[DnD 3.5] The Warlock- What is his problem?

[ProudGrognard]

Greetings oh masters of all things RPG,

Since my first contact with the warlock all those years ago, I have had a fondness for the class. Sadly, I never got to play him, having moved to PF for many years now.

Recently I thought of porting the class to PF. I found out that my favorite iteration, the arcane ranged support, is considered underpowered. So, having little game experience, I would like to ask:

- What are the problems with the warlock? It seems that most say "Too little damage" and " Too little invocations". What are your experiences?

-Are there quick fixes to them? For example, is adding the Cha mod to eldrich blast, a la alchemist, significant?

Please share!

[nedz]

Too few options.
They're not quite a one trick pony, but they don't have many tricks.

They are reasonable for infiltration and counter infiltration and they do have a few useful invocations for combat but they get quite dull fast.

Adding Cha to damage won't really help since their damage output is quite low.

There are a number of optimisation tricks to add more options and they can multiclass, but if you look at combining them with casters then you need to compare them with Reserve feats which are cheaper. The seem to work quite well multiclassed with Rogues.

[ProudGrognard]

So, what you are saying echoes what I have written above. Too little damage, too little invocations.

However, it seems to me that the alchemist also has the same damage progression and he is not considered underpowered. Why adding +4 or some such to 2d6 at 3rd level be inconsequential?

Also, would it help if he got two invocation progressions? One that would specifically shape his eldrich blast (one at 1st level and one every four levels afterwards), in addition to the one he normally gets?

[Marlowe]

They are freakishly like Rogues in terms of effectiveness and utility sometimes, although they come at it from entirely a different direction:

Everyone Else: Check this dungeon for traps.
Warlock: Righto [Spams Detect Magic] Magic traps of some sort there, there, there.
EE: Deal with them!
Warlock: 'K. [Spams Voracious Dispelling]
EE: What about mundane traps?
Warlock: Gimme a minute. [Draws a lot of goblin corpses out of bag of holding, which was inside Handy Haversack. Spams The Dead Walk] Ok, minions, just walk around and blunder into things. [Waits. Watches] OK, normal traps here, here, and over there.
EE: Well?
Warlock: Sigh. [Spams Baleful Utterance]
EE: This doors locked!
Warlock: Come on guys! [Spams Baleful Utterance again]

Well you get the idea.

If I were to "fix" (Upgrade) the Warlock with as few changes as possible I'd:
1, Allow EB to work with Iterative Attacks, maybe let the Warlock make melee touch attacks with it as well.
2, Allow the "Extra Invocation" feat to give you extra Invocations of the highest level you can use when you take the feat, rather than the next highest.

[Grizzled Gryphon]

I could see the Warlock having a progression for the EB like the Dragonfire Adept has for the BW. So the innvocations that deal with EB would be gained at the same rate that the Dragonfire Adept gains the Breath Affects.

Hmm, I think I am going to make that an official homebrew houserule for my games...

[Dr. Azkur]

It depends a lot in what you consider to be a problem. Melee Warlocks are known (or should be known) for their potential at martial prowess, for they can truly kick some butt.

But a main problem you can easily encounter is that much of the material that supports the Warlock, and makes them a much more powerful class, are things such as feats only found in Dragon Magazine like the Eldritch Claws (which is what makes Clawlocks possible! An entire melee path!), or an online FAQ in which the designer says he would allow Practiced Spellcaster to advance Eldritch Blast.
Not every DM is entirely fine with this...

Contrary to popular belief, number of Invocations is not quite as problematic as it seems... The primary problem is the Invocations themselves. For being things you can cast at-will, some of them get useless very fast, but even worse a great number get useless before they reach your Invocation list: Some are very poorly designed and the already small bunch of Invocations gets much smaller after inspection.
I would expand on this but I think the available Warlock Handbooks address it much better than I could and you would draw better knowledge from reading their Invocation ratings than from my little report.

But the basics would be that there are only 2 good essences, and there are very few interesting shapes (The ones that allow a Ref save usually are automatically disqualified for taking)

And on my personal opinion: There are only two worthwhile Least Invocations, and one only serves purpose to one kind of play (Eldritch Glaive) while being subject to a LOT of controversy (another problem with the Warlock). The other one is Baleful Utterance, and that never ceases to be useful. And this is happening while almost all good invocations are Lesser Invocations.

Hope I helped.

PD: Know what feat really sucks? Extra Invocation. Wow. So not cool.

[nedz]

I think that if they could swap their invocations more often it would help, or at least make them less dull. Maybe everytime they get a new invocation they should be allowed to swap out an old one.

I think that there are a few useful least invocations. Being able to move through a web, which you can spam with a wand, is a fun tactic — for a while.
See Invisibility is handy or maybe even necessary. Summon Swarm is a killer at level 1, but grows old. Spear is kind of essential in some situations.

There are a couple of useful greaters, but the darks are fairly poor.

[Metahuman1]

Well, don't forget, if you port it to pathfinder, assuming it's not Pathfinder Society, you can run by maxing UMD and picking up Item Creation feats. Doubling the party's effective wealth and providing yourself and the party a wide variety of potent/useful wands/scrolls/potions/wondrous Items and magic arms and armor can make you very powerful.

[Manly Man]

Honestly, I think that a decent start would be to have separate progression for shapes/essences and other invocations. Have the blast itself progress like the Rogue's sneak attack, and since this is going into Pathfinder, give them the Eldritch Heritage line as bonus feats. It would probably be even better to make bloodline class features for them, much like the Sorcerer, but have different effects on them. However, that would take a lot of work.

[Craft (Cheese)]

The problem with the Warlock is WotC thought at-will abilities are ZOMGBROKEN and have to be undermined as much as possible in order to be "balanced" versus 1/day abilities. At-will abilities are indeed better than dailies, but not by nearly as much as WotC thought them to be.

The beginnings of a warlock fix:

- Begin with 3 invocations and gain 1 invocation every level (instead of every other level).

- When you trade an invocation for a new one, the new one may be of any level you can use (rather than the same level as the old invocation or lower).

- Eldritch Blast damage starts at 2d6 and ends at 10d6.

- New Feat: Practiced Invoker improves your invocations (including Eldritch Blast) by 4 effective levels, not to be in excess of your HD. It also improves the maximum invocation level you can learn, but does not give you more invocations.

- Extra Invocation gives you a new invocation of any level you can learn, and it can be traded for others as you level up just like any other invocation you learn.


Iterative eldritch blast attacks are a good idea, but I'm not sure how it should interact with Eldritch Claws. Any ideas?

[AmberVael]

- What are the problems with the warlock? It seems that most say "Too little damage" and " Too little invocations". What are your experiences?
This, pretty much. They don't need a ton more than what they have, but they do need more. In an attempt to balance out their strengths, WotC went a little too far with limitations.


Adding Cha to damage won't really help since their damage output is quite low.
I don't entirely agree. A decent charisma modifier can make eldritch blast notably more viable at low levels. It doesn't particularly add a ton in the long haul, but it gives one more way to add a little more damage and optimize it.

In short, it's not going to fix everything, but it does help things out. I recommend that warlocks start off with this one way or another.


Also, would it help if he got two invocation progressions? One that would specifically shape his eldrich blast (one at 1st level and one every four levels afterwards), in addition to the one he normally gets?
Ugh. Everyone and their dog does this in homebrew and I never like it- it locks the warlock into focusing on eldritch blast whether they feel like it or not. I strongly recommend against it.


Contrary to popular belief, number of Invocations is not quite as problematic as it seems... The primary problem is the Invocations themselves.
There ARE a lot of bad invocations, but the low number of invocations you get is still a major issue. You start off with one, and end up with 12- you really have very few choices, especially since a great number of those invocations are passive buffs.

The essences and blasts are a major issue, I agree, because so many of them are woefully inadequate and underpowered (which is part of why I dislike homebrew that makes you take them- why would I want to take them?)

[ProudGrognard]

It seems there is a concensus here, even if it is a rough one.

-First thing, the damage needs an update. I think that my initial idea of adding Cha is on the right track.

- A separate progression for eldrich blast invocations and general invocations is needed. Some of the invocations also need updating. Having the alchemist as a guide is not bad.

- Adding some bloodline feats and abilities from the sorcerer would make for a nice bump.

[nedz]

I don't entirely agree. A decent charisma modifier can make eldritch blast notably more viable at low levels. It doesn't particularly add a ton in the long haul, but it gives one more way to add a little more damage and optimize it.


-First thing, the damage needs an update. I think that my initial idea of adding Cha is on the right track.
I don't entirely disagree, I just think that this is applying a band aid for a broken leg.


Ugh. Everyone and their dog does this in homebrew and I never like it- it locks the warlock into focusing on eldritch blast whether they feel like it or not. I strongly recommend against it.

I agree


- A separate progression for eldritch blast invocations and general invocations is needed. Some of the invocations also need updating. Having the alchemist as a guide is not bad.
There are several Warlock's I have built for whom this would not have been useful — eg. the one's who don't bother with essences. What the Warlock needs is more options not less.


- Adding some bloodline feats and abilities from the sorcerer would make for a nice bump.
Yes, anything to add more options.

[Nightraiderx]

Oh Hideous Blow, why do you fail so hard? =(
If you are going to have more invocations learned going to need more invocations to choose from in general. Adding thematic spells would also help.
Like Necromancy SLA's that mesh well with creating undead and healing buffing them.

[AmberVael]

I don't entirely disagree, I just think that this is applying a band aid for a broken leg.

Oh, if it is all that you do, then it is. But it is a easy way to make early levels not fail completely without overpowering the progression overall.

[Dr. Azkur]

There ARE a lot of bad invocations, but the low number of invocations you get is still a major issue. You start off with one, and end up with 12- you really have very few choices, especially since a great number of those invocations are passive buffs.


You can make do with just a few invocations if you pick them well... or you could if you had where to pick from. There are like... 3 possible ways to go about it:


Überscout (Pick all the mobility and perception invocations)
Generic Warlock (Pick the invocations everyone tells you to pick because those are the only ones that make sense for longer than a round or two
Suck completely


But yeah, more slots would be nice. (I insist, 12 is playable. YMMV)

[stack]

PG - You're not looking to change your RHoD character, are you? I would have been down with a reworked warlock (at least someone would have positive CHA then :smallbiggrin:), but I suspect you are pretty well set with your 'gnome'.

[Andezzar]

Adding thematic spells would also help.
Like Necromancy SLA's that mesh well with creating undead and healing buffing them.I never thought that undead fit the warlock particularly well. Now summoning creatures from the lower planes....

[Chronos]

Quoth nedz:

I think that if they could swap their invocations more often it would help, or at least make them less dull. Maybe everytime they get a new invocation they should be allowed to swap out an old one.
They do get this. From Complete Arcane (start of the fifth paragraph, under "Invocations"):

At any level when a warlock learns a new invocation, he can also replace an invocation he already knows with another invocation of the same or a lower grade.
Yes, the rest of that paragraph talks specifically about the invocations you swap out at 6th, 11th, and 16th levels, but that's just to make clear what grade invocations you can swap out at those levels-- It never says you don't swap them out at all the other levels when you learn invocations.

[Talionis]

I think Warlock has a few design problems, but the absolute biggest is that there are not enough Invocations to pick from.

As mentioned above because there are so few invocations and so little support for the class, Warlocks only serve in a couple roles.

My fix for this would be to allow Warlocks to pick any Sorcerer Spell of less than level 3 as a Lesser invocation. Any Sorcerer Spell of less than level 5 as a Greater Invocation and any Sorcerer Spell of less than level 7 to be used as a Dark Invocation. All subject to DM approval.

This would make Warlocks pick a role or two to be good at. And it would put a lot of work on DM's, but it would give Warlocks access to more roles. At least they aren't spamming anything higher than level 6 spells.

I also agree with separating the Shapes from the Invocations.

[nedz]

They do get this. From Complete Arcane (start of the fifth paragraph, under "Invocations"):

Yes, the rest of that paragraph talks specifically about the invocations you swap out at 6th, 11th, and 16th levels, but that's just to make clear what grade invocations you can swap out at those levels-- It never says you don't swap them out at all the other levels when you learn invocations.

Interesting. That's how I originally read the section too, but everyone else seems to assume that you can only swap an invocation at levels 6, 11 and 16.
It depends upon how you read the text I guess.

It would help with taking essences.

[Chronos]

It is confusing. But the first sentence is clear, and the rest has multiple interpretations, one of which conflicts with that clear first sentence, without explicitly saying that it changes the first sentence. Even though that would be the obvious interpretation of those latter sentences in a vacuum, I think we're rather forced to use the interpretation that doesn't conflict.

Incidentally, I already checked, and there's no errata on this.

[Drachasor]

There are definitely a few things that would need to be done.

Bump up EB damage to 1d6/level + Charisma Mod. There's maybe one or two ways this could be a problem (Eldritch Glaive for instance), but that's handled by just halving the number of d6's as part of a particular Blast Shape. Otherwise this is just making it a solid level of damage.

Adding scaling to invocations to keep them relevant.

Gain 1 invocation per level.

Automatically gain the ability to apply metamagic effects to invocations (including EB) a limited number of times per day.

I think it would probably be a good idea to make secondary damaging effects of some invocations optional. Sometimes you don't want to inflict damage or whatever as part of the spell effect.

If I were going to split up invocations into two categories, I'd be more inclined to split up long-term buffs into their own category. In any case, I am not sure it is really needed.

[Talionis]

Everyone keeps saying let Warlocks pick more Invocations, but if they get many more than they have they will have access to at least a third of the existing invocations. I'm serious, they really do need more invocations available to truly be interesting.

[AmberVael]

Everyone keeps saying let Warlocks pick more Invocations, but if they get many more than they have they will have access to at least a third of the existing invocations. I'm serious, they really do need more invocations available to truly be interesting.

Admittedly, as someone who homebrews warlock invocations and uses the homebrew of others, I tend to see this as less of an issue. But yeah, if you're using just the basic invocations your warlocks will get samey fast.

[Nightraiderx]

I never thought that undead fit the warlock particularly well. Now summoning creatures from the lower planes....

Wouldn't summon monster be highly abuse-able as an at-will ability?

It would make sense, but summoning gets into a tricky category.

I could however see them having some of the fiendish transformation spells
from the spell compendium.

[Talionis]

Admittedly, as someone who homebrews warlock invocations and uses the homebrew of others, I tend to see this as less of an issue. But yeah, if you're using just the basic invocations your warlocks will get samey fast.

Homebrew maybe the better answer since you can balance them as you create them. But its some sparse pickings on invocations, it gives it the feel that there are only two or three paths that Warlocks can take.

[Karnith]

Wouldn't summon monster be highly abuse-able as an at-will ability?
Yes, but there's already a class that can do that (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/frcc/20070718) (essentially), so it's not like there isn't precedent for it.

[Security Bear]

I guess adding "HellFire Warlock", "Binder", and "Legacy Champion" to Pathfinder is not strictly speaking a fix for Warlock itself.

[nedz]

Homebrew maybe the better answer since you can balance them as you create them. But its some sparse pickings on invocations, it gives it the feel that there are only two or three paths that Warlocks can take.

Each Warlock can already pick 12, plus pick up another 5 by means of Extra Invocation, making 17. A lot of the invocations are quite poor, so you would never take them. A lot are also quite similar, there are I think 4 leasts which offer 20% miss chance.

Also if you are building a Warlock to a concept: Melee, Debuffer, BC, infiltration etc., then you are going to end up with very few optimal choices. So, e.g., all Melee Warlocks will look pretty similar.

DFA is even worse in this respect since they tend to spend 2/3s of their, even fewer, invocations on must have choices.

[Slipperychicken]

Remember that PF is already buffing their damage with Deadly Aim (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/deadly-aim-combat). Since EB is a touch attack, they should be using Deadly Aim most of the time.


As for Eldritch Blast, I'd consider making it a (Su) weaponlike ability with range increment of 60ft. That means you can throw down Rapid Shot and iterative attacks (albeit at 3/4 BAB), use it from a distance, and it doesn't care about Spell Resistance. That along with Pathfinder's buffs to ranged characters should bring it roughly up to par.

[Talionis]

Each Warlock can already pick 12, plus pick up another 5 by means of Extra Invocation, making 17. A lot of the invocations are quite poor, so you would never take them. A lot are also quite similar, there are I think 4 leasts which offer 20% miss chance.

Also if you are building a Warlock to a concept: Melee, Debuffer, BC, infiltration etc., then you are going to end up with very few optimal choices. So, e.g., all Melee Warlocks will look pretty similar.

DFA is even worse in this respect since they tend to spend 2/3s of their, even fewer, invocations on must have choices.

That's what I mean. Being able to take more invocations doesn't really help if the ones available are similar to what you already have or push you towards the same niches.

[Drachasor]

Remember that PF is already buffing their damage with Deadly Aim (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/deadly-aim-combat). Since EB is a touch attack, they should be using Deadly Aim most of the time.

Deadly Aim does not work with Touch Attacks.

[Twilightwyrm]

I should ask if you already took a look at the PF Warlock (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/3rd-party-classes/adamant-entertainment/warlock) and found it wanting for what you wanted? Because, in terms of power and versatility, it jumps up quite a bit from the original warlock, allowing for everything from Teleportation, to Summoning, to Astral Projection (all while in Heavy Armor, should you so choose). Some of the more thematic Warlock Invocations are gone, but hell, you might well like what they replaced them with.
Now, if you did find it wanting, that is entirely understandable, and I would certainly second increased invocation gaining rates, eldritch blast iteratives, and the other suggestions mentioned here. I just was unsure whether you had seen the PF version or not.

[Urpriest]

Since no-one has pointed this out yet: if an Alchemist wants to focus on damage, they can take a discovery that lets them full attack with their bombs. A warlock doesn't have the same option sans homebrew.

[ProudGrognard]

Well, I had seen him, but this...is not a warlock. This is a class that shares the name. It has nothing of the original flavor.

[Twilightwyrm]

Well, I had seen him, but this...is not a warlock. This is a class that shares the name. It has nothing of the original flavor.

Fair enough, just thought I should ask. In that case, the class should have at least a few increases in power to make it appropriate in PF. The increased ease of crafting is definitely a boon, but the increased prevalence of SLAs by classes overall mean that increasing the number of evocations learned (use the Alchemist discovery rate for a basic idea) and indeed, adding some new ones, would help. If you feel like doing a little extra work, there is a lot of potential for archetypes in the class as well.

[JaronK]

First off, Warlocks aren't weak... they're just mid range on the power scale. They're by no means Wizards, but they're stronger than Monks and Fighters.

But if you wanted a stronger Warlock to play in a group with Wizards and the like, why not just gestalt it with Binder? Similar flavor, and a big upgrade.

JaronK

[stack]

It occurs to me that one could hack together a pure PF warlock by taking eldritch blast then using alchemist discoveries and witch hexes as invocations. Have the bomb discoveries modify your single-target blasts, let fast bombs work with it, maybe channel hexes through the blast. Plenty of debuffs, some modest blasting, and you can keep going all day. Probably grant an 'invocation' every level this way. Should be reasonably tier 3, you would be versatile but certainly not game breaking.