Warlock. Simple, yet blasts you all day?

[kirerellim]

I've never really looked into the warlock before. Didn't really catch my attention. But when looking up spell like abilities, I found it was a class that was just spell like abilities. My interest was piqued so I checked it out. Simple enough abilities that get decently strong later in. Then I realized I couldn't find a 'times a day' section on the site. Looking more closely, still nothing.

At only 12 invocations total, I could see getting unlimited casting but... seriously? Is it really unlimited casting?

[Juntao112]

Yes.

They're fun.

So are Dragonfire Adepts.

[Gwendol]

Yes, that's kind of the basic premise of the class.

[kirerellim]

Well thats... really.... wow. The... WOW. Blaster without end. I'm gonna have fun with that.

[Drachasor]

The class is a bit weak though and you end up doing the same thing a lot.

Personally I think it needs the following changes:
EB: 1d6 damage/level (on shapes that allow EB damage on full attacks, halve the EB dice, rounded up).
Invocations: Get a new one every level. Though this would require more invocations overall.

This would probably put it in Tier 3. But I could see a complete rework of invocations making sense.

Remember the damage a Warlock does is not impressive overall.

[Taveena]

Eldritch Glaive and Claws, as well as Hellfire Warlock, are easily enough to push their damage up to rather impressive levels. And in terms of versatility, there might not be many options, but... you get more options than a Wilder, and they run out of power points. Frankly, I think Warlock is one of the better designed classes (As is DFI) and don't really need a fix, though there ARE quite a few trap options.

[Techwarrior]

Well thats... really.... wow. The... WOW. Blaster without end. I'm gonna have fun with that.

Yessir. Indeed it does. In fact that was my first reaction (as well as the reaction of the other DM I know in real life) as well. The thing about it is, it really never gets great. It just winds up being good to ok. A fighter spec'ed for crossbow damage pulls ahead of you, although you have a few more tricks and a worse chassis.

When your DM balks, as I did, point them to the reserve feats and ask if they think that a spellcaster has better things to do with their time. Point out to them that this is essentially the same premise, but without the shattering power of the spells that power your reserve.

[Drachasor]

Eldritch Glaive and Claws, as well as Hellfire Warlock, are easily enough to push their damage up to rather impressive levels. And in terms of versatility, there might not be many options, but... you get more options than a Wilder, and they run out of power points. Frankly, I think Warlock is one of the better designed classes (As is DFI) and don't really need a fix, though there ARE quite a few trap options.

Yes, Warlocks are much better if min-maxed with the few good options they have. But I guess since I occasionally run games I always think of ways to make the default option good. I'd rather have a good base class for players and remove options that are then OP then have a bad base class and players need to use a small set of options to be decent/good.

[evilserran]

Flying around all day, raining fire from 250' up in the air is always fun. Sure the damage isn't great, but its reliable since it ignores DR. With fell flight you never need to work on most your physical abilities like jump, balance etc.

[Fouredged Sword]

Consider Chameleon 2, for a floating feat that can grab any item creation feat and a few first and second level spells from any list (I am looking at you trapsmith)

The ability to craft any magic item, have a few spells, and basically what amounts to a floating invocation makes for a lot more versatility without changing the feel of the class itself.

[prufock]

Personally I think it needs the following changes:
EB: 1d6 damage/level (on shapes that allow EB damage on full attacks, halve the EB dice, rounded up).
Invocations: Get a new one every level. Though this would require more invocations overall.

I'd be content with giving them 1d6 at every odd level, instead of the weird up-to-9d6 progression they have now. It's as good as a rogues SA damage; better when you consider there are less restrictions. SR is fairly easy to overcome.

I'm ok with 12 invocations, but I'd also probably switch up the progression at which they're gained. 1/2/2/3/3/4/4/5/5/6/6/7/7/8/8/9/9/10/11/12. I'd also consider letting them "trade out" at each level they don't gain a new one, and let them trade UP to their highest grade. So by the end you'd have a few extra Greater invocations that could replace the less useful least and lesser ones.

[Yuki Akuma]

Consider Chameleon 2, for a floating feat that can grab any item creation feat and a few first and second level spells from any list (I am looking at you trapsmith)

The ability to craft any magic item, have a few spells, and basically what amounts to a floating invocation makes for a lot more versatility without changing the feel of the class itself.

This makes you a fairly serviceable Artificer-lite. With a side order of "Shatter at will".

Also, take the Shatter invocation. Also consider the Animate Dead one, too, for disposable trap-springers.

[Person_Man]

1) Blasting stuff and cool spell-like abilities are fun. But the Warlock gets far fewer options then many other classes. (It's generally considered Tier 4). Notably, it cannot change out it's Invocations at least once per day. And you just don't get very many Invocations.

2) In old school D&D, it was assumed that the party would go an entire dungeon before resting, and unless you rested in an inn there was a high probability of a random encounter. But in 3.5 D&D, the "game day" is largely in control of the players, and there are multiple ways to safely sequester yourself when you rest. So unless the DM builds in a "beat the clock" or "trapped at the bottom of the world's largest dungeon" aspect into the game, having "unlimited casting" isn't much of an advantage. Also, the Binder, Incarnate, Totemist, and Dragonfire Adept (and arguably Tome of Battle classes) all have more all day caster-ish abilities.

[Ruethgar]

Eldritch claws with beast claws and a little unarmed optimization gets you pretty powerful pretty quick.

[Hunter Noventa]

The Warlock can be great fun and is pretty versatile. it's a bit tight on feats of course, especially if you want to pick up more invocations. Though in a way, you're lucky some of them are crap so you can skip them altogether.

Treat them more like an archer than a real magic user though, they get some nice tricks, but they can't match up to a dedicated caster.

[Particle_Man]

I consider it the "no paperwork mage". That is great if you have a player that doesn't want to bother with keeping track of things like spells known, spells per day, or spell slots used, or points used, but wants to play a magic-using dude!

It is also (if you choose the right invocations) an NAD character, in that you can get away with playing one without needing any particular stat to be really high.

Oh, and while most crafted magical items have to wait until 12th level, a Chasuble of Fell Power can be made earlier by a warlock with the Craft Wondrous Items feat, and that is an extra 1d6 or 2d6 damage for the Eldritch Blast right there. Oh, and with it you can craft silversheen pre-12th, if that matters.

Oh, note that there has been errata that affects how Maximize SLA and similar feats interact with the EB. Roughly speaking, it is considered either 1st level or the highest level of the invocation affecting the blast. Without this errata it becomes impossible to apply some of the SLA feats.

Interestingly, there is a core character that is in some ways similar: The Angel (astral deva) has 12 HD, +8LA, and a host of at will SLA. I don't think anyone has ever considered this ECL 20 character to be too powerful for 20th level. :smallsmile:

[Grod_The_Giant]

I had a player use one once, and he wound up getting kind of sick of it. Reliable or not, the damage pales in comparison to pretty much anything else, and you really don't have enough tricks to feel versatile in combat. The damage isn't an optimization thing either-- a 5th level warlock deals an average of 10.5 damage per round. A first level fighter with a greatsword can do better than that.

I recommend adding Charisma to Eldrich Blast damage, and allowing you to full attack with it when you get enough BAB. I'd also bump Invocations Known up to 1/level-- there are a bunch more in Complete Mage, and I think a few in Dragon Magic.

[kirerellim]

"trapped at the bottom of the world's largest dungeon"

That. That happens. Often. And our safe zones last not very long at all. If we barricade, the wandering monsters always seem to be curious why the door wont open and get some friends to help them with that. We snatch sleep and refuels when we can, but in this case, there is no, "Oh I'm out of spells, let me rest."

Also, yea, it doesn't seem great, but a few of my characters /are/ 'I want to throw magic around without massive spell list' and I'm willing to work with them and get the damage up to a similar scale to the other players in the campaign. With hellfire warlock and maybe psionic shot and some sneak attack, I could see a decent damage dealer here from a goodly range without ammo or castlimits.

[Equilibria]

Enough with the tiers and comparising with dedicated casters.

Fact of the matter is that the Warlock is fun to play.

End. Of. Story. :smallsmile:

So have at it and enjoy.

[icefractal]

Personally, I would bump damage up to d6/level and if necessary nerf things like Eldritch Glaive / Claws (they might be fine if they were higher level shapes).

When EB is less than Sneak Attack ... and Sneak Attack is like 6/round at 9th level, while EB stays 1/round ... that's not really sufficient. Sure, Hellfire Glaivelock does fine, but that's pidgeonholing every Warlock into a pretty narrow space.

But yes, the Warlock is definitely fun to play. It just needs to work without specific optimizing.

[MeeposFire]

Personally, I would bump damage up to d6/level and if necessary nerf things like Eldritch Glaive / Claws (they might be fine if they were higher level shapes).

When EB is less than Sneak Attack ... and Sneak Attack is like 6/round at 9th level, while EB stays 1/round ... that's not really sufficient. Sure, Hellfire Glaivelock does fine, but that's pidgeonholing every Warlock into a pretty narrow space.

But yes, the Warlock is definitely fun to play. It just needs to work without specific optimizing.

Part of the problem is that on top of being obscure (claws are from Dragon Magazine so not often allowed relative to the warlock class) some of those options have confusing rules.

Claws are not a shape but a feat. You can't add shapes or essences to it. Its base damage is based on your unarmed damage (which is helpful by the way in terms of optimization but confusing with rules interactions potentially).

Glaive is a monster of a rules problem for most. For instance many don't realize that it does not work with haste and that its maximum number of attacks in general is 4 per round IF you have a BAB of +16. It also doesn't work with a bunch of other stuff and some things that do work with it may cause confusion later in other areas (quicken spell like ability).

I would love to get them more support by giving them more low level invocations. Those are often some of the more interesting ones and the ones that don't have as much power. IN addition I would want to make eldritch blast be treated more like a weapon so that more feats work with it and give it some more optimization potential. Something like many shot would give you a standard action attack with decent bite to it in a standard game.

[Person_Man]

That. That happens. Often. And our safe zones last not very long at all. If we barricade, the wandering monsters always seem to be curious why the door wont open and get some friends to help them with that. We snatch sleep and refuels when we can, but in this case, there is no, "Oh I'm out of spells, let me rest."

Also, yea, it doesn't seem great, but a few of my characters /are/ 'I want to throw magic around without massive spell list' and I'm willing to work with them and get the damage up to a similar scale to the other players in the campaign. With hellfire warlock and maybe psionic shot and some sneak attack, I could see a decent damage dealer here from a goodly range without ammo or castlimits.

Fair enough. Though in such circumstances, it is worth reiterating that a Crusader, Warblade, Swordsage, Wildshape Ranger, Incarnate, Totemist, Binder, or Dragonfire Adept will all have more resources then a Warlock, and the last three all have solid "blasty" options. Though in the Warlock's defense, he has certain tricks that can't be replicated by the other classes.

Also, if Homebrew fixes are on the table, consider the Magitech Templar in my signature.

[Cikomyr]

I remember writing, a few years back, what made a Warlock a great character.

with Fell Flight, just imagine the sigh: the man floating above a village, demanding submission of his subjects. He blasts anyone getting in his way, burning houses and killing livestocks.

Yes, compared to a Wizard/Cleric, a Warlock might be weak beause of their lack of versability. But damn it; they have STYLE They can use their magic liberally without worrying about silly things like "charges" or "spell slots". and they are damn charismatic :smallcool:

You can also improve the Warlock Class to make it OP so to make it a great Villain Class.

[Particle_Man]

I had a player use one once, and he wound up getting kind of sick of it. Reliable or not, the damage pales in comparison to pretty much anything else, and you really don't have enough tricks to feel versatile in combat. The damage isn't an optimization thing either-- a 5th level warlock deals an average of 10.5 damage per round. A first level fighter with a greatsword can do better than that..

Depends on one's temperment, I guess. A reliable 10.5 ranged touch attack vs. a higher damage off of a meelee attack that hits less often and exposes one to meelee reprisals.

Also at 6th level the warlock might get dimension door at will or fly at will. Both are pretty awesome.

[Skysaber]

Warlocks are a blast.:smallbiggrin:

No, seriously, I love them for worldbuilding most of all.

Our group has done a lot of work recently building up settlements, cities and kingdoms. The characters doing this are all high level, but don't want to get stuck responding to every CR 1 threat themselves, and certainly not patrolling every village or hamlet. So the overarching design philosophy was how to get the most bang for their buck in making those villages self-sufficient from a defense standpoint.

Retraining the peasants was allowed, but what can you do with a bunch of folks whose highest ability score is 11?

They'd discussed having level one clerics and wizards around by the score, as 11 is enough to grant those first level spells and since they'd never go up in level not having more wasn't too big a hindrance.

But then warlocks got mentioned.

A couple dozen warlocks on horses... well, we ran the math and a tiny little place with 120 adult population, 30 of them level one warlocks, and the warlocks alone were able to annihilate an army of 400 orc footsoldiers without any danger to themselves or the community.

It's also great for handling low level murderhobos. The town watch of 30 warlocks just surrounds them at 210ft or so, and the party either leaves quietly of faces 15D6 of damage every round - all concentrated to drop a character every round (and that's assuming half of these ranged touch attacks miss).

Plus the potential economic benefits of having a few warlocks handy is staggering. Consider a mine. You could use DMG2 rules to run it. The problem with those DMG2 rules is they are too much of an abstraction. They assume you are doing what everyone else is doing. Say for a mine, you grab a bunch of peasants, hand them picks and point them at a hill.

Well, guys swinging picks go painfully slow through any kind of solid rock. So you have to break the stone up some to make the job easier. Today we use explosives. Historically they built huge bonfires next to the surface they wanted to crack, heating it up so it would fracture. Explosives do it better, but both resulted in lots of cracked and broken up rocks.

Unfortunately, neither method works just on the surface you wanted to dig. They also broke up the rocks of your walls and ceilings, too. And that meant those were less stable, so you had a big danger of cave-ins crushing your miners. So you had to employ more men just to haul in timbers to shore up those roofs. And blacksmiths to sharpen those picks and other tools, because pounding iron on solid rock blunts the iron pretty fast. Tools like drills and picks had to be sharpened a couple of times per day. And all of this is for nothing if you don't haul that broken up rock out, and that means mine carts and people whose job it is to just haul broken up stone out. Then it all has to be crushed into even smaller bits so it can be smelted (assuming you are after metals). Guys with sledgehammers often had that job, and it was backbreaking work (so bad they often had prisoners in jails doing it).

All of that is an awful lot of support for some guys swinging picks, but every bit of it is essential. Your skill checks at running this type of business just reflect better accounting, skillful managing so there are fewer wasteful accidents, and insightful decision making, but still you're using the same essential engine for running a mine that everyone does: guys swinging picks.

Or is it really all so essential?

Say you've got yourself a level one warlock, follower or employee doesn't really matter. He's got himself the Least Invocation Baleful Utterance, which produces a Shatter spell at will, which does in a single round about as much breaking up of stone as a strong man can do on a good day, plus as a Warlock he can keep this up every round always and forever.

He only hits the rock he intends to break up, so there's less concern over a fractured rock ceiling falling in on his head as it never got fractured in the first place. So you employ less men shoring that up.

No fires or explosives are needed. No blacksmiths to sharpen tools that aren't being used. Spend 500gp on a Talisman of the Disk and you've got Tenser's Floating Disk all day, every day, which is surely the most pain-free mine cart that ever existed. You don't need to lay track for it, and it never breaks down, moves at a full walking pace without mules having to haul the weight. If your warlock had a familiar it could wear the necklace and haul stone out while he shatters more. And what's more it's all broken up nice and fine into very small gravel, already perfect for smelting.

Suddenly an entire mine operation that once took hundreds of people is doing the same work with only one person.

Are there rules to reflect this? No. But as a DM you really should allow this to have an obscene profit margin. You could even work it out mathematically. Say one warlock replaces a hundred mine workers, and each of those mine workers, skilled blacksmiths and all, only earned one silver piece a day by D&D rules. That's 100 silver, or 10gp per day for mine operation just on payroll alone. Give it all to your warlock as salary so he'll be happy.

Then, to account for those timbers you don't have to buy for roof shoring that is no longer necessary, the fuel for the blacksmiths' forges, track for the mine carts, mules and fodder for them, and all of those other supplies you don't have to pay for, give yourself the same back again: 10gp profit per day sounds perfectly reasonable, don't you think?

In fifty days you'll have paid off your Talisman of the Disk. After that every cent is profit.

And actually, it ought to do better than that, as each Shatter spell he casts represents one miner's work for one day, to say nothing of all of that support staff. So in two hours your warlock will have replaced 120 miners, and who knows how many people overall. A standard eight hour work day for your warlock replaces nearly a thousand miners with picks and shovels.

Of course, there's aspects to this we are overlooking. Mines employed guards, because people do rob them (chiefly for the payroll chests and storehouses of metals they have not yet shipped). But in a fantasy setting we also have to cope with monsters that just don't like humans.

But a warlock is his own guard. Should any orcs or goblins come along (the most common threats to mines in any fantasy game) he's still got Eldritch Blast, a touch attack that can kill any average orc, kobold or goblin at a hit from 60ft away - more, if he takes Eldritch Spear. He's not helpless. In fact, he's better able to defend himself than just about any other first level guard could be. The fact that he's proficient in light armor (and can afford it, given his salary) doesn't hurt either. Also unlike guys laboring with shovels and picks, he's not doing any backbreaking labor either, so he can actually be fully equipped to fight while he's on the job.

So employing a secondary force of guards is something you don't have to do either. More savings. More profit.

Of course, after you have removed this ore from the ground smelting the metal out of it is your next great concern, and to do that you've got to expose the ore to very high temperatures so the fine metal particles turn white hot, then liquify and melt and pour out of tiny cracks and crevasses in your nicely broken up, very small gravel (it has to be small because the melted metal won't flow very far). Burning enough fuel to get that heat is enormously expensive, and tends to blacken the sky with soot, not to mention the fact that everything burnable within tens of miles of a mine tends to get cut down (legally or not) to fuel the smelting operations. Naturally, this leaves the surrounded landscape a desolate, blasted-seeming wasteland, covered in soot and with not a thing growing in sight.

But getting all of that heat magically is much simpler. A simple Heat Metal spell cast over the ore does most of it, so build that as Wondrous Architecture, while something like permanent Walls of Fire could do the rest of the work. And since that heat is easy to maintain it could afford to be left on longer, doing a more complete job of metal extraction.

A 2e Crucible of Melting would be ideal, not even requiring heat to melt any metals placed within. Ghorus Toth's Metal Melt would make an item that was identical. Build a few of these to a size able to handle the volume of ore extraction, then rely on Heat Metal and other techniques to separate out the individual types of metals and smelt to further purity.

An item of Ghorus Toth's Magnetism placed under the Crucible could add an intensely powerful magical magnetism effect, drawing more metal out of the smashed up gravel by benefiting gravity with its attractive force. A selective Floating Disk that affects only stone, not metal, could serve as a very useful filter inside the crucible.

Mine tailings are a third major problem. What they are is all that smashed-up stone after you've extracted the metal from it, and the volume from an active mine can be enormous, enough to reshape the landscape where you dump it, with all these hills of scorched gravel that aren't worth anything. Ground covered by mine tailings may as well be desert: you can't farm it, you can't even raise goats on it as nothing will grow on it for decades. You can't mine it or build on it or generally use it for anything. So it just grows deeper until you've got small mountains of waste stone.

For that, you'll want to invent a spell like Slush and Yuck from Tunnels and Trolls. With it a wizard can turn stone to slush for a short period, and it can be put in molds so when the spell ends, custom cut stone. Which means, long term, custom stone homes being reasonably cheap... successful peasants kind of cheap. A wizard can comfortably retire and break whole guilds with that one spell. But in this case it transforms a major form of pollution into a valuable resource: cut stone blocks as opposed to mountains of mine tailings. A lesser (and temporary) version of the slipsand spell, a level or two lower, would be ideal.

[Zanos]

Enough with the tiers and comparising with dedicated casters.

Fact of the matter is that the Warlock is fun to play.

End. Of. Story. :smallsmile:

So have at it and enjoy.
That depends on the sort of game you're playing in. If you build a ranged EB warlock and you barely manage to peck at enemies every encounter and aren't contributing much in the way of damage, you aren't going to feel useful, and probably aren't going to have fun. And it doesn't take much for anyone to out-damage and blastlock.

[Cikomyr]

Warlocks are supposed to be rich in term of thematic and backstories. Aren't you supposed to have made a deal with the Fay or the Fiends?

[HaikenEdge]

I think people are overlooking the fact the Warlock effectively gets Shatter at will.

If you cannot play at a Tier 3 level with Shatter, one of the most versatile spells ever, at will...

Let's just say, Shatter, when applied judiciously, can solve a lot of problems.

[Equilibria]

That depends on the sort of game you're playing in. If you build a ranged EB warlock and you barely manage to peck at enemies every encounter and aren't contributing much in the way of damage, you aren't going to feel useful, and probably aren't going to have fun. And it doesn't take much for anyone to out-damage and blastlock.

True... but one can only answer a question from ones own perspective.

To adopt the perspective of every kind of game would make it a time consuming effort :smallsmile:

But let me rephrase... If you play in a game with low to low-medium optimization the warlock is a blast(er?).

[Malroth]

It was Listed as a Tier 4 by someone who assumed it would be played as a blaster, At will Shatter, animate dead, Charm monster and Black Tentacles Easily put it in Tier 3 and if playing at lv 12+ the right build could bump it to Tier 2 just from its mini artificer tricks.

[Cikomyr]

It's also a very fun dip, ya know.

the +6 to Charm/Diplomacy/Bluff is a godsend for social builds. You also get a free at-will ranged attack that can always be useful in tight situation.

For rogues, this ranged attack can pull off sneak attacks, and Spider Walk at will mean you can get rid of your climb skill.

[Grod_The_Giant]

But let me rephrase... If you play in a game with low to low-medium optimization the warlock is a blast(er?).
No, it's not, because without a reasonable degree of optimization you don't deal enough damage to be a blaster.

[Prime32]

That. That happens. Often. And our safe zones last not very long at all. If we barricade, the wandering monsters always seem to be curious why the door wont open and get some friends to help them with that. We snatch sleep and refuels when we can, but in this case, there is no, "Oh I'm out of spells, let me rest." *cough* (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) :smallwink:

[Cikomyr]

*cough* (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) :smallwink:

I hate this spell. Overpowered asspull that means players can just get out of a sticky situation if they feel like it.

[Marlowe]

Also, does nothing to help the rest of the party in the interim.

[MammonAzrael]

Warlocks are excellent and fun and I highly suggest you take a look at my rework if you're thinking of playing one and are comfortable with classes that don't require optimization to be tier 3.

[Red Fel]

No, it's not, because without a reasonable degree of optimization you don't deal enough damage to be a blaster.

Sad but true. EB is nice damage, but not awesome damage. And being able to target touch AC with Eldritch Glaive can be nice, but again, others will out-perform you. It takes a lot of optimization to get Warlock up into megadice for damage.

Rather, in low-to-medium campaigns, Warlock is an at-will toolbox. Chilling Tentacles, Nightmares Made Real - these are very useful utilities that can lock down opponents, create concealment, and get you out of tricky places. Even if you go for abilities that don't require saves, you can still use Walk Unseen, Flee the Scene, Fell Flight and the Dead Walk to get yourself into a more strategic position. Voracious Dispelling can be pretty potent, and Wall of Perilous Flame can buy you time in a tricky situation.

Now, once you get into higher-op, or even gestalt, there are things you can do to bring up your numbers. For example, if you can squeeze in Warlock 17, Hellfire Warlock 3, and Enlightened Spirit 10, you wind up with 20d6 Eldritch Blast damage. That sounds impressive, until you realize that it averages to 70 damage. (With Maximize SLA, that's 120, but only 3/day.) And unless you go with Eldritch Glaive blast shape or Eldritch Claws feat, you're not getting iterative attacks off, which means you only get it once per turn; if you do go with Glaive or Claws, you've got to get into melee, which is perilous for the squishy Warlock chassis.

All that said, Warlock isn't a class that's about the numbers. It's about the fun. It's about being a flying invisible chaos-powered zombie-summoner who shoots demon-lasers. Or, if you're a Warforged Warlock, it's about being a Gundam.

[Cikomyr]

You just made me think. As a Warforged Artificier, we established that I was a Builder/Commander Combat Unit, and part of my complement (followers) was a team of 20x Lvl 5 Ninja/Warlock Warforged.

Man that was fun. Invisibility, Climb the Walls, Eldritch Blasts infiltrators/assassins...

[HaikenEdge]

Don't forget to dip a level of commoner and become Chicken Infested Ninja/Warlock Warforged

[Particle_Man]

No, it's not, because without a reasonable degree of optimization you don't deal enough damage to be a blaster.

Actually, I not only played it as a blaster in a low- to mid-optimization game, but the DM was worried that I was too powerful after I made a chasuble of fell power, so we agreed that I would get rid of it. So it really depends on the DM and the campaign.

[kpumphre]

Warlock is my favorite class, oh your wizard can throw 2 fireballs at the bad guys. Then he's out of stuff after the fight I meanwhile can continue to shatter, all day. Plus once I played a Warlock who pretended to be a rogue. The Fighter pushed me around and such so I pretended to look for traps, rolled my search and search mean while I stayed a 10th of an inch off the ground and he didn't notice so I got the other side said it was all clear and he walked through at the end of it he was down to 2 hp and he learned to never talk down to the trap searcher.

[Cikomyr]

Warlock is my favorite class, oh your wizard can throw 2 fireballs at the bad guys. Then he's out of stuff after the fight I meanwhile can continue to shatter, all day. Plus once I played a Warlock who pretended to be a rogue. The Fighter pushed me around and such so I pretended to look for traps, rolled my search and search mean while I stayed a 10th of an inch off the ground and he didn't notice so I got the other side said it was all clear and he walked through at the end of it he was down to 2 hp and he learned to never talk down to the trap searcher.

:smalleek:

And I thought my job's trust-building excercise were dickish...

[kpumphre]

:smalleek:

And I thought my job's trust-building excercise were dickish...


He was a new Player to the group and was not very friendly in character so I adjusted his attitude. I do not condone player killing but be realistic. I you have a character who would not get pushed around don't let him be. The fighter learned that he couldn't do it all him self and that he shouldn't be rude to the squishy guy who could float above his head and blast him until he's dead a +20 to hit, +25 ac don't do any good if the guy has all day to kill you and you can't reach him.

After that though his character decided that my guy proved him self and he liked him so it all worked out for the best. Like those trust circles where you fall back and hope they catch you.

[Equilibria]

No, it's not, because without a reasonable degree of optimization you don't deal enough damage to be a blaster.

I´m not sure there is a lower limit of damage output for being a blaster... it is a term used for someone who blasts his enemies. Not someone who blasts his enemies and deals x damage.

Not in any definition i ever read anyway.

EDIT:

Actually, I not only played it as a blaster in a low- to mid-optimization game, but the DM was worried that I was too powerful after I made a chasuble of fell power, so we agreed that I would get rid of it. So it really depends on the DM and the campaign.

Also... this.

[Red Fel]

I´m not sure there is a lower limit of damage output for being a blaster... it is a term used for someone who blasts his enemies. Not someone who blasts his enemies and deals x damage.

The question for a "blaster" isn't "does it blast," but "is it effective at blasting?"

In theory, you could give a Fighter an infinite number of potions that explode and deal damage, and call him a blaster. Is it cost effective? Would the Warlock, using Eldritch Blast all the live-long day, be able to produce damage comparable to our Fighterblaster?

And that's the point. When you compare the optimization needed to get a Warlock dealing the same damage as some of the more traditional "blaster" classes, versus the optimization they require, the Warlock tends to lag behind. It's not that he can't blast, merely that others can do it better. That's why people say the Warlock doesn't deal enough damage to be a blaster; because if that's what you wanted to be - a "Blaster Warlock" instead of a "Warlock who blasts" - you'd do better to look elsewhere.

It really just depends on your goal, and where you put the emphasis.

[Equilibria]

The question for a "blaster" isn't "does it blast," but "is it effective at blasting?"

In theory, you could give a Fighter an infinite number of potions that explode and deal damage, and call him a blaster. Is it cost effective? Would the Warlock, using Eldritch Blast all the live-long day, be able to produce damage comparable to our Fighterblaster?

And that's the point. When you compare the optimization needed to get a Warlock dealing the same damage as some of the more traditional "blaster" classes, versus the optimization they require, the Warlock tends to lag behind. It's not that he can't blast, merely that others can do it better. That's why people say the Warlock doesn't deal enough damage to be a blaster; because if that's what you wanted to be - a "Blaster Warlock" instead of a "Warlock who blasts" - you'd do better to look elsewhere.

It really just depends on your goal, and where you put the emphasis.

Like i said before, i think it has to do with the level of optimization you play with.
I have played Warlocks as blasters before and have dealt enough damage to act as such.

So to answer the OP question we should probaply ask him how optimized his game is.

If it´s low... go for it.
If it´s high... there are better options.

[Zanos]

Like i said before, i think it has to do with the level of optimization you play with.
I have played Warlocks as blasters before and have dealt enough damage to act as such.

So to answer the OP question we should probaply ask him how optimized his game is.

If it´s low... go for it.
If it´s high... there are better options.
Even in low optimization settings blastlock sucks. If the fifth level wizard tosses a fireball at hits two enemies, he just did 10d6 damage. Meanwhile you're EBs are doing 3d6 damage per round if they hit, so it would take three more rounds of the wizard doing nothing to catch up with his damage output. Sure the wizard only has 2/3 fireballs per day at that point, but when he runs out he can fall back on his 3/4 4d6 scorching rays. I'm struggling to imagine a scenario that isn't forced where the warlock even comes close to a traditional blaster in terms of damage output. Even if there are enough combat rounds in your typical day for a wizard to run out of blasts(which is unlikely), you're still going to be struggling to catch up to the wizard.

"Wizard casts fireball" is pretty low-op, in my opinion. Although high-op for me is that the Wizard was never even on the battle map because he either fights through dozens of proxies or resolved the situation yesterday.


Actually, I not only played it as a blaster in a low- to mid-optimization game, but the DM was worried that I was too powerful after I made a chasuble of fell power, so we agreed that I would get rid of it. So it really depends on the DM and the campaign.
Maybe I'm being pretty combative about "blastlock sucks", but it's hard to imagine any scenario where an additional 1d6 damage per round makes you way too powerful.


Also, does nothing to help the rest of the party in the interim.
Are you referring to rope trick? A typical party can fit in the space created by a ropetrick, and resting isn't only necessary for spellcasters. People run out of health.

[nedz]

Don't forget to dip a level of commoner and become Chicken Infested Ninja/Warlock Warforged

Pull out your chickens, blast them dead, use The Dead Walk
Zombiechickenmaggadon.

[Equilibria]

Even in low optimization settings blastlock sucks. If the fifth level wizard tosses a fireball at hits two enemies, he just did 10d6 damage. Meanwhile you're EBs are doing 3d6 damage per round if they hit, so it would take three more rounds of the wizard doing nothing to catch up with his damage output. Sure the wizard only has 2/3 fireballs per day at that point, but when he runs out he can fall back on his 3/4 4d6 scorching rays. I'm struggling to imagine a scenario that isn't forced where the warlock even comes close to a traditional blaster in terms of damage output. Even if there are enough combat rounds in your typical day for a wizard to run out of blasts(which is unlikely), you're still going to be struggling to catch up to the wizard.

"Wizard casts fireball" is pretty low-op, in my opinion. Although high-op for me is that the Wizard was never even on the battle map because he either fights through dozens of proxies or resolved the situation yesterday.

At Fifth level the wizard has approx. 10-14 spells per day, and 2-3 of those are fireballs. then as you so accurately say he has another 3-4 scorching ray spells. So ideally that is 7 rounds of combat... Usually my adventures involve more than 7 rounds of combat.
Then the wizard has lower level spells but those are spent fast.

Also at higher levels (mind you we are talking low op blasting) the warlock does get to shape his own fireball/cone of cold/chain lightning... and he can do it all day long. Granted at that level the wizard has more spells and is unlikely to run out, but i´m not going to argue with you whether the wizard is more powerful than the warlock... of course it is.

So my argument is simply.... if you want to play a warlock my experience tells me that you can contribute and have a great time doing it.

I am not saying that it is the best at what it does, nor am i arguing that, in terms of power, it is the superior choice.

But the OP asks our opinion about a class and i am going to give it.

WARLOCKS ARE FUN, HAVE GREAT FLUFF and CAN CONTRIBUTE IN MOST LOW-OP GAMES. :smallsmile:

[Malroth]

psionic shot, Assasin's stance, Craven, Mortal bane and hellfire warlock can get eldritch blast up to decent if not great damage

[Cikomyr]

Warlocks are a blast.:smallbiggrin:

No, seriously, I love them for worldbuilding most of all.

Our group has done a lot of work recently building up settlements, cities and kingdoms. The characters doing this are all high level, but don't want to get stuck responding to every CR 1 threat themselves, and certainly not patrolling every village or hamlet. So the overarching design philosophy was how to get the most bang for their buck in making those villages self-sufficient from a defense standpoint.

Retraining the peasants was allowed, but what can you do with a bunch of folks whose highest ability score is 11?

They'd discussed having level one clerics and wizards around by the score, as 11 is enough to grant those first level spells and since they'd never go up in level not having more wasn't too big a hindrance.

But then warlocks got mentioned.

A couple dozen warlocks on horses... well, we ran the math and a tiny little place with 120 adult population, 30 of them level one warlocks, and the warlocks alone were able to annihilate an army of 400 orc footsoldiers without any danger to themselves or the community.

It's also great for handling low level murderhobos. The town watch of 30 warlocks just surrounds them at 210ft or so, and the party either leaves quietly of faces 15D6 of damage every round - all concentrated to drop a character every round (and that's assuming half of these ranged touch attacks miss).

Plus the potential economic benefits of having a few warlocks handy is staggering. Consider a mine. You could use DMG2 rules to run it. The problem with those DMG2 rules is they are too much of an abstraction. They assume you are doing what everyone else is doing. Say for a mine, you grab a bunch of peasants, hand them picks and point them at a hill.

Well, guys swinging picks go painfully slow through any kind of solid rock. So you have to break the stone up some to make the job easier. Today we use explosives. Historically they built huge bonfires next to the surface they wanted to crack, heating it up so it would fracture. Explosives do it better, but both resulted in lots of cracked and broken up rocks.

Unfortunately, neither method works just on the surface you wanted to dig. They also broke up the rocks of your walls and ceilings, too. And that meant those were less stable, so you had a big danger of cave-ins crushing your miners. So you had to employ more men just to haul in timbers to shore up those roofs. And blacksmiths to sharpen those picks and other tools, because pounding iron on solid rock blunts the iron pretty fast. Tools like drills and picks had to be sharpened a couple of times per day. And all of this is for nothing if you don't haul that broken up rock out, and that means mine carts and people whose job it is to just haul broken up stone out. Then it all has to be crushed into even smaller bits so it can be smelted (assuming you are after metals). Guys with sledgehammers often had that job, and it was backbreaking work (so bad they often had prisoners in jails doing it).

All of that is an awful lot of support for some guys swinging picks, but every bit of it is essential. Your skill checks at running this type of business just reflect better accounting, skillful managing so there are fewer wasteful accidents, and insightful decision making, but still you're using the same essential engine for running a mine that everyone does: guys swinging picks.

Or is it really all so essential?

Say you've got yourself a level one warlock, follower or employee doesn't really matter. He's got himself the Least Invocation Baleful Utterance, which produces a Shatter spell at will, which does in a single round about as much breaking up of stone as a strong man can do on a good day, plus as a Warlock he can keep this up every round always and forever.

He only hits the rock he intends to break up, so there's less concern over a fractured rock ceiling falling in on his head as it never got fractured in the first place. So you employ less men shoring that up.

No fires or explosives are needed. No blacksmiths to sharpen tools that aren't being used. Spend 500gp on a Talisman of the Disk and you've got Tenser's Floating Disk all day, every day, which is surely the most pain-free mine cart that ever existed. You don't need to lay track for it, and it never breaks down, moves at a full walking pace without mules having to haul the weight. If your warlock had a familiar it could wear the necklace and haul stone out while he shatters more. And what's more it's all broken up nice and fine into very small gravel, already perfect for smelting.

Suddenly an entire mine operation that once took hundreds of people is doing the same work with only one person.

Are there rules to reflect this? No. But as a DM you really should allow this to have an obscene profit margin. You could even work it out mathematically. Say one warlock replaces a hundred mine workers, and each of those mine workers, skilled blacksmiths and all, only earned one silver piece a day by D&D rules. That's 100 silver, or 10gp per day for mine operation just on payroll alone. Give it all to your warlock as salary so he'll be happy.

Then, to account for those timbers you don't have to buy for roof shoring that is no longer necessary, the fuel for the blacksmiths' forges, track for the mine carts, mules and fodder for them, and all of those other supplies you don't have to pay for, give yourself the same back again: 10gp profit per day sounds perfectly reasonable, don't you think?

In fifty days you'll have paid off your Talisman of the Disk. After that every cent is profit.

And actually, it ought to do better than that, as each Shatter spell he casts represents one miner's work for one day, to say nothing of all of that support staff. So in two hours your warlock will have replaced 120 miners, and who knows how many people overall. A standard eight hour work day for your warlock replaces nearly a thousand miners with picks and shovels.

Of course, there's aspects to this we are overlooking. Mines employed guards, because people do rob them (chiefly for the payroll chests and storehouses of metals they have not yet shipped). But in a fantasy setting we also have to cope with monsters that just don't like humans.

But a warlock is his own guard. Should any orcs or goblins come along (the most common threats to mines in any fantasy game) he's still got Eldritch Blast, a touch attack that can kill any average orc, kobold or goblin at a hit from 60ft away - more, if he takes Eldritch Spear. He's not helpless. In fact, he's better able to defend himself than just about any other first level guard could be. The fact that he's proficient in light armor (and can afford it, given his salary) doesn't hurt either. Also unlike guys laboring with shovels and picks, he's not doing any backbreaking labor either, so he can actually be fully equipped to fight while he's on the job.

So employing a secondary force of guards is something you don't have to do either. More savings. More profit.

Of course, after you have removed this ore from the ground smelting the metal out of it is your next great concern, and to do that you've got to expose the ore to very high temperatures so the fine metal particles turn white hot, then liquify and melt and pour out of tiny cracks and crevasses in your nicely broken up, very small gravel (it has to be small because the melted metal won't flow very far). Burning enough fuel to get that heat is enormously expensive, and tends to blacken the sky with soot, not to mention the fact that everything burnable within tens of miles of a mine tends to get cut down (legally or not) to fuel the smelting operations. Naturally, this leaves the surrounded landscape a desolate, blasted-seeming wasteland, covered in soot and with not a thing growing in sight.

But getting all of that heat magically is much simpler. A simple Heat Metal spell cast over the ore does most of it, so build that as Wondrous Architecture, while something like permanent Walls of Fire could do the rest of the work. And since that heat is easy to maintain it could afford to be left on longer, doing a more complete job of metal extraction.

A 2e Crucible of Melting would be ideal, not even requiring heat to melt any metals placed within. Ghorus Toth's Metal Melt would make an item that was identical. Build a few of these to a size able to handle the volume of ore extraction, then rely on Heat Metal and other techniques to separate out the individual types of metals and smelt to further purity.

An item of Ghorus Toth's Magnetism placed under the Crucible could add an intensely powerful magical magnetism effect, drawing more metal out of the smashed up gravel by benefiting gravity with its attractive force. A selective Floating Disk that affects only stone, not metal, could serve as a very useful filter inside the crucible.

Mine tailings are a third major problem. What they are is all that smashed-up stone after you've extracted the metal from it, and the volume from an active mine can be enormous, enough to reshape the landscape where you dump it, with all these hills of scorched gravel that aren't worth anything. Ground covered by mine tailings may as well be desert: you can't farm it, you can't even raise goats on it as nothing will grow on it for decades. You can't mine it or build on it or generally use it for anything. So it just grows deeper until you've got small mountains of waste stone.

For that, you'll want to invent a spell like Slush and Yuck from Tunnels and Trolls. With it a wizard can turn stone to slush for a short period, and it can be put in molds so when the spell ends, custom cut stone. Which means, long term, custom stone homes being reasonably cheap... successful peasants kind of cheap. A wizard can comfortably retire and break whole guilds with that one spell. But in this case it transforms a major form of pollution into a valuable resource: cut stone blocks as opposed to mountains of mine tailings. A lesser (and temporary) version of the slipsand spell, a level or two lower, would be ideal.

Your mining idea isn't bad, but then you have to remember that Warlocks have to be Chaotic or Evil.

I cannot really see them being ye nice lil' miner.

Also, they would make horribly horrible town watch

[Meth In a Mine]

Enough with the tiers and comparising with dedicated casters.

Fact of the matter is that the Warlock is fun to play.

End. Of. Story. :smallsmile:

So have at it and enjoy.

Amen, good sir. I think everyone in the forum could benefit from reading that.

Cheers

[Knaight]

A couple dozen warlocks on horses... well, we ran the math and a tiny little place with 120 adult population, 30 of them level one warlocks, and the warlocks alone were able to annihilate an army of 400 orc footsoldiers without any danger to themselves or the community.


Warlocks are horribly outranged by mundane ranged weapons. Unless these 400 soldiers were all infrantry without so much as a few javelins, the warlocks would have been in danger, and if they were, horse archers are just as effective.

[TuggyNE]

Warlocks are horribly outranged by mundane ranged weapons. Unless these 400 soldiers were all infrantry without so much as a few javelins, the warlocks would have been in danger, and if they were, horse archers are just as effective.

Well, there's two possible counterpoints: the first is that touch AC is likely easier to hit, even at first level, so there's some advantage over horse archers there; the second is that Eldritch Spear has a nice longish range that only (cross)bows and slings can match; javelins reach a mere 150 feet (5 * 30 ft increment), which is 100 feet short.

Neither of these is necessarily enough to guarantee that warlocks are the best choice, but they do mean that they aren't necessarily the worst choice either.


Horse archer: Human Fighter 1, Weapon Focus: Shortbow, Point Blank Shot, Far Shot; 14 Str, 15 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 10 Wis, 8 Cha; mount single moving 60', shortbow +3/+3 (within 30'), +2/+2 (within 90'), +0/+0 (within 180'), or -2/-2 (within 270') for 1d6, 20x3; 11 HP, chainmail, AC 17.
Warlock: Human Warlock 1, Shatter, Extra Invocation (?): Eldritch Spear, Weapon Focus: Ray (?); 10 Str, 15 Dex, 14 Con, 12 Int, 13 Wis, 8 Cha; single moving 30', eldritch spear +3 (within 250') against touch AC for 1d6, 20x2; 8 HP, chainmail, AC 17.
Enemies: Orc Warrior1; javelin +1 for 1d6+4; 5 HP, studded leather, AC 13/touch AC 10.

Warlocks can open fire with 70% accuracy from far enough out that the orcs will need to double move or even run to catch up; double moving allows 4 turns before they can reply with an attack bonus of -7 (5% accuracy), or 8 turns of no throwing before attacking at +1 (25%); alternatively, running with Dex denied for 2 turns before attacking at -3 (5%) or 3 turns before attacking at +1. Horse archers at the same opening range would have a mere 30% accuracy, or could kite double-moving orcs indefinitely at 180' for 40% or running for 20%.

[Skysaber]

Your mining idea isn't bad, but then you have to remember that Warlocks have to be Chaotic or Evil.

I cannot really see them being ye nice lil' miner.

Also, they would make horribly horrible town watch

You probably know as well as I do that alignment restrictions are the first thing most groups drop when it comes to class. It's been homeruled at our table for so long I'd honestly forgotten that was a requirement.

[Skysaber]

Warlocks are horribly outranged by mundane ranged weapons. Unless these 400 soldiers were all infrantry without so much as a few javelins, the warlocks would have been in danger, and if they were, horse archers are just as effective.

Footsoldiers are inherently infantry, sir. You can't be one and not be the other, and I termed them footsoldiers in my original post - in that part which you'd quoted.

We used standard Orcs straight as they were printed in the MM, which means they did have javelins - which have a range increment of 30ft and as thrown weapons can go out to a maximum of 5 of those, so 150ft in total.

Our warlocks had all been arranged ahead of time to have Eldritch Spear blast shape, for 250ft range with no penalties. That's 100ft of "we can hit you and you can't touch us." So our troops would have to screw up pretty badly for the orcs got a shot off at all - and even then they'd be at -10 range penalty, normal attacks. While the warlocks were doing touch attacks ignoring armor and with no ranged penalty.

It was a slaughter.

Nothing in the game is perfect. But unless you start optimizing their foes against them, these guys make for a pretty strong "no cost" defense.

[Drachasor]

Footsoldiers are inherently infantry, sir. You can't be one and not be the other, and I termed them footsoldiers in my original post - in that part which you'd quoted.

We used standard Orcs straight as they were printed in the MM, which means they did have javelins - which have a range increment of 30ft and as thrown weapons can go out to a maximum of 5 of those, so 150ft in total.

Our warlocks had all been arranged ahead of time to have Eldritch Spear blast shape, for 250ft range with no penalties. That's 100ft of "we can hit you and you can't touch us." So our troops would have to screw up pretty badly for the orcs got a shot off at all - and even then they'd be at -10 range penalty, normal attacks. While the warlocks were doing touch attacks ignoring armor and with no ranged penalty.

It was a slaughter.

Nothing in the game is perfect. But unless you start optimizing their foes against them, these guys make for a pretty strong "no cost" defense.

And 30 first level fighters with bows would do better. They could start shooting sooner and the extra shots more than make up for the distance. The Orc touch AC is 10, normal AC is 13. Weapon Focus and BAB make this a difference of 1. Sure distance plays a role, but consider they will have several shots extra this doesn't matter. They also do more damage even without composite bows (but with composite you can pretty much guarantee each hit is a kill, whereas Warlocks will probably need 2 hits).

And 1st and 2nd level are about the best times for Warlock damage -- which is lagging. After that the damage just gets worse and worse, especially when multiple attacks come into play.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Warlock is a good starting point to a class. But the class DOES need some buffs (so do most martial classes too).

[hamishspence]

Your mining idea isn't bad, but then you have to remember that Warlocks have to be Chaotic or Evil.

I cannot really see them being ye nice lil' miner.

Also, they would make horribly horrible town watch

Chaotic Good seems perfect for a D&D "Dirty Harry" sort of character though.

That said, having the entire watch be "loose cannons" would be a little odd.

[Knaight]

We used standard Orcs straight as they were printed in the MM, which means they did have javelins - which have a range increment of 30ft and as thrown weapons can go out to a maximum of 5 of those, so 150ft in total.

So what you're saying is that a raiding force attacked with no archers and no cavalry, and it ended poorly for them. The exact same situation would happen against basically anything with half decent movement and half decent range. It's also worth noting that the warlocks specifically built for range, and orcs that did the same thing would outrange them, which involves all of picking up a bow. Without the blast shape for range (which is, admittedly, one of the better options) the javelin is more than adequate.


Nothing in the game is perfect. But unless you start optimizing their foes against them, these guys make for a pretty strong "no cost" defense.
Intelligent humanoids packing a bow or sling is not optimizing their foes against them. It's basic logistics. It's something they probably should be doing anyways, particularly if they are in something that vaguely resembles an army.

[TuggyNE]

And 30 first level fighters with bows would do better. They could start shooting sooner and the extra shots more than make up for the distance. The Orc touch AC is 10, normal AC is 13. Weapon Focus and BAB make this a difference of 1. Sure distance plays a role, but consider they will have several shots extra this doesn't matter. They also do more damage even without composite bows (but with composite you can pretty much guarantee each hit is a kill, whereas Warlocks will probably need 2 hits).

Did you look at the numbers I posted?

[lsfreak]

You probably know as well as I do that alignment restrictions are the first thing most groups drop when it comes to class. It's been homeruled at our table for so long I'd honestly forgotten that was a requirement.

Plus, I mean, people forget what chaotic means. Your average chaotic person shows up to work, does their job, loves their family, and treats both friends and strangers well. They may be a little irresponsible or aloof, they may ignore some social or legal rules. But at a surface glance, they're indistinguishable from any lawful or neutral member of society insofar as how they act day-to-day. Just like how you probably won't be able to walk into a workplace and pick out which person supports which political party purely on how they work. No reason at all that most warlocks wouldn't make good miners or town guards just because they have a certain alignment.

[hamishspence]

That certainly works when alignment system is interpreted as having Chaotic and Lawful as fairly common - almost as common as Neutral.

When they are interpreted as rare, with the vast majority of the Neutral population being TN rather than LN or CN, it may be different.

[lsfreak]

That certainly works when alignment system is interpreted as having Chaotic and Lawful as fairly common - almost as common as Neutral.

When they are interpreted as rare, with the vast majority of the Neutral population being TN rather than LN or CN, it may be different.

What is the quote, something like humans not tending toward any particular alignment, including neutrality? As far as I'm aware, the assumption of the rules is that humans are pretty much one-third lawful, one-third neutral, and one-third chaotic (and the same for good/neutral/evil).

[hamishspence]

What is the quote, something like humans not tending toward any particular alignment, including neutrality?

That was the quote, yes- from PHB. It's left unclear as to how alignment falls out from that.

Quintessential Paladin II (a third party book) actually discusses the various campaign models-
one of which has Good, Neutral, and Evil humans occurring with roughly equal frequency,

Low Grade Evil Everywhere
In some campaigns, the common population is split roughly evenly among the various alignments - the kindly old grandmother who gives boiled sweets to children is Neutral Good and that charming rake down the pub is Chaotic Neutral. Similarly the thug lurking in the alleyway is Chaotic Evil, while the grasping landlord who throws granny out on the street because she's a copy behind on the rent is Lawful Evil.

In such a campaign up to a third of the population will detect as Evil to the paladin. This low grade Evil is a fact of life, and is not something the paladin can defeat. Certainly he should not draw his greatsword and chop the landlord in twain just because he has a mildly tainted aura. It might be appropriate for the paladin to use Diplomacy (or Intimidation) to steer the landlord toward the path go good but stronger action is not warranted.

In such a campaign detect evil cannot be used to infallibly detect villainy, as many people are a little bit evil. if he casts detect evil on a crowded street, about a third of the population will detect as faintly evil.
one of which has Neutral being significantly commoner than the others,

Evil As A Choice
A similar campaign set-up posits that most people are some variety of Neutral. The old granny might do good by being kind to people, but this is a far cry from capital-G Good, which implies a level of dedication, fervour and sacrifice which she does not possess. If on the other hand our granny brewed alchemical healing potions into those boiled sweets or took in and sheltered orphans and strays off the street, then she might qualify as truly Good.

Similarly, minor acts of cruelty and malice are not truly Evil on the cosmic scale. Our greedy and grasping landlord might be nasty and mean, but sending the bailiffs round to throw granny out might not qualify as Evil (although if granny is being thrown out into a chill winter or torrential storm, then that is tantamount to murder and would be Evil). In such a campaign, only significant acts of good or evil can tip a character from Neutrality to being truly Good or Evil.

if a paladin in this campaign uses detect evil on a crowded street, he will usually detect nothing, as true evil is rare. Anyone who detects as Evil, even faintly Evil, is probably a criminal, a terrible and wilful sinner, or both. Still, the paladin is not obligated to take action - in this campaign, detecting that someone is Evil is a warning, not a call to arms. The paladin should probably investigate this person and see if they pose a danger to the common folk, but he cannot automatically assume that this particular Evil person deserves to be dealt with immediately
and in one Evil and Good are so rare as to be supernaturally associated- even serial killers are not Evil aligned (for Detection purposes) unless they're doing it as part of devotion to a fiend or evil deity.

Evil As A Supernatural Taint
Another alternative is that Evil is essentially a supernatural quality, a spiritual taint that comes only from dark powers. Merely human evil would not be detected by the paladin's power - only monsters, undead, outsiders, and those who traffic with dark powers are Evil on this scale.

A murderer who kills randomly would be evil on the human scale, but the paladin's senses operate on a divine level. However, if this murderer were killing as part of a sacrificial ritual to summon a demon, then his evil would be supernatural in nature and therefore detectable by the paladin.

In this campaign, a positive result on detect evil means that the paladin should immediately take action. This is a morally black-and-white set-up - anyone who is Evil should be investigated or even attacked immediately.

Suffice to say that this last does not fit "standard 3.5 D&D" at least (maybe other editions) - though the other two could both be argued as valid interpretations of 3.5 alignment.

[Drachasor]

Did you look at the numbers I posted?

Yes. But I think a more fair comparison would be no mounts and using Long Bows or Composite Long Bows.

Archer: Human Fighter 1, Weapon Focus: Longbow, Point Blank Shot, Far Shot;
14 Str, 15 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 10 Wis, 8 Cha; Composite Longbow +3/+3 (within 30'), +2/+2 (within 165'), +0/+0 (within 330'), -2/-2 (within 495'), -4/-4 (within 660'), -6/-6 (within 825') for 1d8+2, 20x3; 11 HP, chainmail, AC 17.

(if we're going with elite stats, I guess).

This gives them a 30% chance to hit at almost 500' out. But they still have a 20% chance to hit at 660'. And a 10% chance at 845'.

If they Orcs don't run they move 60' per round.
845' - Avg. 3 hits - 3 total
785' - Avg 3 hits - 6 total
625' - Avg 6 hits - 12 total
565' - Avg 6 hits - 18 total
505' - Avg 6 hits - 24 total
445' - Avg 9 hits - 33 total
385' - Avg 9 hits - 42 total
325' - Avg 12 hits - 51 total
265' - Avg 12 hits - 63 total
205' - Avg 12 hits - 75 total
145' - Avg 15 hits - 90 total
85' - Avg 15 hits - 105 total
25' - Avg 16.5 hits - 121.5 total

There's a 25% chance a hit is not a death. Two hits is always a kill though. So on average they'll kill 91 Orcs this way. They could do some kiting, and the net result would be to double the kills. Note that running doesn't benefit the Orcs all that much, since they become MUCH easier to hit (for a lot of ranges this more than doubles the hits). And we aren't going as far out as we could.

The Warlocks do have a 70% chance to hit, but have to start at 250'.
250' - 21 hits - 21 total
190 - 21 hits - 42 total
130 - 21 hits - 63 total
70 - 21 hits - 84 total
10 - 21 hits - 105 total

On average it takes 2 hits to give a kill though. So that's only 52.5 kills. The archers did better at 91 kills.

The numbers above assume 30 ranged defenders, btw.

The net effect of moving back 30' before firing for either group is merely doubling the kills. It's also worth pointing out that there are lots of little ways to improve the archers for cheap (like masterwork weapons). Warlocks have a bit of a harder time about it.

[TuggyNE]

Yes. But I think a more fair comparison would be no mounts and using Long Bows or Composite Long Bows.

Archer: Human Fighter 1, Weapon Focus: Longbow, Point Blank Shot, Far Shot;
14 Str, 15 Dex, 12 Con, 13 Int, 10 Wis, 8 Cha; Composite Longbow +3/+3 (within 30'), +2/+2 (within 165'), +0/+0 (within 330'), -2/-2 (within 495'), -4/-4 (within 660'), -6/-6 (within 825') for 1d8+2, 20x3; 11 HP, chainmail, AC 17.

(if we're going with elite stats, I guess).

I think you're accidentally giving them Rapid Shot as a fourth feat. They only get one shot per round with both WF and Far Shot.

Also, because of that, the listed bonuses are wrong; they should be +5, +3, +1, -1, and -3 respectively. Apparently you took that into account further on though.


This gives them a 30% chance to hit at almost 500' out. But they still have a 20% chance to hit at 660'. And a 10% chance at 845'.

If they Orcs don't run they move 60' per round.
845' - Avg. 3 hits - 3 total
785' - Avg 3 hits - 6 total
625' - Avg 6 hits - 12 total
565' - Avg 6 hits - 18 total
505' - Avg 6 hits - 24 total
445' - Avg 9 hits - 33 total
385' - Avg 9 hits - 42 total
325' - Avg 12 hits - 51 total
265' - Avg 12 hits - 63 total
205' - Avg 12 hits - 75 total
145' - Avg 15 hits - 90 total
85' - Avg 15 hits - 105 total
25' - Avg 16.5 hits - 121.5 total

There's a 25% chance a hit is not a death. Two hits is always a kill though. So on average they'll kill 91 Orcs this way. They could do some kiting, and the net result would be to double the kills. Note that running doesn't benefit the Orcs all that much, since they become MUCH easier to hit (for a lot of ranges this more than doubles the hits). And we aren't going as far out as we could.

Orcs have Dex 10, and thus take no AC penalty at all from running. (I realized this partway through my previous analysis and correctly removed it from consideration, but apparently forgot to remove the vestigial note about denying Dex.) I don't have the time to rework all the stats right now, but that should be assumed.


The Warlocks do have a 70% chance to hit, but have to start at 250'.
250' - 21 hits - 21 total
190 - 21 hits - 42 total
130 - 21 hits - 63 total
70 - 21 hits - 84 total
10 - 21 hits - 105 total

On average it takes 2 hits to give a kill though. So that's only 52.5 kills. The archers did better at 91 kills.

The numbers above assume 30 ranged defenders, btw.

The net effect of moving back 30' before firing for either group is merely doubling the kills. It's also worth pointing out that there are lots of little ways to improve the archers for cheap (like masterwork weapons). Warlocks have a bit of a harder time about it.

Cheap is not really accurate in this case: the archers are already using nearly 500gp worth of equipment (per person, at level 1!), vs the 150 gp for a warlock. However, I suppose it's true that before level 4 or 5 the warlock would have a lot of trouble getting anything that improves their blast.

[Particle_Man]

Maybe I'm being pretty combative about "blastlock sucks", but it's hard to imagine any scenario where an additional 1d6 damage per round makes you way too powerful.

Well, it actually happened - the warlock was considered too powerful a blaster. And for that party, perhaps he was (I am not sure I agree with my DM, but I am not sure I disagree - let's just say I am the only one in the party that has even heard of the forums for Order of the Stick, much less other optimization forums). Consider this a chance to expand your powers of imagination! :smallsmile:

Actually in the same party rope trick wasn't as good as we couldn't fit all the characters, their cohorts, their animal companions, etc., in the damn thing, so some people had to stand guard outside anyhow.

[Drachasor]

Well, it actually happened - the warlock was considered too powerful a blaster. And for that party, perhaps he was (I am not sure I agree with my DM, but I am not sure I disagree - let's just say I am the only one in the party that has even heard of the forums for Order of the Stick, much less other optimization forums). Consider this a chance to expand your powers of imagination! :smallsmile:

Actually in the same party rope trick wasn't as good as we couldn't fit all the characters, their cohorts, their animal companions, etc., in the damn thing, so some people had to stand guard outside anyhow.

None of that makes sense together.

People with animal companions AND cohorts couldn't match up to a Warlock with an extra 1d6 damage? You have to be trying really, really hard to manage that. Really, really, really, really hard. Heck, Warlock damage is so bad you have to be trying hard not to beat it as any other damage-dealing class.

IIRC, the +1d6 damage item is priced about the same as a +2 weapon, right? So can you just run down how it is possible that your party could handle appropriate challenges but a Warlock doing an average of 3.5 more damage per round was overpowered?

[Particle_Man]

Easy. They were not optimized. At all. One guy was a ranger/sorcerer/some prestige class that didn't advance sorcerer, for example. Another guy was a half-orc barbarian/cleric. Another guy's first character was an expert (he later took a bard, to be fair). Their spell choices were based entirely on what they thought sounded cool and had little to nothing to do with their effectiveness, as far as I could tell. One was a druid that liked diplomacy and talking more than spellcasting, and whose animal companion was an owl, I think (this was a while back)

How do I put this. Imagine a party of Elans. :elan: :elan: :elan: :elan: :elan: We had a lot of fun, but optimization was the furthest thing from their minds. I am not an optimizer by this board's standards, and I felt I had to pull back a bit.

I was the only character that ever made magic items (I made the chasuble of fell power!) and I couldn't make much because I wasn't 12th level at the time. The others just took whatever they found adventuring, and sometimes their wealth was in the form of political favours and the like.

Anyhow, I was having fun with flee the scene and eldritch chain. Sudden Still was a surprisingly useful feat.

[HunterOfJello]

Easy. They were not optimized. At all. One guy was a ranger/sorcerer/some prestige class that didn't advance sorcerer, for example. Another guy was a half-orc barbarian/cleric. Another guy's first character was an expert (he later took a bard, to be fair). Their spell choices were based entirely on what they thought sounded cool and had little to nothing to do with their effectiveness, as far as I could tell. One was a druid that liked diplomacy and talking more than spellcasting, and whose animal companion was an owl, I think (this was a while back)

How do I put this. Imagine a party of Elans. :elan: :elan: :elan: :elan: :elan: We had a lot of fun, but optimization was the furthest thing from their minds. I am not an optimizer by this board's standards, and I felt I had to pull back a bit.

I was the only character that ever made magic items (I made the chasuble of fell power!) and I couldn't make much because I wasn't 12th level at the time. The others just took whatever they found adventuring, and sometimes their wealth was in the form of political favours and the like.

Anyhow, I was having fun with flee the scene and eldritch chain. Sudden Still was a surprisingly useful feat.

Some groups are like that, and if they're having fun, then good for them.

I can imagine a group where a pure warlock could be too strong, but I can also very easily imagine a group where a pure warlock is pathetically weak and a barely useful addition to a party. That is the main reason people suggest against playing a warlock. It sounds fun, but if the group has people in it who play tier 1/2 spellcasters with half decent mostly-full prestige classes (or a person playing a pure druid), then a warlock is going to quickly fall behind and not feel especially useful all the time.

If a pure warlock build is too strong in your game, then i'd suggest multiclassing into something you think would be fun and interesting for the character in order to delay their progression a bit. Lots of classes work very well and give fun benefits for dips. They include Rogue 2, Barbarian 1-2, Fighter 1-2, Psychic Warrior 1-2, Psion 1, Erudite 1, Cleric 1, Cloistered Cleric 1, Ardent 1, Wilder 2 and more.

[Drachasor]

Easy. They were not optimized. At all. One guy was a ranger/sorcerer/some prestige class that didn't advance sorcerer, for example. Another guy was a half-orc barbarian/cleric. Another guy's first character was an expert (he later took a bard, to be fair). Their spell choices were based entirely on what they thought sounded cool and had little to nothing to do with their effectiveness, as far as I could tell. One was a druid that liked diplomacy and talking more than spellcasting, and whose animal companion was an owl, I think (this was a while back)

How do I put this. Imagine a party of Elans. :elan: :elan: :elan: :elan: :elan: We had a lot of fun, but optimization was the furthest thing from their minds. I am not an optimizer by this board's standards, and I felt I had to pull back a bit.

Except, Elan is actually useful. Not sure how the Half-Orc Barb/Cleric didn't do more damage than the Warlock (even without spells). Like I said, it's not just not optimizing, they have to almost be trying to do badly -- that Druid must not have used Wildshape for anything useful in combat for instance or Summon Nature's Ally. I mean, with the Druid they literally have to be trying not to do anything useful in combat to be worse than the Warlock -- even without spells.

And anything CR appropriate would probably kill them all, I imagine.

All possible, I admit...just really weird.

[Dr. Azkur]

Sidenote: Elan is the only optimized character in the OOTS (The party, not the comic).

[Particle_Man]

You misunderstand, I mean the players are Elans. :smallsmile:

[Drachasor]

You misunderstand, I mean the players are Elans. :smallsmile:

Ahh, and their characters are then clown puppets. This makes sense now.

[Bloodgruve]

Eldritch claws with beast claws and a little unarmed optimization gets you pretty powerful pretty quick.

I just started a warlock myself. Took Eldritch Claws and Glaive both.

Question, Eldritch Claws says it does unarmed damage + blast damage. I've been playing this as natural attacks adding 1d3+2d6+Str+melee modifiers like Inspire Courage. Is this correct?

Please elaborate on how Beast Strike help with Eldritch Claws.

Thanks,

Blood~

[lunar2]

Your mining idea isn't bad, but then you have to remember that Warlocks have to be Chaotic or Evil.

I cannot really see them being ye nice lil' miner.

Also, they would make horribly horrible town watch

i don't remember for sure, but i think it was warlocks who, despite having the alignment restriction in the opening text, have no actual penalties for being other alignments. there is no such thing as an ex warlock, and while you'd have to be chaotic or evil to start taking warlock levels, nothing prevents you from changing alignment later and continuing down the warlock path.

[Red Fel]

I just started a warlock myself. Took Eldritch Claws and Glaive both.

Question, Eldritch Claws says it does unarmed damage + blast damage. I've been playing this as natural attacks adding 1d3+2d6+Str+melee modifiers like Inspire Courage. Is this correct?

Please elaborate on how Beast Strike help with Eldritch Claws.

Thanks,

Blood~

As I've come to understand, Eldritch Claws gives you claw attacks - meaning natural weapons, not unarmed strikes. Beast Strike allows you to use the Eldritch Claw damage on your unarmed strikes, meaning that it gives you iterative attacks. In addition, since Eldritch Claws deal damage equal to (unarmed strikes + Eldritch Blast), and Beast Strike adds your claw damage to your unarmed strikes, your total damage becomes (unarmed strikes + (unarmed strikes + Eldritch Blast)); in other words, your unarmed damage is effectively doubled.

Yes. Melee warlocks are fun too.

[Bloodgruve]

Thanks for clarifying Red.
You would need TWF to take full advantage of this then?
This would work with Flurry of Blows also if multiclassed?

Don't mean to hijak the thread.

Blood~

[MeeposFire]

I just started a warlock myself. Took Eldritch Claws and Glaive both.

Question, Eldritch Claws says it does unarmed damage + blast damage. I've been playing this as natural attacks adding 1d3+2d6+Str+melee modifiers like Inspire Courage. Is this correct?

Please elaborate on how Beast Strike help with Eldritch Claws.

Thanks,

Blood~

If I recall correctly the feat allows you to create claws. These claws deal your unarmed damage plus additional damage equal to your blast damage. It is treated as a natural attack.

Beast claws the feat allows you to make unarmed attacks with bonus damage equal to your claw damage. For this particular character that would mean you essentially deal 2x your unarmed damage plus eldritch blast damage on every unarmed attack. Since this is an unarmed attack you get iterative attacks and you could use abilities like flurrry.

Let me us an example. Let us say you have unarmed strike damage (US) of 1d4 and a blast damage of 2D6.

Claw Damage would be 1d4(US)+2d6(blast)+mods. Natural attack of the claw type following natural attack rules.

Beast claws added would be 1d4(US)+(1d4+2d6)(claw)+mods. Simplified this would be 2d4+2d6+mods in this case. This attack is treated as an unarmed strike so you can use it with snap kick, flurry, and other unarmed attack abilities.


One nasty thing about this is that every boost you give to unarmed strikes (such as imp natural attack or a battlefist) adds the size bonus to the claws and your unarmed strike.

[Red Fel]

Thanks for clarifying Red.
You would need TWF to take full advantage of this then?
This would work with Flurry of Blows also if multiclassed?

Don't mean to hijak the thread.

Blood~

I don't believe you need TWF to use your unarmed strikes effectively.

And if I recall, the Eldritch Claws feat specifically says "A monk may not use eldritch claws as part of her flurry of blows." However, a Monk's unarmed strike progression can be very useful in boosting the melee power of EC, given that (with Beast Strike) it counts twice.

[Dr. Azkur]

Don't forget you're simply using Unarmed Attacks to which Eldritch Claw damage so happens to apply, but you're still left with the actual attacks Eldritch Claws provide. So after your normal attack routine with iteratives/flurry/whatever you still get other two attacks at -5 dealing Unarmed Attack + Eldritch Blast.

Melee Warlocks are REALLY fun.

[Alent]

I don't believe you need TWF to use your unarmed strikes effectively.

And if I recall, the Eldritch Claws feat specifically says "A monk may not use eldritch claws as part of her flurry of blows." However, a Monk's unarmed strike progression can be very useful in boosting the melee power of EC, given that (with Beast Strike) it counts twice.

Why not use Battledancer instead of Monk if you're only boosting unarmed strike damage?

[Red Fel]

Why not use Battledancer instead of Monk if you're only boosting unarmed strike damage?

Battle Dancer is an option. As is Unarmed Swordsage. As is Shou Disciple. As are a number of others. Monk is considered the staple, because it's the classic; but it's not the only option.

That said, Monk allows you to improve a Clawlock's options. For example, Sun School is a feat which allows you, after using a teleportation spell, to make a single melee attack on an adjacent opponent at your highest BAB. Sort of a poor man's Pounce. This works with a Warlock's Flee the Scene invocation, but requires the Flurry of Blows class ability - an ability Monks get. It's actually quite useful with Flee the Scene, which ordinarily prevents you from taking any further action after teleporting.

Just remember that Monks must be Lawful; to be a Monk/Warlock, you must either be LE, or have a sudden crisis of faith that allows you to drop the L angle. (Remember that ex-Monks keep their Monk abilities.)

[magwaaf]

the answer is go evil and prestige into hellfire warlock... all the damage... all the damage....

[Particle_Man]

I think you could be a chaotic good hellfire warlock, fwiw.

[Red Fel]

I think you could be a chaotic good hellfire warlock, fwiw.

This. HFW requires language, skills, and one of two invocations; it does not require alignment. Frankly, if you're gestalting, you could go into both HFW and Enlightened Spirit (which requires a Good alignment).

[MeeposFire]

the answer is go evil and prestige into hellfire warlock... all the damage... all the damage....

Except that hellfire does not work with claws if I recall.

[magwaaf]

i apologize i thought you had to be evil.