a mixture of cleric's domain and little free prestige class you could change everytime with a ritual... Each ritual could be like to trying be attuned to a magic item.
* I don´t imagine a warlock with armour and a sword... I mean that would be a hexblade, nor a true warlock, and for me a hexblade isn´t the blade warlock subclass. A warlock with armour and a halberd would a warmage, and the warmages are more like a sorcerer variant class.
* Variant classes should be showed like complete true classes, by reasons of marketing.
|
| #94draegnNov 09, 2014 6:51:48 | http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Ammon_Jerro
http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Ammon_Jerro
I wonder what kind of character Ammon would have been if good instead of evil and using angels, devas, etc instead of demons and devils. |
| #95sleypyNov 09, 2014 7:28:34 |
|