PDA

View Full Version : Warlocks, they only want to be loved.



Vuzzmop
2007-05-23, 10:39 PM
I am getting really tired of hearing people claiming that warlocks are under powered and useless.

I officially declare the debate of the century, a competition between the warlock faithfull, and those who would dare mock their powers,

Open!!!!!!!

Caduceus
2007-05-23, 10:43 PM
I've wanted to play a warlock ever since I got Complete Arcane, but every time I start to make one, I also make backup characters so I can choose my favorite. The limited number of Invocations known is a hindrance. As well as the very small list to choose from.

That's why I don't play them.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-23, 10:51 PM
Comparison of a warlock to a wizard of comparable level:

1st level to 4th level: advantage: Warlock. Unlimited d6s is far better than what a 1st to 4th level wizard can do.

5th level and beyond: advantage: Wizard. More spells to choose from, better damage, and things to do that aren't damage.

Vuzzmop
2007-05-23, 10:54 PM
Warlocks are definately worth playing.

the invocations known can be annoying, but after all, they aren't casters. Their lack of versatility early on in the game is made up for with infinite casting you get. A first level wizard will run out of spells per day and hide in a corner, while the warlock keeps on going.

sorry, posted too slowly. It's true, the wizard can definately do better at high levels, but then again, the fun of the warlock class isn't the range of abilities, it's the way you mix and match them.

eg 20ft blast of demonic fury + minus 2 levels to all enemies hit = Fun

Jack Mann
2007-05-23, 10:55 PM
It's mostly a question of what they can do for a party in a given round. They're good at surviving, but they're not great for a lot else. Their damage output, round for round, just doesn't amount to much, touch attack or no. Their invocations aren't generally powerful enough to help, even if they are all day long.

Krimm_Blackleaf
2007-05-23, 10:56 PM
Warlocks are kinda weak. But I still love them.

Vuzzmop
2007-05-23, 11:04 PM
Warlocks are good for almost all play styles as well.

infinite "charm person" and rediculously high Charisma is good for diplomatic games (especially without a bard or beguiler in the group), while in kick in the door style games the choice of damaging and self buffing abilities is good for a persistently useful back up blaster character. After all, they are aren't meant to be primary casters, and they're definately not meant for melee, so they easily fit in backup roles.

Gralamin
2007-05-23, 11:06 PM
Warlocks are weak, except in the Worlds Largest Dungeon (Which is where their infinite use can be used to the full degree)

Warlocks are weak for a number of reasons, but mostly due to their damage output. It is much less then any other archer. The "balance" of infinite uses only comes into play when you have more then 5 or 6 encounters in a day.

Vuzzmop
2007-05-23, 11:12 PM
True.

However, no other class can match it for shear fun of playing it. I myself have become prone to yelling "Kamehameha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! quite frequently.

Although I suppose that might just be a sign of insanity.

the_tick_rules
2007-05-23, 11:19 PM
i planned to say something, but i've grown so weary about these debates about why anyone who isn't a wizard stinks that these threads bore me.

dragonwings
2007-05-24, 12:44 AM
I love my evil warlock. She gets to take the high ground, blow off the rest of the party (except the healer), and keep as far away from the swords/talons/claws/teeth/death touch/nose of whatever they're fighting. Archers are a pain, but she can actually run up and melee with them to an extent.

Technical stuff aside, I just like her because of the character. No other class would suit her, really, and that's just what she was built to be. Though, in my opinion, it doesn't matter how "powerful" a class is. It's going to have weak points, but it all depends on what weaknesses you're willing to deal with. I guess with my warlock baby, I'm just willing to deal with the lack of variety and classics like Magic Missle and Fireball.

Besides, I don't think I've found a class yet that someone hasn't claimed was either weak or overpowered. Warlocks just happen to be debated more often than others. Yay Warlock love!

TheOOB
2007-05-24, 12:46 AM
Warlocks are not underpowered, they are underpowered in comparison to wizards. You can be a good deal less powerful then a wizard and still be useful. People still play rangers and paladins, and neither class is especially powerful.

Erk
2007-05-24, 12:57 AM
It's like people are playing for character interest and story involvement rather than sheer damage output/combat effectiveness or something....

:smallwink:

SpiderBrigade
2007-05-24, 01:00 AM
Are warlocks horridly gimped? Hardly. After all, they're still somewhat like a caster. There are even some "nasty optimization tricks" that depend on warlock abilities. But of course a wizard is better.

The reason the "weakness" of the warlock tends to get overstated is that there are a seemingly neverending number of people whose first reaction is that the class is ridiculously overpowered. Which it isn't.

Jack Mann
2007-05-24, 01:04 AM
Warlocks are not underpowered, they are underpowered in comparison to wizards. You can be a good deal less powerful then a wizard and still be useful. People still play rangers and paladins, and neither class is especially powerful.

But the warlock is also underpowered compared to a ranger or a paladin.

Vuzzmop
2007-05-24, 01:26 AM
the warlock is not a caster!

Pretty much every class has been debated over, but everyone has to understand that you cannot compare the warlock to a full caster like the wizard or druid. It could be justified to compare it to other backup type classes like the bard or rogue.

Jack Mann
2007-05-24, 01:35 AM
See, that's the thing. We're not comparing the warlock to the full casters. We know that's not their role. We're just looking at what they can do for a party. And it isn't as much as a rogue, say, or a ranger. Their greatest contribution is probably imbue item, and that doesn't kick in until level 12.

The_Snark
2007-05-24, 01:55 AM
They aren't spectacular, usually, but they're useful. They provide a steady ranged damage output, and invocations can get you effects that are useful to a party. At low levels, they can render enemies shaken or sickened, as well as shatter weapons and obstacles. At higher levels, they can charm, curse, dispel, act as a scout with mobility/stealth invocations, create walls of fire, and debilitate enemies.

A warlock with an eye towards tactics and utility can be a useful party member. And that's without Use Magic Device, either. They're not all that powerful, but they're playable... and fun to play, at that. I've always loved at-will abilities.

Erk
2007-05-24, 01:58 AM
I'd say that the only well-defined party roles are "tank", "healer", "versatile caster", and "skillmonkey", and nearly anything that doesn't fit into one of those is going to be a bit hazy in its party role. Doesn't mean it's useless. I haven't looked at them closely but Warlocks always seemed basically like a fun kind of archer, using elemental damage instead of arrows. And if you want to play a spell-free blaster, that is just plain great.

Diss blasters as you will and tell me to ban evocation: it's not going to change that shooting fireballs is fun.

Jack Mann
2007-05-24, 02:07 AM
See, the problem is that most combats don't last very long, so the ability to do damage over a long period of time isn't useful to a party. It's good if you're solo, and can use your invisibility and flight to keep them from hitting you, but it doesn't work well in a party situation. The round-to-round damage a warlock does is absolutely negligible compared to what a good archer can do. Some of the invocations are kind of nifty (especially the newer ones), but they're often too situational or too weak to really serve the party better than another rogue, say.

Dhavaer
2007-05-24, 02:08 AM
Warlocks are a great class for a 1 person party. Hard to kill, can have social skills, have mobility and can go on forever. They just don't play well with others, at least not until they get Chilling Tentacles/Perilous Flame.

LordLocke
2007-05-24, 03:00 AM
Warlocks are crappy casters. They're a Sorcerer stuck in Blaster mode with a handful of utilities. If you're looking to compare a warlock to Wizard/Sorc/CoDzilla, forget about it.

Warlocks are good archers, however. Free (1/2 level)d6 every round shapable in a number of ways isn't bad, and since they can't full-attack it anyways, Warlocks make awesome moving artillery. Especially since they get stuff like Fly for free. They can also double as a rather specialized skill monkey if they take the right incantations. Stuff like DR is mostly fluff, but useful fluff.

But perhaps their biggest boon is their godly ability with magic items- both using them and making them. Sure, my Warlock blasted and fulfilled a bit of stealthy sneak, but when he had to get serious, it wasn't my elderich blast or my incantations, but my wands and such that get pulled out- I took a number of the wand combat feats, and they paid off big time- Warlocks dual-wielding wands is a lot of fun.

Erk
2007-05-24, 04:29 AM
dual-wielding wands is a lot of fun.

PPPPLEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAASSSSSSSE tell me you named your wands Hurt and Burn (http://tsots.pbwiki.com/Hurt%20and%20Burn)?

JellyPooga
2007-05-24, 05:22 AM
I really like Warlocks, mostly for the variety of character concepts that it opened that were not previously available. As a class, it's abilities can be flavoured in many more ways than the caster classes, yet it retains a mystical kind of flavour that fits a lot of characters that "casting" doesn't.

Even with the really very limited number of Invocations available from Complete Arcane (I don't own Comp Mage), I've managed to create several distinctly different characters, each with it's own very unique concept/background using only the Warlock class. Given more Invocations, I'm sure that I could make even more, with the only similarity being the mechanical rules used for the class. O.k. so the same can be said for pretty much all the classes, but unlike the Wizard or Fighter or any other class, the Warlock doesn't really have a stereotype (IMO) to live up to (the mighty Wizard, the Full-Plate Fighter, the Sneaky Rogue-Adventurer, etc.), which means that you have a little more room for your own imagination when it comes to characters with the Warlock class.

That's how I see it anyway and that's the primary reason that I like the class (the secondary reason is that I've never been happy with spells/day and the Warlock is how I view what a "caster" should be..just my opinion though).

Ceres
2007-05-24, 06:33 AM
In the 3.0/3.5-hybrid campaign I'm playing in, warlocks can have a serious damage output. At lvl 6:

"Mortalbane, maximized, empowered eldritch chain frightful blast, followed by a mortalbane, maximized, empowered, quickened eldritch chain frightful blast, sucka!"
That's 270 damage to be distributed between 2-4 opponents with added fear-effects at lvl 6 :D
However, he can only do this once per day, so it takes some of the fun away. Can really make you feel like emperor Palpatine for a few seconds, though :)

Baleful Utterance is also very powerful. I mean, come on. Shatter at will?! With deafness and dazing included? BAM! There goes your weapon! BAM! Your shield! It's totally overpowered fun :)

Unlimited charm is also, as mentioned, very powerful. Especially in any campaign which isn't a dungeon-crawl.

Arbitrarity
2007-05-24, 07:09 AM
You have... 4 feats at level six, all of which you used on metamigic spelllike abilities, some of which are illegal as your CL is too low?

Cos you're using an effective 8'th level spell like ability there... And you need CL 16 to do that with spell like changes. Your effective caster level is 6.

:smallannoyed:
:smallwink:

Meat Shield
2007-05-24, 07:21 AM
My buddy is about to start a monster game and took one look at my evil pixie warlock, shook his head, announced that she would be the most annoying character ever, and that she would have to die. Something about 8d6 a round, forever, with improved invisibility at will, while flying, and using a ranged touch attack from about 250 feet away.

Let the giant slog it out with the fighters down there, I'll take the bolt from the blue approach.

BardicDuelist
2007-05-24, 07:58 AM
You have... 4 feats at level six, all of which you used on metamigic spelllike abilities, some of which are illegal as your CL is too low?

Cos you're using an effective 8'th level spell like ability there... And you need CL 16 to do that with spell like changes. Your effective caster level is 6.

:smallannoyed:
:smallwink:

I think he is using sudden metamagic (if you can use those with spell like abilities).

AtomicKitKat
2007-05-24, 11:34 AM
The list of invocations is pretty large. The amount you're allowed to select is small.:smallfrown:

Larrin
2007-05-24, 02:16 PM
The list of invocations is pretty large. The amount you're allowed to select is small.:smallfrown:

the list of invocations that are usefull (specifically usefull often or in more than one situation) is also small. as the warlock usually takes about 8 non-blasting invocations, they really need to be of jackknife like qulaity. Shatter, flight, invisiblity are well worth it, you can use them anywhere, anytime, but a darkness that surrounds you and is filled with bats or a 'sending' spell that damages you really don't come in handy very often. even the "stone fist" line of spells are pretty one trick and lackluster. If it isn't usefull in at least two or three uniquely differen situations, its shouldn't be on the list, and yet alot of them still are....

Ceres
2007-05-24, 02:23 PM
I think he is using sudden metamagic (if you can use those with spell like abilities).

I'm using the cheap 3.0 BoVD-versions of empower and quicken which don't require a caster-level :) Sucks to all the 3.5 warlocks

mrjoegangles
2007-05-24, 11:05 PM
The warlock is by and far my favorite character. We are talking about a character that at first level can have a 16 to bluff, intimidate, and diplomacy, Or 16 to knowledge arcane, planes. Or possibly a 16 to tumble, balance and jump. And thats without magic items. 24-hour buff spells like spider climb and flight. Unlimited dispel magics. Detect magic at will. He is probably my favorite scoundrel-type character. Much better then a rogue or bard. Sure his combat prowress has nothing on a wizard (unless you go thurage and that takes time to build up) but D&D isnt all battles, Unless you play hack n slash which is amusing for perhaps 2 sessions.

So sure you can have a wizard on your team and he can fireball and lightning bolt the BBG for you. But Id still like to have that Warlock who can just use wands of fireball that he made himself, and use his eldritch blast to help out on all the henchmen, instead of hideing cause he only gets X spells per day. You know the kind of magic user that can be ambushed at night and is still useful.

Oh yeah before I forget. As good as a Wizard might be, when was the last time you saw him use a heal scroll???? Let alone make one.

Diggorian
2007-05-25, 12:19 AM
The wide variety of games styles played requires folks to speak in generalities. My experience with my PC warlock covered levels 3-9 in a party where the only other Arcane users were a Bard and Ranger with some sorceror levels. Over a little less than a year, the warlock was more than useful.

After Point blank shot and Precise shot, 2 of the other three feats I took were always Extra Invocation. This made up for the limited selection for me.

The ranger did more damage than me only if he used alchemical arrows and hit with every attack. The warlock nearly guaranteed damage every round. If a foe had SR, the archer beat me in output.

With Beguiling influence, the Bard assisted me on my social checks. NPCs did what we wanted or the DM obviously cheaped out on us.

Voracious dispelling made me a master debuffer/counterspeller. The more powerful the spell and the more of them in effect, the more damage they took.

All of these in the campaign I played in made the warlock fun for me, your warlock may vary but dont let a crunch analysis dissuade you from trying.

SurlySeraph
2007-05-25, 12:28 AM
Warlocks are to wizards as monks are to fighters. They do similar jobs, except warlocks and monks do less damage and are harder to kill than wizards and fighters, and warlocks and monks have lots of special abilities of questionable utility.

BardicDuelist
2007-05-25, 07:50 AM
The lower the level, the better the warlock is. I tend to play between levels 1-6, with most campaigns maxing out at 10-12 if we want to play the characters longer, so warlocks are useful. They tend to make the wizard look useless until fifth level.

Eldmor
2007-05-25, 10:59 AM
Here's what the warlock needs crunchwise:

Iterative Eldritch Blasts w/o Eldritch Glaive
Free Heritage Feats
More Invocations Known

Heritage feats will also give the warlock a much needed kick-in-the-arse fluffwise. Opens up alignment resrictions while at the same time getting some much needed, but not overpowering, bonuses and SLAs. Not all warlocks have to have horns growing out of their foreheads and have an Uncle Pluto living on the ninth layer. I particularly like the idea of feyish warlocks flinging around bright, cheery d6 beams. :smallredface:
I particularly don't care for the magic item abilities and would axe them.

AtomicKitKat
2007-05-25, 11:21 AM
Here's what the warlock needs crunchwise:

Iterative Eldritch Blasts w/o Eldritch Glaive
Free Heritage Feats
More Invocations Known

Heritage feats will also give the warlock a much needed kick-in-the-arse fluffwise. Opens up alignment resrictions while at the same time getting some much needed, but not overpowering, bonuses and SLAs. Not all warlocks have to have horns growing out of their foreheads and have an Uncle Pluto living on the ninth layer. I particularly like the idea of feyish warlocks flinging around bright, cheery d6 beams. :smallredface:
I particularly don't care for the magic item abilities and would axe them.

I should totally make a Half-Fey Warlock flinging around Rainbow Blasts.:smalltongue:

Aquillion
2007-05-25, 11:43 AM
Warlocks are to wizards as monks are to fighters. They do similar jobs, except warlocks and monks do less damage and are harder to kill than wizards and fighters, and warlocks and monks have lots of special abilities of questionable utility.Not really. Flavor aside, warlocks aren't really trying to be toolbox arcane casters; they're closer to archers, mechanically.

Warlocks do have some nice things, even if they aren't such a great class overall. Fly + Invisible + 250-foot-range + unlimited ammo is kinda hard to ignore completely, even with low damage output. They're good at UMD, with some support abilities, so they can contribute a few gearbox tricks in a pinch from that.

They're a good class, they're just not good for the sort of things that come up in a typical D&D game. They aren't so good at contributing to killing monsters within the timeframe it'd take the rest of the party to wrap things up, generally, and don't have so much to offer outside of combat.

...actually, if I was redesigning the class, I'd consider boosting their skill points all the way up to 6, and heavily expanding their class skills. Making them a sort of magical skill-monkey could be interesting... their overall flavor and many of their abilities support this.

Also, allow PRCs that extend arcane casting to extend invocations known, too (and let level X warlocks count as having the arcane casting level a sorc of the same level would have for PRC qualification, as long as that PRC doesn't require specific spells.) I can't imagine it'd help very often, but it can't hurt.

ClericofPhwarrr
2007-05-25, 11:53 AM
Not all warlocks have to have horns growing out of their foreheads and have an Uncle Pluto living on the ninth layer. I particularly like the idea of feyish warlocks flinging around bright, cheery d6 beams. :smallredface:

Yes, and more yes. You may have inspired me to finally make a warlock with that statement.

GryffonDurime
2007-05-25, 12:01 PM
Yes, and more yes. You may have inspired me to finally make a warlock with that statement.

And instead of a cape of darkness, fell flight can give you big, prismatic butterfly wings.

And a tiara. For reasons unknown, there will probably be a tiara involved...

I like the Warlock, actually; I'd like to see more support for them from Wizards particularly in the form of Warlock-specific PrCs, because right now...there are three.

The Warlock is really the easiest equivalent in DnD to a superhero: flying, energy blasts...all you need now is a Super-Strength invocation and DR: 10/kryptonite.

Ramza00
2007-05-25, 12:31 PM
With the new books avaliable for warlocks, they are no longer useless, and can be quite good.

Hellfire Warlock (replace flavor if you don't want to be using hellfire) especially with legendary champion (broken), or bloodline levels (not broken)
The Incarnum blasty thingy can add another 4d6 damage.

Attilargh
2007-05-25, 12:48 PM
Could someone tell me why the invocations have (pretty honkin' long) durations despite being effectively infinite thanks to having next to no limitations on their frequency of use? It just seems so very redundant and boring.

I wonder if I could houserule those away without gimping the whole class..?

Fourth Tempter
2007-05-25, 12:56 PM
And instead of a cape of darkness, fell flight can give you big, prismatic butterfly wings.

And a tiara. For reasons unknown, there will probably be a tiara involved...

Ah... Gryffon?
While your Warlock may certainly be a fairy, I do not know that there will be actual fey involved...

I_Got_This_Name
2007-05-25, 01:29 PM
Could someone tell me why the invocations have (pretty honkin' long) durations despite being effectively infinite thanks to having next to no limitations on their frequency of use? It just seems so very redundant and boring.

Because there's no reason to give a duration less than 24 hours, since they'll always be up anyway; anything shorter would just be inconvenient.

Aquillion
2007-05-25, 10:52 PM
Could someone tell me why the invocations have (pretty honkin' long) durations despite being effectively infinite thanks to having next to no limitations on their frequency of use? It just seems so very redundant and boring.

I wonder if I could houserule those away without gimping the whole class..?Well, a few of them can be used on other people. It can become important then. Some effects might also refer to a spell-effect's duration, or require that it be of limited duration, or something similar. Basically, they gave them durations to bring them mechanically close to spells, but made those durations long so Warlocks wouldn't have to waste rounds in combat activating abilities they were intended to have all the time.

Quietus
2007-05-25, 11:17 PM
I should totally make a Half-Fey Warlock flinging around Rainbow Blasts.:smalltongue:

Why, when I read, this, did I instantly think "Care bear stare"?

GryffonDurime
2007-05-25, 11:30 PM
Or better yet, have five little elementally themed Warlock PrCs, then as their capstones they can let their powers combine to summon forth one mighty champion. Perhaps some kind of Outsider...an angel? Then you could finally play a campaign as...(Warning: the pun is reaching toxic levels) Captin Planetar and the Planeteers!

O-o.

Though I suppose the order of elements in d20 terms would go more like: Let our powers combine! Acid! Fire! Electricity! Cold! Noise!

Hurlbut
2007-05-25, 11:38 PM
Or better yet, have five little elementally themed Warlock PrCs, then as their capstones they can let their powers combine to summon forth one mighty champion. Perhaps some kind of Outsider...an angel? Then you could finally play a campaign as...(Warning: the pun is reaching toxic levels) Captin Planetar and the Planeteers!

O-o.

Though I suppose the order of elements in d20 terms would go more like: Let our powers combine! Acid! Fire! Electricity! Cold! Noise!Sonic or Sound :P

Morty
2007-05-26, 05:03 AM
Why use warlocks anyway? They're perfect example of screwed class design. Their fluff is idiotic, and they may be interesting mechanic-wise, but they're boring.

Artemician
2007-05-26, 05:14 AM
Warlocks... BORING?

I never thought i'd see these two words in the same sentence.

My man.. how can you say that a Warlock is boring? He's a walking boomstick! That is so not boring! Quick lads, lets get 'im to the Reformation Lab!

Oh and... MIKURU BEAM!!!

Morty
2007-05-26, 05:18 AM
Blast, blast, blast. That's even more boring than playing meleer, but you're dealing less damage, and your character concept is lame.

Truthseeker
2007-05-26, 05:53 AM
Why use warlocks anyway? They're perfect example of screwed class design. Their fluff is idiotic, and they may be interesting mechanic-wise, but they're boring.

I used to think like that exactly because their fluff *is* idiotic, but I think they're decidedly less boring than the "I swing my sword!" fighter or, at the opposite end of the spectrum, the "I use X highly calculated but broken optimal combination, so I win" wizard. That's all pretty subjective, though. The attraction lies in the ability to walk on walls, take flight, toss energy bolts from your bare hands, whatever... all day long, with almost no limitation on when or why (it's also what makes them LOOK overpowered).

When you look at wizards and their like in most fiction, they often don't feel a huge need to use their powers sparingly, and even when they do have some form of restriction they often don't heed it as wisely as D&D's Vancian casting system encourages in players. When was the last time you saw a D&D wizard blow a lightning bolt (or something) just to shatter a door and go storming through, energy still crackling from his hands? Sure, it happens, but they'll feel the lack of that spell slot for the rest of the day because --to put it mildly-- it could have been more optimally used.

The Warlock is free to play the game as a game instead of a planning session. To goof off, toss exotic powers around liberally and without provocation. "Waste" your magic as a signal flare, a sculpting tool, a "lockpick," casually take out a flock of seagulls just because you feel like it (or to cow the villagers), carve your initials in little holes blown into the cliffside, whatever --and that's just with eldritch (yechy name, though) blast. It is a shame that they perhaps can't keep up when things get mechanically serious, but hey, can't have everything.

Artemician
2007-05-26, 06:03 AM
Blast, blast, blast. That's even more boring than playing meleer, but you're dealing less damage, and your character concept is lame.

Blasting.. is lame?

I'm lost for words.

So.. what do you spend your sessions doing? Throwing oil on the floor? Prodding someone with a pointy stick? How do those things compare to the raw fun of shooting laser beams out of your eyes? Or splitting/bouncing the beams off one person to another, or spitting raw light from your mouth, or... (list goes on)

The Warlock definitely isn't the highest in the power curve, but its the class that lets a characte, as Truthseeker so succintly put it, "blow a lightning bolt (or something) just to shatter a door and go storming through, energy still crackling from his hands."

It's like a Barbarian dressed in tartan with a golf club, it doesn't need a reason to be cool.

EDIT: Oh.. and playing a Meleer is boring? Since when?

Morty
2007-05-26, 08:55 AM
Well, when you play meleer you just say "I swing my sword". Of course, it's not boring. It's fun to cut a bloody swath through enemy. Shooting some unidentifyed energy out of your hands all the time is lame, not fun. Shooting rays out of your eyes is lameness incarned. It's almost as bad as Conjuration spells.
As for wizards: I'm a huge wizard fan, and I love blasting. With my current wizard, I'm using damage spells quite often, and I'm ceratinly not going to use any "win" combos. But when wizard is blasting, he uses one spell to leave smoking hole where enemies used to be. Warlock is throwing some rays and he doesn't do much. Not to mention that "demonic heritage" flavor is dumb.


The Warlock is free to play the game as a game instead of a planning session. To goof off, toss exotic powers around liberally and without provocation. "Waste" your magic as a signal flare, a sculpting tool, a "lockpick," casually take out a flock of seagulls just because you feel like it (or to cow the villagers), carve your initials in little holes blown into the cliffside, whatever --and that's just with eldritch (yechy name, though) blast. It is a shame that they perhaps can't keep up when things get mechanically serious, but hey, can't have everything.

Yeah, true. But I, personally, think that magic should be something powerful that even wizards are using only when they need it. Not something some warlock can toss around.

Quietus
2007-05-26, 09:25 AM
Not to mention that "demonic heritage" flavor is dumb.

I guess you aren't a fan of sorcerors either, eh?

Morty
2007-05-26, 09:47 AM
Well, it's hard to be fan of sorcerors, since they're wizard's weaker and less interesting cousins. But it's not a good example, since sorcerors don't have to draw power from some bloodline. They can just have their own raw talent, sculpted into spells. In fact I prefer the latter, since as I said, bloodline-based classes are stupid.

Quietus
2007-05-26, 10:01 AM
Well, it's hard to be fan of sorcerors, since they're wizard's weaker and less interesting cousins. But it's not a good example, since sorcerors don't have to draw power from some bloodline. They can just have their own raw talent, sculpted into spells. In fact I prefer the latter, since as I said, bloodline-based classes are stupid.

Personal opinion, I suppose; I can agree that crunch-wise they don't quite stand up to Wizards, but then, not much in this game does. "Wizards are better!" isn't a good way to compare things. However, some of us actually like the bloodline-power idea. In my homebrew world of Vethedar, I've set it up so that all Sorcerors DO have some strange heritage several generations removed, though it can be elemental, draconic, or otherworldly, as the player desires.

Artemician
2007-05-26, 10:12 AM
I don't know about you, but for me, there are an infinite amount of ways one could spin out Eldritch Blast. Eye beams, finger lasers, implosions, telekinesis, energy spears, shockwaves, lightning, gripping someone's shirt and blowing his guts out in a bloody swathe (ala Scar from FMA), invisible blades of force that chop limbs off (Diclonius-style), ghostly weapons that appear and pierce the target, rocks flying off the ground and whipping at the target, red flames that envelope the target, etc etc.

You're only limited by your imagination. Just as you don't say "I swing my sword at the troll", but rather "I take a quick step forward, duck low, and spiral upwards in a windmill of steel", you don't say "I blast the orc", but rather " I step forward and grasp the orc's neck in my iron grip. Red lightning and smoke billows from my fist, and and suddenly the orc's head erupts in a fountain of blood and smashed bone."

And as for the whole "Bloodline" thing, it can be safely ignored. It is possible to play "Mages" who cut apart locks with fine scorching rays (actually a Rogue) and "Wilders" who smash people with pure force of will (actually a Barbarian). Compared to that, a non-demonic Warlock is nothing.

Indon
2007-05-26, 10:24 AM
See, the problem is that most combats don't last very long, so the ability to do damage over a long period of time isn't useful to a party.

What about a low-damage party?

Warlock, Scout, Monk, and say a Ranger. They don't even need a healer, really (though the Ranger can use wands and such) because they'll almost never take damage.

Plus, rather than kick-in-the-door combat, they could use strategy and stuff, like using ambushes themselves, on enemies!

Aquillion
2007-05-26, 12:31 PM
Why use warlocks anyway? They're perfect example of screwed class design. Their fluff is idiotic, and they may be interesting mechanic-wise, but they're boring.How can you say that? "I'm an illusion that's actually over there! Now I'm a swarm of bats that covers half the battlefield! Now I'm enveloping you in darkness that is trying to eat you! Now I'm dispelling your spells so completely, they explode."

Most of that isn't any good, but I don't think anyone can argue that warlocks lack class.

Piccamo
2007-05-26, 12:50 PM
What about a low-damage party?

Warlock, Scout, Monk, and say a Ranger. They don't even need a healer, really (though the Ranger can use wands and such) because they'll almost never take damage.

Plus, rather than kick-in-the-door combat, they could use strategy and stuff, like using ambushes themselves, on enemies!

Players using tactics? That will never work. :smalltongue:

AtomicKitKat
2007-05-26, 02:22 PM
Shooting rays out of your eyes is lameness incarnate.

Cyclops: //Wrist:smallfrown:

:smallbiggrin:

Hyrael
2007-05-26, 03:01 PM
A major issue that is being forgotten here is the warlock's high charisma and UMD as a class skill, plus their abilities to take 20&craft items in a Artificier-like fashion. MIC's Warlock's scepter is cheap and strong, and the Hellfire Warlock Prestige Class from FCII:Tot9H is massively Wicked in Flavor and Power (3 lvls, easy to enter, fire resistance, take 1 Con Dmg=Bonus 2d6 untyped dmg.)

For my campaign, I homebrewed a "Fey" warlock for my Little brother. Loose Armor proficiency to gain a limitend number of 1 and 2/day spell like abilities as you level up (stuff like Jump, Faerie Fire, Barkskin, Minor Image, that sort of thing).

There's also the Hideous Blow, Half-Orc Warlock. Very Flavorfull, particularly in Eberron, and Cheesier than a Cheese Shop run By a Chain-weilding half-ogre and a Grey Elf Wizard. Deals the same damage as a Thug Rogue, but non-conditional sneak attack (you loose those m4d 5k1lz, but still have a handfull of invocations, so you can spider-man, fly, and your swearing breaks stuff).

Vuzzmop
2007-05-26, 07:20 PM
The demonic heritage thing is only an example of what a warlock can be. But it is the most popular of about a million choices for fluff. Heaps of fun is to be had inventing the way your character got his , fey heritage, gnome experimentations gone wrong, whatever.

Gaiwecoor
2007-05-26, 09:06 PM
Hrm... I seem to fall somewhat in the middle here. I don't think the Warlock is the most powerful class ever, but does that really matter? Sometimes the class is worth playing for the story it brings with it.

Now, with that said, I think some of the more fun paths to use involve multiclassing the Warlock, thereby adding the warlock abilities to some of the other "more favored" classes.

For example:

The Warlock / Spellthief (or Rogue, if you rather). This is someone that would work best as a scout, since (as some people mentioned earlier), the warlock abilities work more for their own benefit, not the party. Give the warlock/rogue the ability to cast Darkness and Devil's Sight at will? Walk up to a group of unfriendlies, blind them, and have fun sneak attacking them 'till they're gone. Once the party shows up, dismiss the darkness - the enemy combatants are already hurt (unless they can see in magical darkness.. which the majority can't).

The Warlock / Fighter. Concentrate on blast shapes and essences. The fighter levels give you a few more hit points, and a little better BAB. You can use your blast for "archery," or a hideous blow in close melee.

Several Prestige Classes work great with the class as well. A couple that leap to mind: Acolyte of the Skin, Mindbender, Enlightened Fist. I hear there are a few in Complete Mage designed specifically for warlock - I haven't really had the chance to check it out, yet.

Anyhow, I think those people that are looking for the next exploda-bomb class are right. They aren't going to find it in the Warlock. Those that are looking for a character that's fun to play with a good storyline are right as well. It gives a lot of flavor to the character. In my opinion, it's more of an augmenting class. Use it for what it's worth, augmenting your primary class (or using another class to augment it).

Aquillion
2007-05-27, 12:27 AM
What about a low-damage party?

Warlock, Scout, Monk, and say a Ranger. They don't even need a healer, really (though the Ranger can use wands and such) because they'll almost never take damage.

Plus, rather than kick-in-the-door combat, they could use strategy and stuff, like using ambushes themselves, on enemies!That would be an interesting campaign, but I think it would require cooperation from the DM to an extent... there are situations where it is very hard for the players to avoid damage, and situations where it's just tough to pull strategy. No matter how good you are, you do get ambushed occasionally (short of Foresight, which warlocks only get at level 20 at the cost of their one Dark evocation.)

Maybe if the party was some sort of special fantasy covert ops commando squad or something, though...

Skjaldbakka
2007-05-27, 12:51 AM
[QUOTE]There's also the Hideous Blow, Half-Orc Warlock. Very Flavorfull, particularly in Eberron, and Cheesier than a Cheese Shop run By a Chain-weilding half-ogre and a Grey Elf Wizard. Deals the same damage as a Thug Rogue, but non-conditional sneak attack (you loose those m4d 5k1lz, but still have a handfull of invocations, so you can spider-man, fly, and your swearing breaks stuff).[/ (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0017.html)QUOTE]

anybody else go there?

My two bits:

I have used warlocks twice as antagonists (arguably their weakest role, as their advantage is effectively negated (encounters don't tend to have depleted resources anyway)).

The first was an appropriate CR for the party, with four warlocks, each with a different flavor (two blast+status effect, 1 melee + hideous blow, one really long range guy to disrupt spellcasters). It was a hard fight.

The second was large numbers of warlock 2/ninja 2 in waves, against a level 10 party. They almost didn't make it to the boss fight alive.

Aquillion
2007-05-27, 03:23 PM
I have used warlocks twice as antagonists (arguably their weakest role, as their advantage is effectively negated (encounters don't tend to have depleted resources anyway)).

The first was an appropriate CR for the party, with four warlocks, each with a different flavor (two blast+status effect, 1 melee + hideous blow, one really long range guy to disrupt spellcasters). It was a hard fight.

The second was large numbers of warlock 2/ninja 2 in waves, against a level 10 party. They almost didn't make it to the boss fight alive.Actually, warlocks aren't so bad as NPC antagonists. The advantage there, like with monks, is that the players are forced to actually kill them... you're making the players fight their strong point, which rarely comes up in an actual game. Unless they have good casters or other tricks, it'd be easy for the players to screw around failing to hit the teleporting invisible flying warlocks while they get slowly pinged to death.

And against casters, smartly-played NPC warlocks can easily force them to waste more spells than they should have for a fight of that CR, putting them in trouble later on... PCs are much more vulnerable to being 'worn down' than NPCs.

Vuzzmop
2007-05-30, 04:39 AM
Does this count as thread necromancy?

(Evil laugh):xykon:

Eldmor
2007-05-30, 08:40 AM
Expanding on my earlier statement, here's what I would do to pump the warlock.

~[Heritage] Bonus Feat at Lv1,5,10,15, and 20.
~4+INT Skill Points
~Remove Deceive Item and Imbue Item
~Change Invocations Known to (2/3/3/4/5/5/6/7/7/8/9/9/10/11/11/12/13/13/14/15)
~Iterative Attacks w/ Eldritch Blast and Hideous Blow
~No Alignment Restriction (Although there are still some RP-boundaries set by your [Heritage])