PDA

View Full Version : Why are warlocks ruining our group?



RobbieOC
2007-04-08, 07:54 PM
I like the warlock class alright, I guess. But it causes a lot of unnecessary problems in my game group. I've heard a lot of people say the warlock is underpowered compared to a lot of classes, but I'm not seeing that in my group. The ranged touch attack of the eldritch blast, coupled with fly and eldritch spear (and then adding on maximize and mortal bane from BoVD makes the warlocks in our group highly effective. Why is it so different for us than it is for everyone else?

Kultrum
2007-04-08, 07:58 PM
It really does depend on who is playing the char, who the DM is, how the DM lies to play, and the level of houseruleing whether or not a char is effective

Innis Cabal
2007-04-08, 07:58 PM
how are you adding the maximize to it unless your adding maximize spell like ability, which he can only use three times per day if i remember correctly, dont see that as breaking. And i havent read BoVD recently, do you mean the mortal bane class? or is that an ability that he is some how adding to his eldritch blast. I don't think a warlock is underpowered just very limited in what it can do, but i love the warlock so im biased a bit. Don't know why its so different, and how is he accessing the fly spell? Is someone casting it on him? I don't remember that as an invocation becuase i know i would have taken it if it was

And stop following me Kultrum

UglyPanda
2007-04-08, 07:59 PM
BoVD is 3.0, that takes care of problem one. Problem two is that you don't have nearly enough enemies that let themselves get nailed from 300 ft. away. So your DM doesn't make enough flying enemies and/or makes too many enemies that just pop onto the battlefield and yell out "Look, I'm a target!". Also, it might just be that you guys are playing blaster mages with 20 encounters a day. If that's the case, then of course Warlocks are going to rule.

Arbitrarity
2007-04-08, 08:00 PM
Maximize and mortal bane might be it, though really, not much lifts the warlocks out of the dirt that their class is. Dunno what those do though.

I mean, as it is, you have flying guys who shoot 6d6 at people. Maximize... maximizes? So 36. And mortal bane :/ Dunno.

However, maybe other people in your party can't min-max properly. A good fighter, assuming quite a few splatbooks, at a guess level 12 or so, can deal insane damage at this point with a 4 level dip in psywar.

Can you give an example of what happens in a given turn?

Ah, maximize is 3/day, it's just maximize spell-like ability. Mortal-bane is 5/day, +2d6. So you have guys who do 48 damage 3/day. Why is this uber effective again?

Now vitrolic blast, is a nice invocation.

Kultrum
2007-04-08, 08:00 PM
And stop following me Kultrum

I was here first

RobbieOC
2007-04-08, 08:07 PM
Maximize and mortal bane might be it, though really, not much lifts the warlocks out of the dirt that their class is. Dunno what those do though.

I mean, as it is, you have flying guys who shoot 6d6 at people. Maximize... maximizes? So 36. And mortal bane :/ Dunno.

However, maybe other people in your party can't min-max properly. A good fighter, assuming quite a few splatbooks, at a guess level 12 or so, can deal insane damage at this point with a 4 level dip in psywar.

Can you give an example of what happens in a given turn?

Ah, maximize is 3/day, it's just maximize spell-like ability. Mortal-bane is 5/day, +2d6. So you have guys who do 48 damage 3/day. Why is this uber effective again?

Now vitrolic blast, is a nice invocation.

Well, I have no problem with it really, it's the whole touch attack thing that really bothers a few people in our group. And the DR, too. Plus, we always play in real high magic settings where nearly anything is available if you have the money, so if you add in chausibles of power and all that it doens't help any.

I guess what I wanted were reasons the warlock isn't as overpowered as they seem to think it is. I should have just asked outright... sorry for being misleading.

Thanks.

Innis Cabal
2007-04-08, 08:17 PM
they really arnt over powered, with hardly any items, save a few in the books they are presented in and the new stuff in Magic item compendium, they are hardly supported at all. They have very weak "spells" that are only good at certain things, most of them evil or non-good, and they have a very strict alignment code. Sure you can play CG but when the CG 12 year old human girl with pig tails bursts into a could of bats even the most rightous paladin is going to go "HUH? Did she just turn bats?" thats an alignment restriction. Plus their eldritch blast isnt graet, as they said 6d6 points of damage isnt great, better then a normal weapon but you can only do it once a turn, though i have seen some great PrC's that fix that, so even the fighter is going to do more damage with his full attacks.

Good reasons why they arnt over powered?

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-08, 08:21 PM
What are the rest of the people in your party doing?

Maximize SLA, as people have mentioned, is 3 blasts per day. It's not really even worth taking, Quicken SLA is better.

The Warlock makes touch attacks, but he makes one a round... and he has a lower attack bonus than the fighter. Frankly, a fighter and a Warlock will be hitting about the same percentage of the time, except against enemies with a particularily low touch AC.

Yes, Warlocks can fly and attack from a distance. Warlocks are good at Not Dying. Generally, their problem is that they can't contribute much offensively. A few d6es once a round is pretty bad.

So, basically, the question is--what the heck is the rest of your party doing?

Epiphanis
2007-04-08, 08:26 PM
I think Warlock is actually fairly well balanced. It is, however, built more along the lines of a martial type than a caster type, and people used to the variety of caster spell lists are turned off by a caster with what amounts to bonus feats instead of spells per day.

Also, the really twinky tricks available to endgame caster levels aren't there for the warlock. Some just think "why not play a CoDzilla or Wizard instead"? But a lot of the people who think that think the same thing about rogues and fighters, too

Arbitrarity
2007-04-08, 08:27 PM
K, there we go.

Warlocks are UP for a variety of reasons. 1'st, being that they only have a couple of "spell" selections, much worse than a sorc. Those "spells" for the most part, though at will, also take up the valuable combat round. Fog cloud, darkness, invisibility, and so forth take one of their 5 or 6 selected abilities. Anyway.

Secondly, they only get one blast per round (except eldritch glaive, but it's 10 ft). Or quicken spell-like ability, but it's 3/day. The blast is the same as the rogue's sneak attack, but it's only one, and rogues have better skill/class abilities. Even with a greater chausible of eldritch power, it doesn't keep up with the rogue getting flaming and shock, say.

That blast, though a touch attack, is one touch attack, no real magical enhancement. Most of the warlock abilities don't go well with current magic items. So... 8d6, 1/round, 10d6 5/day, maximise 3/day.

Their DR is nearly worthless. DR 2/cold iron does nothing, relatively, at that point, unless you're getting owned by cats.

The only thing that could potentially make or break the warlock is their invocation selection. Hideous blow, for instance, removes the touch aspect, opening up greater suckage. Say, noxious blast is nice, but it only lasts one round.

Bleah. Main thing is, warlocks can do damage, but almost nothing else, other than being a face. Only other thing they can do is save themselves. And the damage, after a while, just isn't good enough.

Ask one of the experts, they can probably explain better than I can.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-08, 08:33 PM
Bears, did you mean the fighter and warlock will be hitting the same percent of the time or the same number of times per round? Because, really, many many enemies have more than (party level / 2) + (1 to 3) AC which is doesn't count towards touch attacks, and that's roughly the difference between the warlock's to-hit and the fighter's to-hit (1/4 levels for BAB, 1/4 levels for a magic weapon, 1 to 3 for difference in attack stat, weapon spec, etc.)

edit:


Bleah. Main thing is, warlocks can do damage, but almost nothing else,

Or, you know, cause 3-5 creatures per round to make a fort save or be nauseated for a minute, as well as taking nd6 (for the first one) or nd6/2 damage. But that's not nearly as broken as celerity + time stop, so it's unplayable.

Innis Cabal
2007-04-08, 08:33 PM
i think you got it on the nose, but i think warlock is one of the most fun class;s to play. There is an item i made floating around on the board here that makes the damage go from d6 to d8, if your willing to look for it

Arbitrarity
2007-04-08, 08:38 PM
The fighter specializes only in strength to hit, the warlock can only specialize in cha, with dex secondary, so has worse to hit from stats.

martyboy74
2007-04-08, 08:40 PM
Bears, did you mean the fighter and warlock will be hitting the same percent of the time or the same number of times per round? Because, really, many many enemies have more than (party level / 2) + (1 to 3) AC which is doesn't count towards touch attacks, and that's roughly the difference between the warlock's to-hit and the fighter's to-hit (1/4 levels for BAB, 1/4 levels for a magic weapon, 1 to 3 for difference in attack stat, weapon spec, etc.)

You can only use one SLA per round. That's one attack per round for the warlock, unless he's using Quicken SLA, or Eldritch Glaive. Depending on level, the fighter probably gets more attacks per round, and usually at more damage.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-08, 08:44 PM
You can only use one SLA per round. That's one attack per round for the warlock, unless he's using Quicken SLA, or Eldritch Glaive. Depending on level, the fighter probably gets more attacks per round, and usually at more damage.


I know, that's why I asked if he meant number of hits / round instead of percent of the time. Fighters will probably hit more times per round, but warlocks will probably hit witha larger percent of their attacks.

Bears With Lasers
2007-04-08, 08:55 PM
Bears, did you mean the fighter and warlock will be hitting the same percent of the time or the same number of times per round? Because, really, many many enemies have more than (party level / 2) + (1 to 3) AC which is doesn't count towards touch attacks, and that's roughly the difference between the warlock's to-hit and the fighter's to-hit (1/4 levels for BAB, 1/4 levels for a magic weapon, 1 to 3 for difference in attack stat, weapon spec, etc.)
The Fighter will have a bigger STR than the Warlock has DEX, and a lot more attack boosters, from feats to items to buffs. He'll also be able to get flanking, trip his enemies, etc. There's a wide range of ACs and touch ACs out there, but I think it's safe to say that against a significant number of them, the Fighter's about as likely to hit as the Warlock.


edit:

Or, you know, cause 3-5 creatures per round to make a fort save or be nauseated for a minute, as well as taking nd6 (for the first one) or nd6/2 damage. But that's not nearly as broken as celerity + time stop, so it's unplayable.
No, it's compared to killing one of'em outright, or making them all Confused or Feared and therefore useless.

Dragonmuncher
2007-04-08, 09:50 PM
So, for whatever reason, you say the Warlock is out performing all the other PCs? Dealing at least as much damage as the fighter, while staying out of reach?

Hmm... you could send a horde of lower CR creatures. fighter gets full attack, meaning he can kill more than one a turn, wizard can fireball, etc. Warlock still only has one blast.

Use monsters that have a higher touch AC, or maybe some spell resistance.

Do some indoor battles, so flying isn't quite as big a deal. Or have the enemies use archers or magic to damage the warlock.

Flying creatures.

That's all I can think of, for now.

Ramza00
2007-04-08, 10:25 PM
mortal bane allows you to add +2d6 damage to your eldritch blast 5 times a day. It is only +1d6 if the attack hits an outsider, construct, or undead.


I rather take quicken spell like ability for another attack per round 3 times a day.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-08, 11:44 PM
No, it's compared to killing one of'em outright, or making them all Confused or Feared and therefore useless.

Have you looked at what nauseated means? From the SRD:


Nauseated creatures are unable to attack, cast spells, concentrate on spells, or do anything else requiring attention. The only action such a character can take is a single move action (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#moveActions) per turn.That's just about the definition of useless as far as I can tell. They can't even run away from you as fast as they could if they were Feared.

Lemur
2007-04-09, 12:21 AM
mortal bane allows you to add +2d6 damage to your eldritch blast 5 times a day. It is only +1d6 if the attack hits an outsider, construct, or undead.


I rather take quicken spell like ability for another attack per round 3 times a day.

I was under the impression that if mortalbane is used against outsiders, constructs, or undead, not only would the bonus damage dice not be added, but the damage dealt would be halved.

Zincorium
2007-04-09, 12:33 AM
Have you looked at what nauseated means? From the SRD:

That's just about the definition of useless as far as I can tell. They can't even run away from you as fast as they could if they were Feared.

It's a fortitude save, which means for most bruisers it's the best save they have, and for a large number of common enemies (undead, constructs) it won't even happen at all. It also requires that touch attack in addition to the fortitude save.

It's also a greater invocation, meaning it's not available at all until 11th level, at which point the wizard is getting things like Eyebite, disintegration, antimagic field, and so on. You also get five greater invocations, ever, unless you burn feats or use up a Dark invocation slot. That means that you have given up some pretty significant effects to use it.

It's pretty good. In no way does it make a warlock overpowered compared to casters. It puts it only a decent way ahead of fighters and the like, and it's already past the point where those classes lose out compared to most others.

Illiterate Scribe
2007-04-09, 07:15 AM
Again, I have to reiterate this - what on Earth is the rest of the party doing?

Indon
2007-04-09, 07:52 AM
My guess is, the Warlock is optimizing his character better than the other party members. Regardless of class, this can happen in such a scenario.

My recommendation is to talk it out with the player of the Warlock about relative character effectiveness.

And if they disagree, start throwing things with SR into the equasion.

Starbuck_II
2007-04-09, 08:06 AM
My guess is, the Warlock is optimizing his character better than the other party members. Regardless of class, this can happen in such a scenario.

My recommendation is to talk it out with the player of the Warlock about relative character effectiveness.

And if they disagree, start throwing things with SR into the equasion.
Or tell the others to optimize better. THe PHB 2 added in retraining because of these problems (player not playing characters well).

Indon
2007-04-09, 08:08 AM
Or tell the others to optimize better. THe PHB 2 added in retraining because of these problems (player not playing characters well).

True, really either solution works if it brings all the players in-line. I just consider bringing one in line with the rest to be easier.

Fhaolan
2007-04-09, 08:27 AM
how the DM lies to play

I know this is a mistype, but it's still funny, and is quoted for truth. :smallbiggrin:

its_all_ogre
2007-04-09, 09:52 AM
even if a fighter is doing only one attack a round he should still do more than 36 hps damage unless he is a really poor fighter or you do not have the splat books. i mean assuming you are level 12 thats weapon focus and Greater same for spec, add in mastery, power attack(2 handed sword?) leap attack and shocktrooper and you practically cannot fail to do more than 36 damage!
and you have endless swings in the same way as a warlock has endless blasts, ie until your hps run out.

the_tick_rules
2007-04-09, 10:15 AM
it all depends on the circumstances. My DM prides himself on taking classes, characters, feats, weapons etc. that many consider useless and use them against us to great effect. He's very good at his job.

Nerd-o-rama
2007-04-09, 10:57 AM
Okay. Your 12th-level Warlock does a maximum of about 50 damage per turn (without closing to melee range with Eldritch Glaive), with Maximize SLA (3 times per day), Mortal Bane (5 times per day), Chasubles, etc.

A well-played 12th level fighter should be able to break 100 damage on a full attack (or charge if he's built for it), and keep up that kind of damage all day.

Now, neither of them can do anything else...the warlock can manage some battlefield control or utility if needed and the fighter can do some tricks if he feels like it, but they're both mainly damage classes. And as for defense, the warlock's harder to reach (pro tip for DM's: flying enemies counter flying players), but he's significantly more fragile than the fighter in terms of both AC and HP. Not to mention Fort saves.

Bear in mind, this is me comparing the warlock to one of the less useful classes in the game. Full casters make even the best-built warlocks cry, unless it's a 20-encounter endurance match.

valadil
2007-04-09, 11:32 AM
Warlocks are underpowered because they don't do as much damage as other caster classes. They have potential to be cool because they can sustain their damage output for much longer than any wiz or sorc could ever hope to, but until the wiz or sorc runs out of spells the warlock is subpar.

I'm going to echo what everyone else in here has been saying. The warlock is being played well and is taking advantage of abilities it was never meant to have (since warlock is 3.5 and BoVD is 3.0) and other players aren't as optimized as the warlock in your group.

I was accused of powergaming once because I played a druid with a gimpy PrC. This wasn't like one of those natural spell wielding beast druids. I basically just played the character as a caster who used wild shape for subterfuge. The others thought I was powergaming because their builds sucked. At level 8, a druid can drop flame strike while a rogue4/sorc4 is still relying on level 2 spells for damage. By comparison my character was overpowered, but it was really just that the others in the group had gimped themselves.

Yakk
2007-04-09, 11:41 AM
L 12 half-assed Archer build:
L 3 Paladin (elf subsitution level for ranged smite)
L 7 Ranger (Two-weapon style)
L 2 Fighter

6 more ranger levels (for hide in plain sight) and 2 more fighter levels (for another feat) to top it all off.

Feats:
Point-blank shot
Rapid Shot
Many Shot
Far Shot
Improved Initiative
Weapon Focus (longbow)
Weapon Spec (longbow)

Dex primary and Str secondary build.

Bow is build with bonus dice: +2 Holy Merciful (total +5), as an example.
Arrows are built around bonus dice as well (+1 Flaming, +1 Bane, etc).

Assume 18 strength and 24 dex (after gear).

Arrow attacks, point-blank:
+12+7+1+1+2: +23 to hit

Point-blank manyshot flaming arrows on an evil target: +17 to hit
(1d8+9+4d6)*3
= 27.5 * 3
= 82.5 damage per volley (simple action, can be done during surprise round, and can move during it).

A full-attack action does more damage.

The archer can also ranged smite for a cha-bonus to hit and a +3 to the damage of each arrow.

And, finally, this character has the paladin holy aura, so she gains her charisma bonus to all of her saves.

The archer also carries a quarterstaff, which she can do a +10/+10/+5/+5/+0 full attack with.

Oh, and a +4 and a +2 favoured enemy bonus, useful if your campaign has a theme. Tracking, Endurance, Animal Empathy. Small amounts of lay on hands. Detect evil at will.

And that wasn't even trying.

jjpickar
2007-04-09, 11:47 AM
Uh guys he's not saying that warlocks rock but rather a warlock isrocking and how is this possible. I'll echo what others are saying and suggest that the other players are not playing up to the GiantItP character strength standard.

Aquillion
2007-04-09, 12:04 PM
Also, what level are we talking about here? Warlocks can be fairly useful at very low levels, when resources are stretched more thinly for everyone and many opponents have very low hps.

PinkysBrain
2007-04-09, 12:13 PM
I like the warlock class alright, I guess. But it causes a lot of unnecessary problems in my game group. I've heard a lot of people say the warlock is underpowered compared to a lot of classes, but I'm not seeing that in my group. The ranged touch attack of the eldritch blast, coupled with fly and eldritch spear (and then adding on maximize and mortal bane from BoVD makes the warlocks in our group highly effective. Why is it so different for us than it is for everyone else?
Nova abilities in general make balancing harder, a sorc or wiz with sudden maximize and/or metacheesy rods can be quite hard to handle too ... even the archer who buys a couple +1 holy arrows for those tough fights will cause trouble.

RobbieOC
2007-04-09, 03:03 PM
I think another problem we're having (this is for all of you who asked what the rest of the party is doing) is that we have two players who love the warlock class and they always use the same build, which I described above. Everyone else in the group likes to mix things up and play different characters more often, so I think they feel like they're being punished for stretching out and trying new things.

Obviously, the two players don't play the warlocks at the same time, but one of them plays a druid when he isn't a warlock and the other plays an invoking sorcerer. They're the type that believe damage in combat is the most important part of the game, and it just rubs some of the rest of the group the wrong way. I play bards and rogues, so I have a different take on the game than they do, but I'm not too bothered by it all. I was just hoping for some things to point out to the others so they realize it's not really the warlock class that needs to be nerfed but rather the build that they've constructed is working well, and they need to try for something similar if they want to compete.

Thanks for the responses. I know warlocks have been trampled lately, so I didn't really want to cover a lot of old ground again, I was just hoping for a little input. You guys are awesome.

Noneoyabizzness
2007-04-09, 03:15 PM
players who beleive damage output is the most important thing, but neither play a warmage? or a psion?

...

ok the flaw is many OPers here never see the value in damage out put. it's why people talk about dropping evocation when making a wizard, but forgettign many people still gotta play the first few levels.
now if their belief structure is garnering them control over your campign. give them issues fireballs cannot fix. sometimes killing everyone is not for the best.

Everyman
2007-04-09, 04:30 PM
I love the fact that so many people belive that damage is all that matters in D&D. It makes the DM in me smile.

Back on topic, the warlock is probably the most balanced class in D&D. We tend to shun the warlock because it doesn't do as much damage, but a warlock (probably built) is capable of doing damage, using all manner of magic devices, crafting gear (at 12th level), surviving, etc. However, I will concede that they are not the damage-dealing titans that perhaps WotC feared they would be.

If your friends are THE damage dealers of the group, I suggest someone take a look at their character sheets/watch their dice rolls. Warlocks can be potent, but only if used properly. Even then, they shouldn't be surpassing other classes in damage, but in status effects. The 6d6 damage ONCE per round shouldn't be the kill button, but rather the essences they put into it.

And before I get yelled down, I know that the essences aren't all that and a bag o' potato chips. I'm just noting that damage AND ailments combined are effective at controlling the game.

Bag_of_Holding
2007-04-09, 05:21 PM
Well, if the massive damage input potential is what's bothering you, try presenting a few talk encounters.

Aquillion
2007-04-09, 05:23 PM
I love the fact that so many people belive that damage is all that matters in D&D. It makes the DM in me smile.Nobody on this board, I hope, still thinks that damage is all that in D&D.

The problem is that if you view Warlocks as a status-inflicting class and not a damage-dealing class, they come off even worse, because then you are pitting them directly against wizards, who are the true masters of status manipulation in the metagame. Any half-decent spellcaster can inflict a status on an entire group of enemies in the time it takes the Warlock to do just one, giving the targets fewer rolls to escape in the process, lasting longer, and usually using nastier status effects.

And if you're limiting your status effect to a single person, status effects actually aren't that great. In the time a warlock inflicts nauseated status on a baddie, a half-decent archer could often inflict dead status on it just as easily. The big bad things that can't be dead-ified so fast generally have good saves and immunities, which leads to point three, which really kills warlocks as a functional status-effect class:

The key to wizards as effective status-inflicters--really, the heart and soul of any status-inflicting class--is that they have a wide range of statuses, saves, and effects to choose from. Any class that wants to focus on status effects needs, at a bare minimum, the ability to hit all three saves and the option to use more than one different status effect on each. Without that, you're going to be useless a significent precentage of the time. Not everyone has to be as powerful as a wizard, sure, but anyone who wants to claim status effects as a key class feature needs that much at a bare minimum just to stay functional--you can't make an effective status-effect class focusing on one status effect aimed at one save on a single opponent per round.

What does your warlock do when the enemy is immune to nausea, as huge numbers of opponents are, particularly later on? What do they do with opponents who have excellent fort saves? Making puppy-dog eyes at your DM every time you fight creatures who don't happen to be vulnerable to your one trick is only going to carry you so far.

That leaves your warlock stuck with damage in a significent portion of the fights (in general, note, these will often be the hard fights, the ones where your group can least afford to have you be deadweight.) And warlock damage, well, it sucks.

There are balanced classes out there. Warlocks are not one of them. They can succeed in an extremely small subset of situations when properly-built, sure, but overall they're weak.

And the most balanced class in D&D is probably the Psychic Warrior--good range of abilities to support a melee class, plus some fighter feats, which they pay for with cleric BAB and HD; the psionic ability to manifest spells at different 'levels' also lends them versitility that most partial caster classes lack. A well-made Psychic Warrior can contribute effectively in any situation without outshining anyone.

Clementx
2007-04-09, 06:11 PM
Warlocks have a hard time out-damaging and out-statusing other classes, so the rest of the party is obviously not well-built for either of those functions (which is hard to screw up). Warlocks have useful tricks that last all day, contribute constantly, and are very good UMDer (and later, problem-solvers by crafting scrolls to fill in gaps if you don't have a wizard). They just require a different perspective than other classes to present challenging opponents. You have a survivable archer with a couple self-buffs and moderate status effects. Making ranged damage-spamming a bit more difficult, presenting a variety of obstacles that can't be bypassed by just flying over it, and varying the resistances of opposition all help.

JoeFredBob
2007-04-09, 07:36 PM
I'm going to present here a decently (I think) built warlock. The intent is to show that they are a worthwhile class. It's not a full stat block

Disclaimer: Yes, I know wizards can do it better. As has been pointed out, that is not a valid reason to say a class sucks. If you can show that a bard, monk, or ranger can do it better I'll listen more carefully. (I happen to like these classes, but since general consensus is that bards and monks are weak, and we know that rangers do not make good casters, they probably make good low-end classes for this type of build.)

Mr. Caster Blaster the Warlock

Mr. Caster Blaster the Warlock is designed to be a fairly versatile warlock who can act as a decent arcane caster for the party. He's not a toolbox, by any stretch of the imagination, but he has a decent number of tricks.

Warlock 13
Stats: 24 pt buy. 10 12 12 10 10 16 base. Halfling and ability score increases for 8 14 12 10 10 19. Assume a cloak of charisma +4 for 8 14 12 10 10 23. Nothing exciting.

Invocations:
Least:
Darkness
Devil's Sight
Hammer Blast

Lesser:
Eldrich Chain (4th)
Fell Flight
* Dispelling (either relentless or voracious)
Stony Grasp (The way i read it, weapons do damage to the arm as to an object, because it has hardness. If this is true, then stony grasp is a good thing to have, because plenty of things won't necessarily damage it, and it grapples well. If this isn't the case, I would probably pass on this invocation and pick up another feat.)

Greater:
Noxious Blast (6th)
Bewitching Blast (4th)

Feats:
Ability focus (eldrich blast)
Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
extra invocation (taken at 12th level)

Things you can do:
With a +13 to-hit, and most touch ACs being under 20, you have a very good chance to land your blasts, which is especially important because you'll be chaining each one of them, so you'll actually be doing up to 3 attacks/round (albiet the last two for half damage). Incidentally, if they're too dextrous for you, good use of darkness can make it flat-footed touch AC. i.e. ~10 in most cases.

Always carry around a few stones with darkness cast on thim in a closed bag or haversack. This turns dropping one in combat into a move action unless your DM is very stringent with actions.

Unlimited dispelling is an INSANELY nice thing to have. Take your pick between getting to target someone or something and get two attempts for one action, or being able to do area dispells. This is one area where I think the warlock actually outshines most casters. I've seen people run out of prepared dispells many times.

Status effects: preferred is nauseated. 3 creatures/round DC 24 fort save or useless for a minute. Perfect for those pesky casters.
If they have a strong fort save, confused is decent, but it's DC is only 22, and it only lasts 1 round.
Depending on your style you can switch in Charm for Bewitching Blast (or rather, for stony grasp, and take another Greater invocation), which lasts longer but is single target. Another possibility is Repelling Blast, if you expect to be facing mostly medium or smaller opponents. Prone sucks.

Stony grasp is a good choice if your enemies are likely to not bypass the hardness. Grappling at +19, it has a good chance of completely disabling anyone that doesn't have full BAB, and isn't very large. If you switch in Repelling Blast you should probably switch this out (both useful mainly against medium and smaller opponents).

Once again, I know this isn't absolutely stellar. It is, however, playable, and useful.

Aquillion
2007-04-10, 12:39 AM
(I happen to like these classes, but since general consensus is that bards and monks are weak, and we know that rangers do not make good casters, they probably make good low-end classes for this type of build.)To go slightly offtopic for a moment, despite all the jokes I don't think bards are really that underpowered. They have a decent variety of 'jack of all trades' abilities to back up the rest of the party--while none of them are hugely powerful on their own, a Bard can back up a full caster in a caster v. caster fight by casting silence while their full caster immobilizes the opposition, can back up melee fighters with music, can handle difficult social situations while saving expandable resources (eg. spells, etc) that the rest of the party might otherwise end up wasting, etc, etc.

They're a bit hurt by the fact that diplomacy is broken, since it's worth less to specialize in something whose rules are so poorly-defined, but they can still be effective. The key to a bard is that you can serve whatever sort of backup role is most-needed at the moment--the big mistake people make with them is to try and focus on one thing. The bonus for Bardic Music is small, but sometimes you really need that particular plus; bardic spells are limited, but sometimes you just need an extra caster cranking some key effect out, etc. They're not as good as full casters, of course, but who is?

Warlocks are the opposite. They're like the anti-Bard, like a bizarro failed Bard. Bards focus on many things, but master none; warlocks focus on one thing and still don't get it. They might have a fun flavor (I always saw them as sort of X-Men or anime superhero characters, for some reason, with a signature attack and all), but their mechanics need work.

And don't say that true role-players would never care about that, because it's not true; given that most D&D characters are martial in flavor (and warlocks, particularly), the ability to contribute meaningfully in combat is a significant part of most of those character's identity. Just like you can't effectively role-play a master of stealth and deception without at least a few ranks in Move Silently, Hide, and/or Bluff (or some substitute abilities, like invisibility from some source), you can't realistically roleplay a frightening and destructive master of darkness when, at the end of the day, your eldritch blasts of arcane might have all the force of thrown cheetos.

...well, that's exaggerating a bit, of course. They are playable, like the above says. But I think that any effort to balance D&D would focus on making them just a tad more playable. They're far enough below the bar for it to be noticable even in moderately casual play.