Why would anyone get more than 2 levels of Warlock?

[Merudo]

I feel like I have a good gasp of most of the 5e classes.

However, there is one class I absolutely do not "get", and that's the Warlock.

As far as I can tell, the two main selling points of the Warlock are the Eldritch Blast, and the two spell slots that recharge on a short rest. I consider both highly problematic, for different reasons.

Eldritch Blast

The main problem with Eldritch Blast is that two levels in Warlock are enough to nearly full master the ability. Once Agonizing Blast is learned, a multiclassed Sorcerer or Bard will be about as effective as a pure Warlock in using Eldritch Blast. Hence Eldritch Blast by itself cannot be the reason to plain a "pure" Warlock.

The other problem with Eldritch Blast is that the damage it does is really not that amazing. Eldritch Blast damage is essentially equivalent to what an unoptimized Fighter does by attacking. However, in my experience, most players optimize their Fighter by learning powerful feats such as Great Weapon Mastery or Sharpshooter, or do fancy moves such as Grappling or Shoving, in which case the Fighters are far more effective at combat than the Warlock is. Eventually, most players will acquire some sort of magical weapon, which will widen the gap between the Warlock and the Fighter even more. Similarly, Dragonic Sorcerers who twin cast Firebolt do about the same damage as the Warlock, but retain a higher degree of flexibility in how they spend their spell slots and sorcery points.

Warlock Spellslots

The other problem I have with the Warlock is that spellslots management requires an almost tyrannical DM and/or an overly assertive Warlock to be balanced.

Balance in 5e is based on 6-8 encounters per days, with 2-3 short rests in between. Any deviation from this ideal balance will hurt the Warlock more than any other class.

Despite this explicit guidance, the reality is that many groups actually only fight one or two epic battles a day (the "5-minute adventuring day"). This makes the full spellcasters and the Paladin very powerful, as they can just burn through their entire spellslots every battle. The Warlock doesn't benefit from this, and will only contribute 2 spells per day.

At the other extreme is the long adventuring day with no short rests. During these days, the Warlock will be stuck casting only 2 spells spread over 6+ encounters, a dreadful prospect that's perhaps even worst than the 5 minute adventuring day. With the exception of the Monk and the Battlemaster, Martials aren't really impacted by such long days, while full spellcasters can remain useful by casting a powerful low level spell every encounter (Bless, Faerie Fire, Web, etc) while saving their higher level slots for when they are really needed. Meanwhile, the Warlock will be performing as a weak fighter for 3/4 of the battles.

Hence to be effective the Warlock needs a group that tightly follows the recommendation of 6-8 encounters per days, with 2-3 short rests in between. Yet, this guideline is extremely difficult to justify narratively. Spells such as Leomund's Tiny Hut make it easy for the party to rest almost anywhere; even without the spell, a party can often find an appropriate hiding place to sleep undisturbed. Hence, if the party has spellcasters that are running low on spellslots, most will advocate for a long rest instead of a short one.

To justify pushing forward after 6+ encounters in a day, there typically must be some sort of time limit to prevents frequent long rests. Such time limit is hard to impose on many plots. Most official modules do not have such built-in time limits; even Out of the Abyss, where the party is pursued by Drows for most of module, doesn't really have a strict timeline. Heck, for AL play, players are typically allowed to spend "downtime" at the start of every play session. It's also hard go justify why the party somehow has enough time for 3 short rests but not enough for 1 long one.

To preserve balance, the DM is thus burdening to work against most the player's inclinations by imposing an awkward day that no one but the Warlock really wants; unless the DM is both resourceful and strict, the "ideal" day promoted by 5e is just a pipe dream, with the Warlock as the worst loser.

[Tanarii]

If your DM isn't going to run a game that averages the expected adventuring day, then s/he should tell you that before you make characters. That's going to affect a lot more than just Warlocks spell slot recovery.

It goes both ways too. For example, if a DM is running the Gritty Realism rest variant, short rest and no rest characters have an advantage ... provided the encounters are spread out across 4 or more days before you can take a week to long rest.

Edit: also, it's not my experience that most groups run a 5 min work day. Of course, my play experience is mostly official play for 5e, so I can see where YMMV. Nor do I find that my players shoot for a standard day when I let them pick the pace. More often they push to about 1-1/3 adventuring days before a long rest, taking an extra short rest in the process.

[sophontteks]

Taking a short rest isn't very difficult. Many characters depend on it to keep at full fighting capacity throughout the day. Its realistic, given how exhausing fighting is, that the party would rest after a couple scraps.

In a normal campaign, the warlock would have no problems using at least one spell every fight. He can nova all his spells in one fight, and get full spellcasting ability just by taking a breather.

In good roleplay I think its good to remember that the characters aren't robots. Mechanics aside, they can only fight so long before they must rest, eat, bandage wounds, etc. All of that is a short rest, so they should be common.

Some campaigns I have seen make long rests prohibitive and give the advantage to the warlock. Sleeping for 8 hours is really risky and sometimes its a luxury the party can't afford, or it may be interrupted.

Eldritch blast is enhanced with invovations. Add cha is nice and its added for every hit. Pushing enemies back 10 feet is also nice, and its also per hit. Its battlefield control and dps in one. Yes the cantrip doesn't beat a. Fighter, but the fighter doesn't get full spell progression either.

[JoeJ]

You've already sold your soul, signed a fey contract, or in some other way paid whatever price was demanded. Why would you not want to get full value from the deal? If you only continue for two levels you'll only get the weakest otherworldly patron feature. You won't even get your pact boon until 3rd level. Hurling somebody through hell, getting them lost in the mists, or permanently charming them are all 14th level features.

Also, multiclassing is an optional rule that not all DMs use.

[JellyPooga]

Two 1st level spell slots per short rest is fine at level 1. It's a handy bonus at level 10, no more. Two 5th level spell slots per short rest, given ample short rests, makes Warlock a power house. Yes, your traditional full caster had a lot more spell slots, but he only has so many higher level spell slots. The Warlock only has high level spell slots (relative to their class level). So, for example, at 5th level, a Wizard might be able to cast Fear twice per long rest, but a Warlock (assuming appropriate short resting) can cast it 4, 6 or even 8 times or more in that same period. That's nothing to sniff at.

Yes, it's predicated on actually using short rests, but if you're not using short rests...why are you playing 5ed and not another edition? They're a key core mechanic of the game for more than just the Warlock.

[JakOfAllTirades]

...because there are 18 more levels of Warlock, that's why.

[Daithi]

I think you make some good points. A lot of the appeal of the warlock comes from Eldritch Blast and a couple invocations that work with it. Since Eldritch Blast scales with character level instead of warlock level there isn't a major reason to keep advancing in warlock beyond 2 levels.

I would say that Eldritch Blast gives some pretty descent damage. At 5th level you get 2 bolts, 3 at 11th, and 4 at 17th. Each delivers 1d10 damage, and with Agonizing Blast you add your CHA mod to each bolt. Then there is Hex, which allows you to add 1d6 damage to that. At 5th level you can also take Maddening Hex to add your CHA mod in damage as bonus action to your hexed target and any foe within 5' of him.

One thing that makes the warlock standout is that he is basically an archer with magic bolts that deliver more damage than arrows. With Eldritch Spear his range is 300'. (Spell Sniper feat extends to 600' and ignores most cover. A couple levels of Sorcerer and the Distance metamagic extends it to 1,200. And, Quickened Spell doubles the number of bolts you can fire with Eldritch Blast. Now you're doing some damage.)

But what happens when the bad guys get close enough to the warlock for melee attacks? Well, the Hexblade is actually pretty good. He's got smites, various invocations, the cantrips from SCAG, an extra attack at 5th, and he can make it real nasty when he turns out the lights and makes his opponents fight him in the dark while he can see with his Devil's Sight.

If you enjoy Game of Thrones, and thought that Arya Stark was the ****z then you'll love the warlock's Mask of Many Faces invocation.

If you don't want to play the Hexblade, that's cool. You could go the Pact of Chain route instead. Maybe an imp familiar is just your thing, and you can also use those spell slots to summon increasingly powerful demons and devils (although I think the wizard is still better at this).

Anyway, that's just a few ideas as to why people might want to go beyond 2nd level with warlock.

[Waazraath]

Because:
- on a lot of (my experience: most) tables getting short rests is the norm. As others have mentioned, if it's not the Warlock suffers, but lots of classes do (and that's not a problem with classes in the first place, that's playing the game diferently than intended / recomended).
- because it's one of the most fun, customizable classes, with spells, invocations, feats (optional) and the pact boon - you can make anything out of it; skill monkey, ranged damage, melee fighter, arcane support, AoE damage...
- because it has great class features from 3-20, and is in no way weaker than the average class.

Note: I'm not a fanboy, haven't played one yet myself (have played with them though). Want to in the future though, cause awesome.

[Galactkaktus]

Book of ancient secrets is really good.

[KillingTime]

Because not everyone looks at a class and then rejects it based on an arbitrary notion of optimized DPS

[JellyPooga]

Because not everyone looks at a class and then rejects it based on an arbitrary notion of optimized DPS

So much this.

Warlocks contribute decently in combat, better than some, worse than others, but it's out of combat that I think they really shine and a 2 level dip just doesn't cut it in that theatre. Many of their Invocations and Spells are focused on repeated use of utility; Mask of Many Faces, Beast Speech, Misty Visions, Invisibility, Suggestion, Gaseous Form, Contact Other Plane, then Detect Thoughts and Clairvoyance (GOO), Calm Emotions, Dominate Beast (Fey), Command, Speak with Dead (Undying)...if Sorcerers are the "Barbarian" of the spellcasting world and Bards are the "Rogues", Warlocks are kind of like the "Ranger"; no slouch in a scrap, but their niche is really when DPR doesn't count for squat.

[MephitBlue]

I understand where you are coming from on the Warlock class. On the surface, it can seem like a one trick pony in combat. Eldritch blast, rinse and repeat. You can go Blade, but you won't be as good at fighting as a pure fighter. If you end up playing in a dungeon crawl style of game playing a Warlock can get boring.

However, dig a bit deeper and you find a class that you can tailor to how ever you want to play. Pact of Tome along with Book of Ancient Secrets makes you the ultimate ritual caster in a game. Pact of the Blade gives you a super scout that can use the Aid action to dole out advantage to your party members during combat. Hexblade along with Pact of the Blade can make you one of the best gishes in the game.

Invocations add a lot of flavor and variety to your character, however you really need to stick with Warlock to level 7 for them to really add a lot of flavor to how how you play. Each Pact has at least two invocations that are must takes at early levels, so you don't really get to pick the invocations that make your Warlock unique until around level 7.

I won't lie that I love the Warlock class as a dip, and I'm currently playing a Rogue / Hexblade. However, I'm considering going full on Hexblade for my next character. I'd like to explore some more invocations and higher level abilities of the class.

[Grod_The_Giant]

You are correct in that the Warlock is more vulnerable to unexpected adventuring day lengths than...pretty much any other class, really. If they don't get their Short Rests, they'll be noticeably weaker. And that's certainly a flaw with the class, just as (in my opinion) it is with the edition as a whole. But... that is just with the class. If they get their expected rests (or a houserule to compensate) their spellcasting winds up roughly comparable to a normal caster (more high-level slots over the day, fewer low-level), with lots of unique abilities in the form of Invocations.

[Submortimer]

To justify pushing forward after 6+ encounters in a day, there typically must be some sort of time limit to prevents frequent long rests. Such time limit is hard to impose on many plots. Most official modules do not have such built-in time limits; even Out of the Abyss, where the party is pursued by Drows for most of module, doesn't really have a strict timeline. Heck, for AL play, players are typically allowed to spend "downtime" at the start of every play session. It's also hard go justify why the party somehow has enough time for 3 short rests but not enough for 1 long one.



There is a limit to how often you can take long rests, right in the PHB:



Long Rest

A long rest is a period of extended downtime, at least 8 hours long, during which a character sleeps or performs light activity: reading, talking, eating, or standing watch for no more than 2 hours. If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity—at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting Spells, or similar Adventuring activity—the characters must begin the rest again to gain any benefit from it.


At the end of a long rest, a character regains all lost hit points. The character also regains spent Hit Dice, up to a number of dice equal to half of the character’s total number of them (minimum of one die). For example, if a character has eight Hit Dice, he or she can regain four spent Hit Dice upon finishing a long rest.


A character can’t benefit from more than one long rest in a 24-hour period, and a character must have at least 1 hit point at the start of the rest to gain its benefits.

In a lot of cases, this doesn't totally matter, but in many modules you find yourself in dungeons or situations where you can't just wait around for a whole day to get another long rest.

[Metamorph]

Lets twist your Question:

Why should I just take 2 Levels of Warlock? Its abilities are cool and it has so much potential for side quests/ main quests. Alone the fact that your patron wants you to do things for them is interesting because you have to think of abstract problems or have to find a way to fullfill its will but not doing it the way it wants to because it would play against your party goals.

Furthermore the higher your level as a warlock is your patron gives you more power right? So how could that afect your charackter? One of my players for example wanted a moon based old one as a patron, so we said that his abilites are getting stronger by full moon and he nearly useless by new moon. He also will eventually go crazy for a short time after a full moon cause he cannot abandon the will of this patron. So it can happen that he would do anything that is demanded and this will getting worse the more levels he gets in this class.

I personally love the potential for storytelling and character development of this class:smallsmile:.

[Finieous]

If you don't want to play the Hexblade, that's cool. You could go the Pact of Chain route instead.

Or you could do both, since hexblade is a patron. ;)

[BlackRose]

I agree that that the difficulty in setting up ample encounters and short rests severely hamstrings the warlock. But thats not the warlocks fault, it's balanced against the intent. If you know the campaign will be heavier on long rests than short rests then certainly I would pick a different class too.

That said, more levels in warlock does give lots of options, even when working on a single short rest per day as I imagine most campaigns run with. Level 3 gives you access to the pacts. The tome is my personal favorite, as it is to many, for the sheer versatility it gives you as a caster. 3 cantrips and an invocation for rituals is just unreal value. As you gain more invocations you get a bevy of abilities. Permanent mage armor, massive range on Eldritch blast, pushing blast, see through magic darkness, permanent detect magic, smite etc. Some archetype abilities at level 6 can be impressive too like dark one's own luck.

At level 11 things really get going. While other casters are stuck with 2 fifth level spells the warlock is getting 6 over 1 short rest. Thats 4 people paralylzed per slot, 2 creatures banished, or 1 monster paralyzed. It could be 30 temp hp, and dealing 30 damager per swing that hits you. And if they don't deal 30 in one swing the damage only goes up. That means with just 1 short rest you're getting up to 120 temp hp and 120 damage (supposing melee).

Plus all of this stacks. You can be a 600 range pushing slowing sniper, and still have all of your resources ready when they reach you. You can be permanently disguised, acting as magical radar with an invisible familiar scanning for danger. You permanently enslave a creature to your bidding while concentrating on a 24 hour hex.

Ultimately though it's as others said. Not everyone is looking at the numbers game, some still enjoy the roleplay aspect even if they get a little cheated in combat.

[KeilFX]

Why go more than 2 levels into Warlock? Yeah, it can be a hard sell (especially if short/long rests are few and far between)... I feel that a Martial character that MCs into Blade pact Hexblade Warlock performs the best under these conditions.

As a Rogue 4 / Warlock 4 / Fighter 12, you can swing a Cursebringer around, dashing through the air every turn doing 3 attacks (that can crit on a 19) for 6d6+66 (CHA+PRO+11 (from Great Weapon Master + Improv. Pact weapon) is pretty sweet). That's 90 average damage a round, and isn't including Hex (+1d6 per hit), Battlemaster maneuver (+1d10), a Monster Hunter Sup. dice (+2d10 (yes, you can do the MH maneuver and the feat's maneuver together), or the Cursebringer's smite-ish ability (+4d8)... or Action surge (×2).

So yeah, a long adventuring day will burn out your spellslots (for Hex, Shield, Blur, etc)... But mixing the Hexblade with other martial classes can accent things really well. Also, I feel that Warlocks as a whole have a huge advantage over other classes when it comes to dynamic roleplaying.

[Sinon]

First things first – Level 3 is the pact boon.

1 – Eldritch Blast
Adding Agonizing Blast is fine, but with Lance of Lethargy, Grasp of Hadar, and Repelling Blast, you have a versatile tool for reshaping the battlefield.

With multiple blasts, you can impose different effects, breaking up formations or clustering foes together for an ally’s AoE.

If you want keep making your EB better than an arrow, you have to keep advancing as a warlock.

2 – Short Rests
Every table is different, and while I think that the guidelines should only be guidelines and that DMs need to be unpredictable (within reason) in order to be challenging and fun, every player wants to take a short rest. Yes, the warlock will like them more, but I’ve never seen a fighter who didn’t want to get his hp back up to max (or a cleric that wouldn’t rather he did so by resting rather than by using up a spell slot he could save for something fun like Spiritual Weapon).

And, no one loses anything by taking one.

Short rests are an hour – that’s a lunch break. That’s chillaxin’ while the rogue searches for clues and your familiar (intelligent and invisible because you took three levels in warlock) scouts the area ahead.

It is realistic downtime while the party tries to assess what just happened or plans what they need to do next.

As a DM, I will force things sometimes, make such rests impractical or interrupt them with another encounter; but only often enough to keep the players on their toes, and not as an arbitrary way of making things harder for certain type of class.


Why do I play a warlock past 2? They are fun, flavorful. They are easy enough for a beginner but still have enough options to keep them interesting to those with more experience.

[Fire Tarrasque]

Warlocks get some other powerful tools. The classic Eldritch Blast/Hex combo can be devastating to a powerful but relatively squishy enemy, and I as a DM have had many "Wait you can do that?" moments with Warlocks. There's also the Bladelock which is just FUN.

[NecroDancer]

Whenever people look at the warlock slots they forget about short rests. At first when I was a warlock I complained about my lack of spell slots but my DM pointed out that I wasn't taking many short rests even when I had the chance.

Then when I finally started to short rest (for example when the party is traveling in our wagon) I realized the strength of the warlock. At 9th level I'm casting 6 5th Level Spells per day because I get my slots back on a short rest.

[Arial Black]

I feel like I have a good gasp of most of the 5e classes.

However, there is one class I absolutely do not "get", and that's the Warlock.

As far as I can tell, the two main selling points of the Warlock are the Eldritch Blast, and the two spell slots that recharge on a short rest.

Yep, you've just shown that you absolutely do not 'get' the warlock.

If you are looking for a class which uses spell slots every round, look elsewhere.

In actual play, so far in 5e I've played three warlocks:-

* a pirate captain in a homebrew campaign, human Pal 2 (going for Vengeance oath)/War 3 (fiendish chainlock). Has eldritch blast but prefers his greatsword. Heavy Armour Mastery keeps his armour of agathys going longer. Much use of Mask of Many Faces, intimidation, hex

* a city watch investigator for Curse of Strahd, teifling (SCAG variant, +2 Dex instead of Cha, looks mainly human) Ftr 1/War (undying bladelock) X (got up to War 9 by the end, then played her up to Ftr 1/War 11). TWF, Dex-based, plenty of flavour and utility, no eldritch blast!

* my current PC for the Dragon Drop campaign started as a barbarian class (but is a civilised soldier with anger management issues, not some loincloth-wearing savage!), switched to warlock (fiendish bladepact) at 2nd, am now Bar 1/War 5, will get two more Bar levels next (to Bar 3/War 5) going for Zealot, then it's warlock all the way to Bar 3/War 17. No eldtrich blast! High Str/Dex/Con, medium Cha. In fact, now that I've got a Headband of Intellect, Cha is my secont lowest score! I pre-cast armour of agathys, cast a pre-asskicking fireball, then wade in Raging, hoping the baddies hit me and take 15 cold damage while my spell takes a couple of damage to the THP. I'm a combat monster! Can't wait for next level when I gain Reckless Attack, making sure I hit and they take the cold damage!

* my next PC will be a valkyrie, a Chooser of the Slain. aasimar Pal 6 (vengeance)/War 6 (bladepact hexblade). No eldritch blast! Will be PAM, HAM, scourge aasimar, divine favour, lots more spellcasting thanks to combination of long-rest spellcasting slots and short rest Pact Magic

The way to 'get' warlocks is that they are very flexible and you can build them in many ways: melee beast, ranged powerhouse, utility/stealth master, lots of ways. Your two slots should be treated as either buffs which go a long way or as encounter enders. Yet you still get to use them outside of combat for utility, because you regain your slots every time you go for an hour without doing anything strenuous.

Therefore, build your warlock with the idea that your action each and every combat round will not be to use a spell slot, but to use a cantrip/attack in melee/something else.

An ideal dip class, but an even better main class which dips other classes! With 10 warlock levels my armour of agathys deals 25 cold damage to every fool who hits me in melee (and melee is where I put myself, even provoking AoOs to get there), and my hex lasts 24 hours or until I Rage. After 10th I start getting a 6th/7th/8th/9th level spell 1/day.

No reason to go past 2nd level warlock? Yeah, you don't 'get' the warlock. :smallsmile:

[MrBig]

Here’s what you are missing about warlocks.

You said:

> As far as I can tell, the two main selling points of the Warlock are the Eldritch Blast, and the two spell slots that recharge on a short rest.

What you are missing are the other core class abilities: invocations and Pact Boons.

For most casting classes, their core ability is spellcasting. That’s 90% of what they do, so their spell lists, and spell slots, are the main class mechanic.

Sure, they get a few other class abilities as they level up, but those are supplementary.

So, 90% spellcasting, 10% class abilities.

The warlock, however, is unique.

It’s the only full-caster class that splits its power : 50% spell casting, 50% class abilities (invocations and Pact boons).

So, does the warlock spell casting look weaker than other casting classes?

Yes. And that’s by design, because the warlock gets those other abilities too.

Invocations are significantly more powerful than typical class abilities. Most of them are spell-like abilities, and many of them are at-will.

Mask of Many Faces : at-will disguise.
This lets you cast this spell *as often as you want*.

Having abilities that you can use *at-will* is a pretty powerful thing.

If you look at the warlock abilities, you’ll see that there are a bunch of abilities like that.

It’s a core design feature of the class.

You trade spellslots, which are a consumable resource with a variety of possible effects, for invocations and Pact boons, which are single-effect abilities, but generally not consumable and can be used at-will.

Also, another appeal of the warlock class is that it has some abilities that are flat-out not available to any other class.

Repelling Blast: 10’ pushback (per bream) on *any* creature, of any size. No save.

Devil’s Sight : see through *magical* darkness

Chain Pact : get a Familiar that is intelligent, has hands, can fly, and turn invisible. It’s a *massive* upgrade over a standard Familiar.

Etc

So, bottom line:
Normal spellcasters: 90% casting / 10% abilities
Warlocks : 50% casting / 50% abilities

[Citan]

I feel like I have a good gasp of most of the 5e classes.

However, there is one class I absolutely do not "get", and that's the Warlock.

As far as I can tell, the two main selling points of the Warlock are the Eldritch Blast, and the two spell slots that recharge on a short rest. I consider both highly problematic, for different reasons.

No need to look further, your problem is right here, in your assumptions.

Besides the fact that Warlock end with more slots per short rest (I'll put it aside because of the "few people get over 10" usual argument) you also get cool, flavory features between Patron features and Invocations (many of which end as free magic).
Warlock also sports a limited but interesting choice of spells, but that kind of argument goes both ways (few of them are exclusive from what I recall).

More importantly, it's probably the most "DIY" of all casters in terms of build, when most others just care about spell selection and otherwise impose features from just a starting choice.
And those few slots you get does entice to a bit more careful management than other casters.
(I'll put aside the "yeah you depend on short-rest" argument, which is completely meaningless and useless to me: if you don't plan on being in a collaborative party, don't play Warlock, or any other class for that matter: even on long-rest classes, shorts rests at least mean time to repair/prepare equipment, eat and drink, restore HP with hit dice...).

Most importantly, it's a class which gets power from an outerworld entity: some kind of people like it because it gives them a framework to RP within (I mean, easier background to build, of course anyone can set goals and backstory for character ;)), in addition to giving easier strings to pull for the DM.

[MilkmanDanimal]

Because invocations are a really cool to customize a character, and are one of my favorite things about 5e. While increasing Warlock levels may not directly increase combat utility as much as going into other classes, they give you a way to make a character very distinct. It's not about optimization, it's about how Warlock feels like the most unique of classes to me just because of all the ways you can tweak a character.

Also, the Pacts of the Chain and Tome in particular add all sorts of utility at 3rd level, so stopping at level 2 seems like you're missing so much there.

[MrStabby]

Well there are a few good things...

It may depend on what spells you want from your Warlock. If you are playing a non caster but really want level 2 spells (say for shadow blades) then Warlock 3 or 5 is good. Want a caster with 2 attacks? Take 5 levels, and so on.

I have seen effective Warlock rogues with 5 levels of Warlock for two attacks.

Maybe you want to be great at counterspell, and dark ones own luck is the answer.

You could be taking a caster for a little out of combat versatility for your PC, instead of wizard you take a tomelock 3.

Maybe you just want more of the good stuff- agonising blast and repelling blast are great but maybe you want devils sight as well?

[IStillDream]

Because not everyone looks at a class and then rejects it based on an arbitrary notion of optimized DPS

This.

Or, put more simply, "because they like the idea of playing a Warlock."

I didn't pick my character based on damage output, I picked him because I was excited about the idea of playing someone without str desperate to save his oppressed people, without the strength or dexterity to take up weapons, who wanted revenge now for the destruction of his community, and was willing to take a dangerous shortcut to give himself a chance to fight back.

There are story reasons why I'd multiclass if the opportunity presented itself–the god of his people has been silent (perhaps dead) for 500 years, and if it suddenly returned he might well become a paladin or a cleric. And of course, those classes would mesh well mechanically with a warlock, crunch and roleplay aren't an either-or, but for me at least there would need to be some kind of serious character reason to do it. Not the only way to play of course, but I think a perfectly valid one.

[Merudo]

I've read what you all have posted and some of you made great arguments. I would like to respond to 4 points that came repeatedly in the posts.

Short rests happen often in most campaign

Short rests may be frequent enough in some campaigns. However, even if days with plenty of short rests are frequent enough (say 50-60% of adventuring days), each day that goes with 0-1 short rests or less than 5 encounters is a day where the Warlock is significantly less useful than other spell casters. I would argue that in most campaigns, such days happen frequently. For example, many DMs will have 1-2 random encounters while traveling from town to town, to the detriment of the Warlock.

A Warlock is best for campaigns with frequent short rests

The main problem with this type of argument is that the player who is debating playing Warlock is effectively asked to predict how the whole campaign will unfold, at character creation.

Predict wrong, and you may end up with a nerfed Warlock.

Of course, the player should discuss with the DM before rolling a Warlock. However, because of the interactive nature of D&D, often not even the DM is able to predict where the storyline will go or how often the group will rest. And if the DM is running an official module for which he is inexperienced, he may overestimate the amount of short rests the players will take.

The number of short rests taken by the group is also dependent on other people's decisions, and those are outside the control of the Warlock. Maybe the Monk player will leave or die, and be replaced by a Cleric who can heal the group without a short rest. Maybe the Lore Bard will take Healing Spirit as a magical secret, and be able to fully heal the group for a level 2 slot. Maybe someone will craft a massive number of healing potions in downtime.

Playing Warlock means your abilities are highly dependent the decisions of both the DM and the rest of the players.

Book of ancient secrets is awesome

In my experience it's very rare for the party to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't on the Wizard spelllist. So Book of ancient secrets is essentially a slightly more useful Ritual Spellcaster feat. Neat, but not really that impactful.

Invocations are cool

I see the Invocations mentioned here as "cute" but not really impactful abilities.

Mask of Many Faces: Your voice doesn't change by the mask, so it's not like you can impersonate other people. Only the caster is disguised, so the rest of the party will have to stay behind. A disguise kit replicates most of the ability, unless you want to pass off as a non-humanoid, in which case you probably don't know their language anyway. Stealth, Pass without Trace & Invisibility are much better to not be detected.

Devil’s Sight: Most parties can't see in the dark so you are not helping them any. Instead of Darkness, something like Faerie Fire would be much more effective.

Eldritch Spear: How often does combat at this range really come up?

Misty Visions: Requires concentration, and the minor illusion cantrip replicates most of this.

Beast Speech: Replicates a highly situational level 1 ritual spell...

I guess I'm missing something here?

[sophontteks]

A warlock could sit in a wagon during the trip and short rest between every encounter between destinations without even slowing the party down. If no wagon is available, the party could just take a break after a couple encounters between destinations. They do have to eat, bandage wounds, get their bearings etc. Unless they are being chased, the warlock is the strongest caster to deal with random encounters during a trip. Wizards and sorcerers would want to save their spells while warlocks are all like "BURN THEM ALL!" and just needs to take a breather afterwards to be at full fighting capacity.

The invocations are largely giving the Warlock the cheap utility spells they lose compared to wizards. Some are incredibly strong, some are situational. Warlocks don't get low level spell slots, so having the ability to replicate them is actually really nice.

Book of tomes is a better version of one of the best feats in the game, as you said. And that's why its awesome. ritual caster plus free cantrips. How is this bad???

-Devils sight. Just don't be near your allies. Giving yourself advantage on all attacks, and being untargettable is HUGE. Even if they somehow pin you down in the darkness, its disadvantage.

-Many faces. Just don't take your allies with you. Rogues don't seem to struggle with this concept.

-beast speech- talk to animals is highly underestimated overall. When you talk about 'little birds chirping' you literally mean little birds are telling you where the enemy is. Great spy network.

-Eldritch spear- depends on you! Since you have an invisibile familiar to scout for you why not add spell sniper and eldritch spear and literally assassinate people from beyond visual range. In outdoor settings its straight up broken if you build for it. Each blast also pushes them back 10 feet. I mean a warlock can just rip up entire groups with this at no personal risk. Its crazy.

- misty visions replicates silent image, not minor illusion. that means it creates moving illusions rather then still ones. Big difference. Its a very strong level 1 spell at will. That's awesome and highly abusable. Just walk around with a body double at all times, for one.

[Composer99]

Why would anyone get more than two levels in warlock? Because they're awesome, that's why.

[mgshamster]

Why would anyone limit themselves to only two levels of warlock?

[Zeikin]

snip long post.

Hurl through Hell.

[JakOfAllTirades]

I guess I'm missing something here?

Basically, everything.

And willfully so, at that.

[Merudo]

Basically, everything.

And willfully so, at that.

Your two posts on this thread account to little more than trolling.

[Tanarii]

If that's the best you can do to defend the Warlock, either the class is bad or you know nothing of its abilities.
The class doesn't need defending. It stands in its own merits within the frame work of the defined expectations of the game.

What you're having problems with is far more general: the defined expectations of the game.

[Merudo]

The class doesn't need defending. It stands in its own merits within the frame work of the defined expectations of the game.

What you're having problems with is far more general: the defined expectations of the game.

One of your main arguments was that the Warlocks are balanced when using the "Gritty Realism rest variant".

That argument is not compelling. Clearly, if the Warlock requires such a dramatic variant to be balanced, it's a poor class indeed.

My main problem is not that the class is unbalanced, or the "defined expectations of the game", my main problem is that I do not find a convincing rationale as to why the class is good.

To me, it's telling that a lot of people (JoeJ, JakOfAllTirades, KillingTime, IStillDream, Composer99, mgshamster, etc) have essentially no argument to defend the Warlock beyond "I like it". Maybe the fluff associated with the class resonates with them, and that's great, but it's kind of sad that they seem unable to articulate a reason as to why the class is mechanically powerful.

[KorvinStarmast]

My main problem is not that the class is unbalanced, or the "defined expectations of the game", my main problem is that I do not find a convincing rationale as to why the class is good. Then play something else. There are 11 other classes. If you do just a little bit of searching here, you can read up on what Dyndrilliac did with 1 level in Sorcerer and 12 in Warlock. Go do your homework.

[Tanarii]

Dude, one of your main arguments was that the Warlocks are balanced when using the "Gritty Realism rest variant".It was that it's likely to be more powerful than expected when using that variant.

When using standard rest and an expected by the system adventuring day, it's balanced as intended.


My main problem is not that the class is unbalanced, or the "defined expectations of the game", my main problem is that I do not find a convincing rationale as to why the class is good.Its properly balanced and "good" if the system expected adventuring day happens, on average.

The vast majority of your OP was a rant against the expectations of the system, to whit 2 short rests per long rest.

[sophontteks]

Literally the only agrument against is that its completely unreasonable to rest for an hour, ever. If that is true in your campaign, do not play warlock. But that is so not the norm.

One player pointed out here that he thought the warlock was bad and the DM set him aside and told him that he is not taking short rests when his character is perfectly able to. And once he did the warlock was awesome. I think this is a really great point. If you arent short resting, who's fault is it? What is so hard about a short rest? Just...do it.

[Sinon]

<snip>Look, I can address your arguments, but I can't do it nicely because this is not a problem with the class. This is about nothing more than your preferences.

You asked, "Why would anyone get more than 2 levels of Warlock?"

You've been given lots of reasons. You want to counter that our reasons are "bad" reasons.

That you do so poorly, disingenuously, and in bad form is really irrelevant.

Because that's not what people who actually want to understand do. They listen. They try.

You don't like warlock. Station. I do.

Many have the same preferences as you. Many don't.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Your two posts on this thread account to little more than trolling.

If that's the best you can do to defend the Warlock, either the class is bad or you know nothing of its abilities.

I've played Warlocks since this edition came out. And I know a troll when I see one, just like everyone else on this thread. If there's anyone here who doesn't understand the Warlock class, it's yourself. And it's obvious you don't even want to try. I suspect you've never played one, nor been at a table with anyone who really knew what makes the Warlock class work. I gave you exactly the response your ****-posting deserved, and if others deigned to attempt to reason with you, be thankful for their patience. Some here apparently will "suffer fools gladly." I won't; you're a waste of time.

[pdegan2814]

Eldritch Blast - now with Xanathar's Guide out there are 5 Invocations that enhance Eldritch Blast(push, pull, slow, hit harder, hit further), so you have more options than can be had with just a 2-level Warlock dip

I've never been in a game where we had trouble fitting in short rests. Bard, Cleric, Druid, Fighter, Monk, Paladin, Warlock, and Wizard all have at least one class ability which requires a short rest to make use of. So odds are you've got multiple party members with a vested interest in finding time for Short Rests. Plus your healers will appreciate the chance for folks to do some healing without them having to burn any spell slots. If you're playing with a DM who's not allowing the party opportunities to get Short Rests, and didn't warn you ahead of time that this was the sort of campaign they would be running, then a conversation is in order.

But my biggest response to this is that not everyone looks at D&D as an equation to solve. Being effective in combat is good, certainly. But for many of us this game is about storytelling, and the Warlock has a TON of storytelling potential baked right in. Plus the Patron, Pact and Invocation options provide lots of ways to flavor the Warlock the way you want. If you have a DM who enjoys working personal story arcs into the campaign, the Warlock gives them lots to play with.

[MaxWilson]

The other problem I have with the Warlock is that spellslots management requires an almost tyrannical DM and/or an overly assertive Warlock to be balanced.

Balance in 5e is based on 6-8 encounters per days, with 2-3 short rests in between. Any deviation from this ideal balance will hurt the Warlock more than any other class.

Despite this explicit guidance, the reality is that many groups actually only fight one or two epic battles a day (the "5-minute adventuring day"). This makes the full spellcasters and the Paladin very powerful, as they can just burn through their entire spellslots every battle. The Warlock doesn't benefit from this, and will only contribute 2 spells per day.

All spellcasters are still limited by action economy and concentration economy as well as by spell slot economy. If you're having only one short fight in any given day (maybe because most of your game is about drama and mystery, with a climactic confrontation at the end which turns into a fight), two spells might be all any spellcaster casts in that fight. E.g. if a spellcaster casts Fear to shatter the bad guy's bodyguards, and Fireball to mop up the remnants, and Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Blast on the bad guy... who cares whether he has seven spell slots remaining after that or zero?

Now, he may have done some work before this fight, maybe Speak With Dead to gather clues from a corpse, or using his familiar and Voice of the Chain Master to follow suspects, or Suggestion or Invisibility in the course of infiltrating a facility, but since he's a warlock he may not have spent spell slots at all to do this (e.g. at-will invocations) or he may have regenerated the spell slots used just by having lunch for an hour.

Anyway, warlocks are going to struggle most if you have a pure combat-centric game with, say, 30 rounds of combat, all inside of an hour. (This could be one big fight or ten smaller fights; it doesn't matter.) So maybe don't run a pure combat-centric game without random encounters?

===============================================


You've already sold your soul, signed a fey contract, or in some other way paid whatever price was demanded. Why would you not want to get full value from the deal? If you only continue for two levels you'll only get the weakest otherworldly patron feature. You won't even get your pact boon until 3rd level. Hurling somebody through hell, getting them lost in the mists, or permanently charming them are all 14th level features.

Also, multiclassing is an optional rule that not all DMs use.

I'd kind of argue that your strongest incentive from a RP angle is to not go to level 3, because that's the point at which your patron gains an actual hold on you: a Pact Boon for "faithful service" which could presumably be taken away. Once you hit level 3 you're sort of committed, and there's a two-way relationship, but before that there's no guarantee your patron even knows you exist (e.g GOO). You may very well just be operating on stolen knowledge.

Depends very much on the details of your pact though, and since there's really no info on pacts in RAW that means it depends on your own imagination and taste and your DM's house rules.

===============================================


Why would anyone limit themselves to only two levels of warlock?

Not wanting to be beholden to a patron. I can think of three PCs at my table who have all stopped at warlock 2 for exactly this reason.

[Mordaedil]

Maybe I've been misunderstanding something, but I've been going into 5th edition with the idea that "short rest" was basically building on 4th editions encounter powers, where after basically any fight where you aren't constantly straining yourself, you can count as a short rest and gain the benefits of that, from spending hit dice to recovering your spells. And if you are having 1-2 encounters per day, yeah, you are going to have a short rest in between them. It doesn't mean you need to have a siesta in the wilderness where you crack open rations and eat lunch.

This isn't Darkest Dungeons or anything.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Why would anyone limit themselves to only two levels of warlock?

Some multi-class characters take a 2-level dip into Warlock and there's nothing wrong with that.

To claim that the Warlock class has no use beyond the 2-level dip is, in a word, trolling.

[Citan]

I've read what you all have posted and some of you made great arguments. I would like to respond to 4 points that came repeatedly in the posts.

Short rests happen often in most campaign

Short rests may be frequent enough in some campaigns. However, even if days with plenty of short rests are frequent enough (say 50-60% of adventuring days), each day that goes with 0-1 short rests or less than 5 encounters is a day where the Warlock is significantly less useful than other spell casters. I would argue that in most campaigns, such days happen frequently. For example, many DMs will have 1-2 random encounters while traveling from town to town, to the detriment of the Warlock.

A Warlock is best for campaigns with frequent short rests

The main problem with this type of argument is that the player who is debating playing Warlock is effectively asked to predict how the whole campaign will unfold, at character creation.

Predict wrong, and you may end up with a nerfed Warlock.

Of course, the player should discuss with the DM before rolling a Warlock. However, because of the interactive nature of D&D, often not even the DM is able to predict where the storyline will go or how often the group will rest. And if the DM is running an official module for which he is inexperienced, he may overestimate the amount of short rests the players will take.

The number of short rests taken by the group is also dependent on other people's decisions, and those are outside the control of the Warlock. Maybe the Monk player will leave or die, and be replaced by a Cleric who can heal the group without a short rest. Maybe the Lore Bard will take Healing Spirit as a magical secret, and be able to fully heal the group for a level 2 slot. Maybe someone will craft a massive number of healing potions in downtime.

Playing Warlock means your abilities are highly dependent the decisions of both the DM and the rest of the players.
Also, all you have been saying is mainly relating to fighting days.
When party spends a whole day just exploring / socializing in a crowd of any kind, Warlocks plain rock: with ample occasions to take short rests while doing something actually meaningful (typical example: grabbing a beer while chatting with locals in a tavern) you can use spells like Comprehend Languages or Suggestion many times a day (of course there is the problem of people understanding you are using magic, which is another problem of its own. Which is why Sorcerer multiclass is so awesome. ;=)).

Book of ancient secrets is awesome

In my experience it's very rare for the party to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't on the Wizard spelllist. So Book of ancient secrets is essentially a slightly more useful Ritual Spellcaster feat. Neat, but not really that impactful.

Invocations are cool

I see the Invocations mentioned here as "cute" but not really impactful abilities.

Mask of Many Faces: Your voice doesn't change by the mask, so it's not like you can impersonate other people. Only the caster is disguised, so the rest of the party will have to stay behind. A disguise kit replicates most of the ability, unless you want to pass off as a non-humanoid, in which case you probably don't know their language anyway. Stealth, Pass without Trace & Invisibility are much better to not be detected.

Devil’s Sight: Most parties can't see in the dark so you are not helping them any. Instead of Darkness, something like Faerie Fire would be much more effective.

Eldritch Spear: How often does combat at this range really come up?

Misty Visions: Requires concentration, and the minor illusion cantrip replicates most of this.

Beast Speech: Replicates a highly situational level 1 ritual spell...

I guess I'm missing something here?
Well, I'd say everything you say just reflects the kind of games you are playing with your friends. :)

To rebound on your points.

1. "Each day that goes with 0-1 short rests or less than 5 encounters is a day where the Warlock is significantly less useful than other spell casters."
This assertion's truthness potential wildly varies.
Before level 3, there is really no significant difference in termes of slots. In fact, Warlock probably ends as more useful than other casters thanks to the Invocations, and the fact his iconic spells last a good chunk of time if your concentration isn't broken.

Between level 3 and 10, it all depends on your choices: if you go Bladelock? Well, you're as potent as any martial so yeah, you won't have that many tricks a long-rest caster has, but it's not like you're useless either.
You went Chain? Your familiar is one of the most powerful ways to scout ahead because, I mean, you obviously picked the one that can make invisible right? :)
You went Tome instead? Well, you could be the one carrying the party (more on that later).
You picked free Jump, Detect Magic or Levitate? It means you don't need Wizard spending slots on this, and your party works well even without a Rogue or Monk.

2. "the player who is debating playing Warlock is effectively asked to predict how the whole campaign will unfold, at character creation.
Predict wrong, and you may end up with a nerfed Warlock."
I don't see why. I don't understand this argument at all actually.
It's up to each people's responsability to make his own choices.
What is "optimization" is different from one to another people. For me, it's having specialties while being overall efficient.
There are many ways for a party to secure the benefits of a short rest. So it's up to Warlock player to talk with party and see how much they like short rests and are ready to invest into it.
As you rightly said, nobody, even DM, can really assert accurately how many short rests party can have "just" from the way the story unfolds. So it's party's responsibility to make them happen, and "yours" to decide how much to rely on them.
As a consequence, confer previous point: you can be perfectly functional even with little short rests. It sure asks for a bit more thinking at build, but that holds true of other classes.

3. "In my experience it's very rare for the party to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't on the Wizard spelllist."
I'm sorry to be blunt, this argument is sort of nonsense.
That you say this makes me think you probably always play in parties that have at least one Wizard (and that you never were in a situation where such Wizard is unavailable or uninterested in rituals).
Which would not necessarily invalidate the interest of the Invocation though: not only could Warlock and Wizard share with each others (from Wizard point of view, it's like having hired someone else to look for scrolls, so he can focus on learning other spells), it's also a good safety net to have two people knowing the same rituals (Wizard is occupied concentrating on a long-cast spell? Warlock will take care of the ritual, and reverse).
Even if you have a Druid or Cleric in party, tha above holds true: sure, there is not the opportuniy cost of learning spells, but there is the opportunity cost of having them prepared. At low level you still don't have that many "slots" available for all the nice spells you want to use, so "sacrificing" one or two of them just in case one ritual could be useful is annoying. Warlock has no such problem.
And you should note that Druid and Cleric have a few exclusive rituals that are also very interesting. Ritual Caster forces you to choose, Invocation does not.
And whenever there is no such caster in party, Warlock is the one that carries the party throughout, as long as DM gives him reasonable chances to learn scrolls. Of course otherwise he's screwed (as would be any Wizard for that matter, I mean, unless you play high-level campaign, the main reason of going Wizard is the expectation of learning additional spells).

4. "I see the Invocations mentioned here as "cute" but not really impactful abilities."
I guess it's mostly a YMMV situation here.
Especially the Speak with Animals: "highly situational"? Absolutely not in my games: all my players like animals, one of them is highly fond of it, so he got highly skilled in interacting with its.
In games that I experienced as a player, in D&d or other game systems, I always use animals for many things. Of course that DM was much stricter that I am with my players, so interacting was actually funnily awkward (not because you speak the language, means you can have an actual conversation ;=)) but even then...
Getting information on the best restaurant (cats/dogs picking the best trashes or stealing food from kitchens), seeing if one particular person was seen (of course you need non-humain information such as a particular odor or the color of clothes, or maybe noises the target makes when moving), hiring them as innocent-looking sentinels for a few cents of food worth, etc...
Of course it depends on how much DM will allow or provide, but I don't see any reason to not at least allow a player to ask animals general information.
Especially since you can easily justify how precise or how vague information an animal can provide, because of its limited intelligence (these sessions make people realize how much context we rely on in human conversations ^^).

EDIT:
In fact, I personally would revert your question and instead ask: "why would anyone get less than 3 levels of Warlock?" XD
Because getting the third level brings you so many goodies: short-rest slots become 2nd level, you can learn 2 spells among a great selection of second level (Suggestion, Misty Step, Invisibility, Mirror Image, Shadow Blade, Darkness) and you get access to new Invocations that go with your pact choice...
But I know why, it's obviously because multiclassing always comes at a steep cost, at just a 3rd level may result in condemning great 18th level features or just dealying higher level features by too much of an amount. ^^

[Merudo]

If there's anyone here who doesn't understand the Warlock class, it's yourself. I suspect you've never played one, nor been at a table with anyone who really knew what makes the Warlock class work.

I have indeed never played a Warlock, as I view it as an inferior choice (I've never played Beastmaster for the same reason).

Each time a Warlock was in our party, they ended up not pulling their weight. Now it may have been because they didn't know how to play the Warlock right, but it wasn't obvious what, exactly, they were doing wrong.

For example, in our last campaign, every character was far more useful than the Warlock:

- The GWM Fighter with a 1 level Rogue dip could do much better damage than the Warlock, and had Expertise in Athletics. Many fights were won because the Fighter successfully grappled the BBEG.

- The GWM Paladin could do damage similar to the Fighter without expending resources, could Nova like crazy, and boosted our saves by a lot, in addition to the occasional spell.

- The Clerics would Bless the martials to improve their DPS, did amazing battlefield control/damage with Spirit Guardians, could improve our skills with Guidance, saved people from dying with Healing Word & Sanctuary, occasionally repealed hordes of undead, could predict the future with Divination spells, and could tank even better than the two martials. The Tempest Cleric would do significant AoE damage with maximized Shatter & Destruction Wave, while the Life cleric would totally save our asses when our team was low on HP.

- The Lore Bard was amazing at all things social, would regularly debuff enemies with Cutting Words & Faerie Fire, could also save lives with Healing Word, would do huge damage with Animate Objects, would incapacitate hordes of enemies with Hypnotic Pattern, could Counterspell better than anyone, and could heal even better than the Life Cleric with Healing Spirit.

- The Divination Wizard was the king of versatility, with a spell ready for any situation. They would also use their Portent effect to devastating effects, and would let us long rest nearly anywhere with the Tiny Hut spell. They were supported by a small army of skeletons through the Animate Undead spell. Their owl familiar could both scout & provide advantage to the martials without getting hit. Wall of Force trivialized many encounters.

Meanwhile, the Warlock... typically cast Eldritch Blast for okay damage. They basically acted similar to the GWM Fighter, except they couldn't do nearly as much damage, couldn't tank, and couldn't grapple...

In combat, their Quasit familiar were also less useful than the Wizard's because the Quasit couldn't fly to safety after performing the Help action. Out of combat, the Owl familiar could scout as well as the Quasit outdoor, and both couldn't scout inside (every other time the Quasit would open a door he would get attacked by the creatures waiting behind it).

I first I thought the Warlock was not doing well because they picked poor spells. However, after I took a look at their spell list I had to conclude the Warlock just had a mediocre spell list. They only had a handful of spells of note not available to the Clerics, Lore Bard, or Wizard. Their "unique" spells & abilities were typically only buffs to themselves (Shadow of Moil, Darkness + Devil's Sight, Armor of Agathys, etc) - the Warlock was almost devoid of "force multiplier" spells & abilities, which are so valuable in 5e. Often, their best actions was to cast Fear or Hypnotic Pattern - level 3 spells that the Lore Bard & Wizard could have cast just as well.

Overall, the Warlock didn't contribute anything unique that the other spellcasters couldn't do, and had absolutely no synergy with the rest of the group. Awful.

[MrStabby]

I have indeed never played a Warlock, as I view it as an inferior choice (I've never played Beastmaster for the same reason).

Each time a Warlock was in our party, they ended up not pulling their weight. Now it may have been because they didn't know how to play the Warlock right, but it wasn't obvious what, exactly, they were doing wrong.

For example, in our last campaign, every character was far more useful than the Warlock:

- The GWM Fighter with a 1 level Rogue dip could do much better damage than the Warlock, and had Expertise in Athletics. Many fights were won because the Fighter successfully grappled the BBEG.

- The GWM Paladin could do damage similar to the Fighter without expending resources, could Nova like crazy, and boosted our saves by a lot, in addition to the occasional spell.

- The Clerics would Bless the martials to improve their DPS, did amazing battlefield control/damage with Spirit Guardians, could improve our skills with Guidance, saved people from dying with Healing Word & Sanctuary, occasionally repealed hordes of undead, could predict the future with Divination spells, and could tank even better than the two martials. The Tempest Cleric would do significant AoE damage with maximized Shatter & Destruction Wave, while the Life cleric would totally save our asses when our team was low on HP.

- The Lore Bard was amazing at all things social, would regularly debuff enemies with Cutting Words & Faerie Fire, could also save lives with Healing Word, would do huge damage with Animate Objects, would incapacitate hordes of enemies with Hypnotic Pattern, could Counterspell better than anyone, and could heal even better than the Life Cleric with Healing Spirit.

- The Divination Wizard was the king of versatility, with a spell ready for any situation. They would also use their Portent effect to devastating effects, and would let us long rest nearly anywhere with the Tiny Hut spell. They were supported by a small army of skeletons through the Animate Undead spell. Their owl familiar could both scout & provide advantage to the martials without getting hit. Wall of Force trivialized many encounters.

Meanwhile, the Warlock... typically cast Eldritch Blast for okay damage. They basically acted similar to the GWM Fighter, except they couldn't do nearly as much damage, couldn't tank, and couldn't grapple...

In combat, their Quasit familiar were also less useful than the Wizard's because the Quasit couldn't fly to safety after performing the Help action. Out of combat, the Owl familiar could scout as well as the Quasit outdoor, and both couldn't scout inside (every other time the Quasit would open a door he would get attacked by the creatures waiting behind it).

I first I thought the Warlock was not doing well because they picked poor spells. However, after I took a look at their spell list I had to conclude the Warlock just had a mediocre spell list. They only had a handful of spells of note not available to the Clerics, Lore Bard, or Wizard. Their "unique" spells & abilities were typically only buffs to themselves (Shadow of Moil, Darkness + Devil's Sight, Armor of Agathys, etc) - the Warlock was almost devoid of "force multiplier" spells & abilities, which are so valuable in 5e. Often, their best actions was to cast Fear or Hypnotic Pattern - level 3 spells that the Lore Bard & Wizard could have cast just as well.

Overall, the Warlock didn't contribute anything unique that the other spellcasters couldn't do, and had absolutely no synergy with the rest of the group. Awful.

I do think Warlocks are a slightly weaker class, certainly more limited than other casters but I think your views are too extreme.

Firstly you seem to judge them by what they bring that other classes don't. If you judge warlock by the spells it has in its list that the cleric doesn't then you should also judge the cleric by the spells they have that the warlock doesn't.

Secondly there is a glaring gap in the party without the warlock - ranged damage. Eldritch blast is solid damage over a very long range and the party has no archers to speak of. Sure it doesnt look good if your DM throws every encounter at you in a 30ft by 30ft room - but then a GWM paladin looks equally bad if every encounter takes place outside with clear visibility against flying enemies.

One thing that some people forget to look at is that it isn't just damage per round, but how that damage is dealt and how many rounds it is dealt over.

Ranged attacks don't need you to close with the enemy. Even in relatively close confinement a warlock can be shooting their spells even as a fighter takes the dash action instead. An extra round of attacking because you have a good range is like having action surge.

Ranged attacks let you pick your target better. Whilst a barbarian might be doing loads of damage to a target, if they can only attack what is in their face they might not be hitting the most high priority target. Whilst the melee combatants can be engaging the enemy meat-shields the warlock can be picking off casters and breaking their concentration and actually have more effect on the fight despite doing less damage.

The warlock spell list is... OK. You really do need to include the domain spells as well. Frankly I can't really complain about any list that has banish on it - not least as it scales really well. One question is what roles you need the warlock to cover. Damage is covered naturally by eldritch blast but their other spells can fill in the gaps. This means that they are not going to be "best" at any one thing but they can be second best at a lot. When the party needs damage they will outshine the bard and the wizard, when control spells are needed they will outshine the fighter and the paladin.

Warlocks do suffer from their casting method though, few spells at max level doesn't really give a lot of meaningful choice. I think one of the reasons you are so down on the warlock is that this game naturally compares them to really powerful options. Great weapon Mastery paladins for damage? Very powerful class, very powerful choice. And for versatile casting you compare them to a divination wizard - powerful class and probably the most powerful school and compare to a Lore Bard, an other popular candidate for most powerful class.

I agree that warlocks are on the lower 50% of classes when it comes to power, but half the classes have to meet that description and warlock isn't that far below average. I can support you not playing a warlock - I have played a couple and it is so much harder to make them mechanically fun than other classes, but I think the "Fun" argument is stronger than the "Power" argument.

[sophontteks]

That warlock definately just wasn't good. He couldn't find a good use for an invisible beefed up familiar. Thats pretty sad.

Warlocks have a great spelllist, they pull more spells from their patron so the list is deceiving. And they always cast all their spells at max level. Look at the spells from the fiend patron for example.

I wrote a big list that showed how literally everything you griped about was strong. Broken strong even.

You said spear was bad. I showed that you could build a warlock around it that can assassinate anyone, even groups of enemies, outside of visual range. All they need is spell sniper and the warlock familiar. And the thing is spear IS one of the weaker abilities, yet doing this practicly breaks the game. A DM would lose his mind over that.

[Willie the Duck]

Well, this thread is going about as well as one might expect. I will engage with it in good faith though. Let's see,


As far as I can tell, the two main selling points of the Warlock are the Eldritch Blast, and the two spell slots that recharge on a short rest. I consider both highly problematic, for different reasons.

Some people have called this into question. I am going to agree that these would be "selling points." If you were in fact being sold classes on a showroom floor like a car dealership, these would be the points of interest the salesman would bring forth. If that is where the discussion ended, however, it would be the same as someone walking away with a jeep when what they wanted was a pickup truck (in which case it is no wonder you are disappointed).

There are other nuances to the class that genuinely have a huge impact on gameplay. Some of which you have addressed and some not. We'll got to them. However, even without them, you get eldritch blast (as good or bad as you think it is, it is better than other spellcaster's at-will effects), and spells (as good or bad as you think the recharge mechanism is), in one package. At 5th level, a warlock has an at-will ranged attack that does 1D<something decent>+<stat>, getting two attacks a round, and has 3rd level spells. To do that otherwise, you need to go to something like paladin9, wizard5/fighter5, or things like valor bard (which is also one of those classes which gets 'is this really any good'-type threads).


Despite this explicit guidance, the reality is that many groups actually only fight one or two epic battles a day (the "5-minute adventuring day"). This makes the full spellcasters and the Paladin very powerful, as they can just burn through their entire spellslots every battle. The Warlock doesn't benefit from this, and will only contribute 2 spells per day.
At the other extreme is the long adventuring day with no short rests.

Yes, those are two extremes. Between those two extremes is the vast gulf where most games are probably played. Outside of theory-space, or the ubiquitous one-encounter-a-day-while-travelling you mention later, most adventuring that I have seen has vaguely resembled 'dungeon, with lots and lots of encounters, where figuring out how to accomplish a long rest is problematic (and has consequences such as some of the enemies leaving with their treasure, etc.), but where the party can take as many short rests as they can find safe-spots/bolt-holes in which to rest for an hour. That is where the Warlock, Battle Master, Moon Druid, and other short-rest-dependent classes shine.

But while we are here, let's talk about the 'one-encounter-a-day-while-travelling.' This is all too common a thing for a DM to throw at the party. I understand why it happens. It is the DM breaking the 'rules-expected' pattern of rests and part of me wants to hang the responsibility on the DM for making an alteration that hamstrings the SR-classes (at the very least use gritty recharge rules while travelling). But it is so common and so intuitive that the other part of me thinks the designers should have expected it and put in a baked-in way of addressing it (of course they did, the gritty recharge rules).

But-but... I'm still not convinced that this really is all that harsh on the warlock, compared to, say, a wizard. Using 5th level again as an example (and fire-evoker vs. fiend pact for simplicity), here is what that one encounter might look like--Wizard: fireball (other fireball kept in reserve because every DM will throw a second encounter at the party while they are sleeping if the spellcasters keep completely depleting themselves), scorching ray, scorching ray (last one in reserve), firebolt or burning hands, firebolt or burning hands; Warlock: fireball, fireball (since, y'know, SR-recharge), eldritch blast, eldritch blast, eldritch blast. Damage output fairly similar, and in that one encounter, the wizard doesn't actually get enough rounds to actually let their deeper reserve make that much difference. If your one-encounter-while travelling spell depletions differ from this, let us know and we can pour over the nuances, but this has been my experience.


To preserve balance, the DM is thus burdening to work against most the player's inclinations by imposing an awkward day that no one but the Warlock really wants; unless the DM is both resourceful and strict, the "ideal" day promoted by 5e is just a pipe dream, with the Warlock as the worst loser.

I think this is where you lose the most people, and also the most fundamental problem. Look, in all editions of D&D (with 4e perhaps suffering the least, since each class has similar structure), if the DM and players and game world collude to allow it, there is nothing mechanically stopping the party from going and finding a safe spot to rest and recharge. That will always most benefit those classes whose schtick is 'has a number of extremely powerful effects balanced by being able to use them very few times per day (and is perhaps relatively useless otherwise)' -- wizards and sorcerers being perhaps the best examples. However, I don't think very many people here except you seem to think that the narrative, group-goal, and other-classes'-mechanics which coordinate to keep the 1-encounter adventuring day from being a thing to be some kind of ridiculous burden, so much as a natural and emergent part of gameplay. Front-liners get hurt and want to short rest (and bolster themselves with the benefits of Healer and Inspiring Leader feats). People want to play Battle Masters and Moon Druids (and warlocks, since they are fun). Parties who use Leodmund's Hut to rest left and right with no strategic thinking wake up to find themselves surrounded by enemies (and reasonably so). The only pipe dream part of the 5e "ideal" day is that it is even remotely consistent, and that's the real problem (but also one that keeps several wizard spells uncast every day, in case they are needed for later).




Book of ancient secrets is awesome

In my experience it's very rare for the party to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't on the Wizard spelllist. So Book of ancient secrets is essentially a slightly more useful Ritual Spellcaster feat. Neat, but not really that impactful.

I will use this example as a general point about all the parts of the warlock that do not fall into the Eldritch Blast/Spells per SR 'selling points' we discussed earlier. Warlocks have a number of these abilities, each of which look... decent, but hardly worth writing home about. That's true, if you choose not to engage them. Look at Book of Ancient Secrets-- that's all the Ritual Spellcaster feats in one. If you have that ability, I bet you will find (or seek out, or selectively negotiate from the treasure pile) enough non-wizard scrolls (or, heaven forfend, the party doesn't need a wizard with those ritual spells since they have you) to justify the investment in warlock levels over #2. Regardless, you have the adaptability to plan (and the party to plan) around having this ability.

In the same way, all those other invocations and features you derided as 'cute' -- you get them, or at least a grip of them (enough that if they all perfectly synergized intuitively, it would be overpowered). A character who can change their appearance at will and has access to persuasion and deception skills (and fight pretty well even when unarmed)? Niche but useful. A more combat-centric character who can cast darkness, see through said darkness, and push people about the battlefield with repelling blasts? So useful it is considered cheesy to line up. A character who can act as a SS-less archer, cast spells, cast any ritual spell, and have additional abilities? Even if it doesn't have the same straight power as a paladin for instance, it takes a bunch of roles like that and takes care of them so that no one else has to.



Some multi-class characters take a 2-level dip into Warlock and there's nothing wrong with that.
To claim that the Warlock class has no use beyond the 2-level dip is, in a word, trolling.

Okay, OP has never done themselves any favors. Every thread they try to cast themselves as being beset by trolls, when in fact people have given them entirely too many second chances to show that they are arguing in good faith. However, within this thread, the opinion that a warlock class seems optimal as a 2-level dip has been structured in a 'it feels like this to me, where am I wrong?' frame. And that part of their argument is the part with the most reasonability. It is just reversed. A 2-level warlock dip is a fairly reasonable (although hardly cost-free) dip or impromptu prestige-class-analogue for other (usually cha-based) classes. There is no doubt that a Lore Bard who needs something to do when not casting support spells (other than the 15th single-arrow/round or vicious mockery-which-doesn't-hold-up-once-enemies-get-multiattack) might benefit from 2 levels of warlock (although delaying their normal advancement is not trivial).

[Unoriginal]

I'd kind of argue that your strongest incentive from a RP angle is to not go to level 3, because that's the point at which your patron gains an actual hold on you: a Pact Boon for "faithful service" which could presumably be taken away. Once you hit level 3 you're sort of committed, and there's a two-way relationship, but before that there's no guarantee your patron even knows you exist (e.g GOO). You may very well just be operating on stolen knowledge.

Depends very much on the details of your pact though, and since there's really no info on pacts in RAW that means it depends on your own imagination and taste and your DM's house rules.

===============================================



Not wanting to be beholden to a patron.

As said by the game designers, Warlocks are not beholden to their Patron, normaly, and a Patron *cannot* take the power back once given.

The "service" mentioned happens before the first Warlock level, and once it's payed Patron and Warlock never have to contact each other again. The power is then the Warlock's, and if the Patron literally ceased to exist it wouldn't change anything for the Warlock.

Now a Patron could demand more, technically, but at this point it's the Warlock paying more than needed.

[Merudo]

Thank you Citan for raising the follow points:



Before level 3, there is really no significant difference in termes of slots. In fact, Warlock probably ends as more useful than other casters thanks to the Invocations, and the fact his iconic spells last a good chunk of time if your concentration isn't broken.


I do believe that the Warlock is quite powerful for levels 1-4.



Between level 3 and 10, it all depends on your choices: if you go Bladelock? Well, you're as potent as any martial so yeah, you won't have that many tricks a long-rest caster has, but it's not like you're useless either.


I admit I do not have much experience with the pack of the Blade, so I will withhold my judgement for now.



You went Chain? Your familiar is one of the most powerful ways to scout ahead because, I mean, you obviously picked the one that can make invisible right? :)


In my experience the Warlock's familiar is roughly as good a scout as the Wizard's familiar or the Druid in Wild Shape. Beside, there is plenty of powerful ways to scout (Rogue with Stealth, Invisibility, Pass without Trace, Arcane Eye, Divination magic, etc). The Warlock is not really shining any more than the other spellcasters here.



You picked free Jump, Detect Magic or Levitate? It means you don't need Wizard spending slots on this, and your party works well even without a Rogue or Monk.


Free Jump & Levitate that can only be cast on the Warlock, and are only available at level 9+...

I hope you understand I'm not terribly impressed by a Warlock replicating for free at level 9 a situational ability that the Wizard had since level 1...

Want to save spellslots? Just throw a grappling hook, or ask the Wizard's familiar to loop a rope. Less flashy, sure, but as effective.



So it's up to Warlock player to talk with party and see how much they like short rests and are ready to invest into it.


Problem - other players will prefer a long rest since it restore their resources too.



As you rightly said, nobody, even DM, can really assert accurately how many short rests party can have "just" from the way the story unfolds. So it's party's responsibility to make them happen, and "yours" to decide how much to rely on them.


The party's responsibility is to be in optimal shape to have the highest likelihood of victory. The party's responsibility is not to handicap themselves by taking short rests instead of long ones just so the Warlock can feel like a competitive class.



3. "In my experience it's very rare for the party to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't on the Wizard spelllist."
I'm sorry to be blunt, this argument is sort of nonsense.
That you say this makes me think you probably always play in parties that have at least one Wizard (and that you never were in a situation where such Wizard is unavailable or uninterested in rituals).


I guess I poorly expressed myself here. Sorry about that.

I meant to say that in my experience, it is rare to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't available to Wizards (such as augury, speak with animals, divination, etc). I took a quick look at the Curse of Strahd module and not a single scroll is available for non-Wizard rituals.

Hence in practice, the Pact of the Tome ability does not provide anything the Wizard wouldn't do.




4. "I see the Invocations mentioned here as "cute" but not really impactful abilities."
I guess it's mostly a YMMV situation here.
Especially the Speak with Animals: "highly situational"? Absolutely not in my games: all my players like animals, one of them is highly fond of it, so he got highly skilled in interacting with its.


Again, replicating for free what a Druid & Bard can cast as a ritual at level 1, and what a Ranger can cast at level 2, is not terribly exciting to me.

It's cute, it allows you to do fun stuff like asking dogs what they think the best restaurant in town is, but ultimately, other more traditional abilities (such as Persuasion checks / Suggestion spell / etc ) can do the job just as well.

[mgshamster]

Not wanting to be beholden to a patron. I can think of three PCs at my table who have all stopped at warlock 2 for exactly this reason.


Some multi-class characters take a 2-level dip into Warlock and there's nothing wrong with that.

To claim that the Warlock class has no use beyond the 2-level dip is, in a word, trolling.

But.. but.. think of all that POWER!! They're missing out on so much!

(I should have put a smiley or something in my last post. It wasn't meant to be taken too seriously.). :smalltongue:

But seriously, warlocks are a lot of fun. That should be reason enough to go beyond second level. And that, coincidentally, is the same exact reason why you'd go more than a few levels in any class: they're a ton of fun to play.

[Merudo]

Secondly there is a glaring gap in the party without the warlock - ranged damage. Eldritch blast is solid damage over a very long range and the party has no archers to speak of. Sure it doesnt look good if your DM throws every encounter at you in a 30ft by 30ft room - but then a GWM paladin looks equally bad if every encounter takes place outside with clear visibility against flying enemies.


You know, that's a very good point. I must say most of our adventures occurred indoor, in rooms that are roughly 30ft by 30ft. Even outdoor, the enemies typically sneaked on us through dense forests until they were less than 90 feet away.

I wouldn't necessarily say it's the fault of the DM though - we played on roll20 in official campaigns, and most of the maps provided were too small to allow the sort of extreme-range combat you alluded to.



This means that they are not going to be "best" at any one thing but they can be second best at a lot. When the party needs damage they will outshine the bard and the wizard, when control spells are needed they will outshine the fighter and the paladin.


This may also be part of the issue - I've often played in relatively large groups (5+ characters). Large groups encourage specialization - it's best to be able to do one thing extremely well instead of being second best at everything. Plus, force multipliers (such as buff, debuffs, and control spells) are even more powerful, and the Warlocks tends to be selfish with their buffs.



Warlocks do suffer from their casting method though, few spells at max level doesn't really give a lot of meaningful choice. I think one of the reasons you are so down on the warlock is that this game naturally compares them to really powerful options. Great weapon Mastery paladins for damage? Very powerful class, very powerful choice. And for versatile casting you compare them to a divination wizard - powerful class and probably the most powerful school and compare to a Lore Bard, an other popular candidate for most powerful class.

I agree that warlocks are on the lower 50% of classes when it comes to power, but half the classes have to meet that description and warlock isn't that far below average. I can support you not playing a warlock - I have played a couple and it is so much harder to make them mechanically fun than other classes, but I think the "Fun" argument is stronger than the "Power" argument.

I guess the issue is that all other full spellcasters except the Sorcerer have a subclass that is among the top of the list in power:

Bard: Lore
Cleric: Life
Druid: Moon
Wizard: Divination

So naturally, when I compare a Warlock to other spellcasters, I compare them to the most powerful subclasses. However, it doesn't seem that there is a top tier option for Warlock subclasses - even the Hexblade is best suited to a simple dip.

[MilkmanDanimal]

I feel like if all you're concerned about is straight combat utility, then, no, Warlock may not be optimized. If you want a class that rules in combat, I'm sure someone will show up at some point this week and tell you about the Sorcerer King . . .

[MaxWilson]

I have indeed never played a Warlock, as I view it as an inferior choice (I've never played Beastmaster for the same reason).

Each time a Warlock was in our party, they ended up not pulling their weight. Now it may have been because they didn't know how to play the Warlock right, but it wasn't obvious what, exactly, they were doing wrong.

*snip*

In combat, their Quasit familiar were also less useful than the Wizard's because the Quasit couldn't fly to safety after performing the Help action. Out of combat, the Owl familiar could scout as well as the Quasit outdoor, and both couldn't scout inside (every other time the Quasit would open a door he would get attacked by the creatures waiting behind it).

Well, there's one thing he was doing wrong: Quasit can turn invisible until it attacks or uses Scare. "Help" does not turn it visible. Opportunity attacks can only be made against creatures you can see. If an invisible quasit was taking lots of opportunity attacks, and a flying owl was not, you guys weren't following the rules for opportunity attacks correctly.

Overall I'd say yes, warlocks and fighters do have a lot in common (which is why Barbarian 1-3/Bladelock 1-17 is so much more fun than pure Barbarian if you happen to roll stats good enough to overcome the MAD). Warlocks tend not to have as many proactively game-changing spells as bards, wizards or druids. E.g. no Planar Binding, no Teleport or Transport Via Plants or Teleportation Circle, limited access to Polymorph, no conjuration spells. (This may have changed somewhat post-Xanathar's with the new warlock access to demon-summoning spells, etc.) The high-level warlock's best trick is True Polymorph, which is a good trick, and Forcecage and Mass Suggestion are also both good, but still, overall, warlocks are limited more by their spell selection and spells known than by their slot mechanics, IMO. To a first approximation it is true that a good warlock could be replaced by a fighter or two with no loss of party effectiveness. That tends to be untrue of spellcasters with stronger niches, like wizards, bards, and druids.

Also, Celestial warlocks are an exception too, because they can provide access to healing and Revivify/Greater Restoration spells that would otherwise require a cleric in the party, instead of just other fighters.

[Composer99]

So for all your argle-bargle about people not engaging with you seriously, you then go and admit you are working off a sample size n=1 poor experience with warlocks.

Guess what? No matter how much you try to gussy that up with a thin veneer of theory-crafting respectability, no one has any obligation to treat your personal experience as being more authoritative than their good experiences with warlocks.

[MaxWilson]

Problem - other players will prefer a long rest since it restore their resources too.


But it takes orders of magnitude more time--eight to twenty-four times as long.

It's 10:00 a.m. and the wizard is low on spell slots because he's been nova'ing. Does your party really drop what it's doing to set up a Leomund's Tiny Hut and camp out there until 8:00 a.m. tomorrow morning? Wouldn't it be nice to have a spellcaster who can be ready to go by 11:00 a.m. today instead?

[Mjolnirbear]

*snip*

In my experience the Warlock's familiar is roughly as good a scout as the Wizard's familiar or the Druid in Wild Shape. Beside, there is plenty of powerful ways to scout (Rogue with Stealth, Invisibility, Pass without Trace, Arcane Eye, Divination magic, etc). The Warlock is not really shining any more than the other spellcasters here.


The familiar can do it at no risk to the PC. Warlock familiars can do it *invisibly* and are slightly tougher.




Free Jump & Levitate that can only be cast on the Warlock, and are only available at level 9+...

I hope you understand I'm not terribly impressed by a Warlock replicating for free at level 9 a situational ability that the Wizard had since level 1...

Want to save spellslots? Just throw a grappling hook, or ask the Wizard's familiar to loop a rope. Less flashy, sure, but as effective.



The Wizard can cast Knock and spend resources, or ask the rogue to pick locks. What do you think the wizard prefers?

Sure, the wizard can cast Jump. *if* he took the spell at all. And sure, the wizard can cast it on the whole party, at significant cost to his resources. Or, y'know, have the warlock do it for free.






Problem - other players will prefer a long rest since it restore their resources too.



Wizard: gets back a spell slot on a short rest.
Fighter: gets back Second Wind and Action Surge on a short rest.
Cleric: gets back Channel Divinity on a short rest.
Bards: gets back Bardic Inspiration on a short rest.
Everybody: gets back hit points on a short rest.

Literally every class gets resources on a short rest. This has been explained quite a few times. Why do you insist on ignoring it?




The party's responsibility is to be in optimal shape to have the highest likelihood of victory. The party's responsibility is not to handicap themselves by taking short rests instead of long ones just so the Warlock can feel like a competitive class.



How are they handicapping themselves by getting HP back on a short rest? Further they cannot benefit from a long rest more than once in 24 hours. At all. In order to keep going, those short rests are *crucial*.




I guess I poorly expressed myself here. Sorry about that.

I meant to say that in my experience, it is rare to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't available to Wizards (such as augury, speak with animals, divination, etc). I took a quick look at the Curse of Strahd module and not a single scroll is available for non-Wizard rituals.

Hence in practice, the Pact of the Tome ability does not provide anything the Wizard wouldn't do.

[\quote]

Wizards have the most rituals. This is true. But PofT is not restricted to Wizard rituals. And you get cantrips. Before Hexblade, only Wisdom casters could take advantage of Shillelagh to be more SAD in battle. It's not insignificant. You can also get Resistance, Guidance, or any other cantrip from any list.

[QUOTE=Merudo]


Again, replicating for free what a Druid & Bard can cast as a ritual at level 1, and what a Ranger can cast at level 2, is not terribly exciting to me.

It's cute, it allows you to do fun stuff like asking dogs what they think the best restaurant in town is, but ultimately, other more traditional abilities (such as Persuasion checks / Suggestion spell / etc ) can do the job just as well.

If your DM is allowing you to use Persuasion to talk with animals, then you are playing something that is completely different. However, you're assuming you'll have either a druid, or bard, or ranger in the party. You can't assume that. There are a lot of classes. They don't cover anything. And if you *do* have a ranger? Well, don't take that invocation.

Perhaps that is the point that you're missing. The warlock is whatever you want it to be. Missing a wizard? Play tomelock and cover those rituals. Need a meat shield? Play Blade. No rogue or ranger? Hello Chain or Tome, with your free trap-triggerer, ambush-finder, or hostage-locater. Want to be a face? Hello, Beguiling Influence. Want a particularly tricksome face? Mask of Many Faces, with Friends for extra giggles. Missing a Paladin? Hello, Eldritch Smite.

But wait, there's more! Maddening Hex is something no other class can do. Same with Tome of Levistus. Or Fiendlock. Feylock for short-rest AoE charm or fear. Want to be the most magical of magical creatures? Tome for cantrips, cantrips, cantrips! Eldritch Blast can be configured to have unparalleled control over the battlefield and yet doesn't cost a single spell slot (you haven't *lived* until you've knocked an archer off a rooftop from 100 feet away). You can maximize rolled healing with Chain or never need to sleep with Tome or see magic constantly with no need for ritual casting. *No One* gets Hurl through Hell, or permanent Telepathy, or Create Thrall, or Hexblade Curse, or Hex Warrior. You can Fire Shield/AoA/Grasp of Hadar/Cloak of Flies/Maddening Hex, and put out *constant AoE damage*.

No other class has this versatility. No other class can fill so many roles. No other class can be built to taste, with incredible flavour, and thoughtful, interesting and yes, sometimes very powerful abilities.

The warlock can fill virtually any space in a party, and do it with *style*. You could have a party of only warlocks and yet every one could be different.

It's not a class for everyone. But it is incredibly versatile, fun, and flavourful.

Ultimately, if it's not for you, that's fine. Just don't expect us to *justify* ourselves to you.

[Unoriginal]

CoS is also EXTREMELY generous with Wizard spells (if you can reach that part, true, I suppose).

Most modules are nowhere close.

[Finieous]

Well, there's one thing he was doing wrong: Quasit can turn invisible until it attacks or uses Scare. "Help" does not turn it visible. Opportunity attacks can only be made against creatures you can see. If an invisible quasit was taking lots of opportunity attacks, and a flying owl was not, you guys weren't following the rules for opportunity attacks correctly.


Also, while it plays into the "selfish warlock" complaint, an invisible familiar is much better than an owl, if your DM happens to make the familiar roll for initiative. I ran into this (finally, after 9 levels at conventions) with my AT's owl. DMs had always just allowed the owl to act on my turn. Then I got one who required the owl to roll separate initiative, as per RAW.

So if the owl wins initiative, he can take a flyby Help action. Then, if someone else attacks that target before my AT, no advantage for me. The owl could fly up and Ready a Help, but then he isn't flying by and is vulnerable to attack. If I win initiative, I can move up Ready the Cast a Spell action for my booming blade and wait on the owl, but then I'm not able to use Cunning Action to Disengage. Or I could take a no-advantage attack on Round 1, have the owl flyby Help on his turn, and then, again, hope no one else attacks the same enemy before my turn comes around again.

The invisible warlock's familiar can just Ready Help and trigger it before the warlock's attack. At worst, if the warlock wins initiative, he's got one turn without advantage. No muss, no fuss.

[MaxWilson]

Also, while it plays into the "selfish warlock" complaint, an invisible familiar is much better than an owl, if your DM happens to make the familiar roll for initiative. I ran into this (finally, after 9 levels at conventions) with my AT's owl. DMs had always just allowed the owl to act on my turn. Then I got one who required the owl to roll separate initiative, as per RAW.

So if the owl wins initiative, he can take a flyby Help action. Then, if someone else attacks that target before my AT, no advantage for me. The owl could fly up and Ready a Help, but then he isn't flying by and is vulnerable to attack. If I win initiative, I can move up Ready the Cast a Spell action for my booming blade and wait on the owl, but then I'm not able to use Cunning Action to Disengage. Or I could take a no-advantage attack on Round 1, have the owl flyby Help on his turn, and then, again, hope no one else attacks the same enemy before my turn comes around again.

The invisible warlock's familiar can just Ready Help and trigger it before the warlock's attack. At worst, if the warlock wins initiative, he's got one turn without advantage. No muss, no fuss.

That still leaves the familiar pretty vulnerable to getting killed though. Attackers need to hit AC 13 at disadvantage (from invisibility), but that's not too hard. And it only has 7 HP (with resistance to normal attacks and some other stuff). The strafing Help approach is much safer overall, whether you're using an owl or an imp or quasit.

[Finieous]

That still leaves the familiar pretty vulnerable to getting killed though. Attackers need to hit AC 13 at disadvantage (from invisibility), but that's not too hard. And it only has 7 HP (with resistance to normal attacks and some other stuff). The strafing Help approach is much safer overall, whether you're using an owl or an imp or quasit.

Not at all, by RAW. The Help action states:



Alternatively, you can aid a friendly creature in attacking a creature within 5 feet of you. You feint, distract the target, or in some other way team up to make your ally’s attack more effective. If your ally attacks the target before your next turn, the first attack roll is made with advantage.


The familiar is invisible. Per the find familiar spell, the familiar can communicate with you telepathically. Consequently, the invisible familiar can fulfill the very loose conditions of the Help action without even revealing its presence, for example by telepathically communicating tactical insight: "He dropped his shield! Thrust high, now!"

An invisible imp with AC 13 and resistance to nonmagical damage is fairly resilient when the enemy has no reason to even suspect he's there. A clever enemy might suspect something is there, depending on how the DM handles invisibility and hiding, but the familiar never has to physically interact with the enemy by RAW.

Beyond that, a warlock with Mobile or Cunning Action isn't sticking around to let the enemy attack the invisible familiar. In this respect, the warlock is providing the same hit-and-run capability as the owl's Flyby. As always, the enemy can Ready its own action, but this should (IMO) be apparent to the warlock, who is then under no compulsion to indulge the enemy by moving in to trigger the Readied attack.

[Mortis_Elrod]

Not at all, by RAW. The Help action states:



The familiar is invisible. Per the find familiar spell, the familiar can communicate with you telepathically. Consequently, the invisible familiar can fulfill the very loose conditions of the Help action without even revealing its presence, for example by telepathically communicating tactical insight: "He dropped his shield! Thrust high, now!"

An invisible imp with AC 13 and resistance to nonmagical damage is fairly resilient when the enemy has no reason to even suspect he's there. A clever enemy might suspect something is there, depending on how the DM handles invisibility and hiding, but the familiar never has to physically interact with the enemy by RAW.

Beyond that, a warlock with Mobile or Cunning Action isn't sticking around to let the enemy attack the invisible familiar. In this respect, the warlock is providing the same hit-and-run capability as the owl's Flyby. As always, the enemy can Ready its own action, but this should (IMO) be apparent to the warlock, who is then under no compulsion to indulge the enemy by moving in to trigger the Readied attack.

I will also add to this that Familiar's aren't hard to replace. So if by some miracle they do catch and kill it, simply remake the familiar.

[Segev]

I've read what you all have posted and some of you made great arguments. I would like to respond to 4 points that came repeatedly in the posts.

Short rests happen often in most campaign

(...) For example, many DMs will have 1-2 random encounters while traveling from town to town, to the detriment of the Warlock.

A Warlock is best for campaigns with frequent short rests

The main problem with this type of argument is that the player who is debating playing Warlock is effectively asked to predict how the whole campaign will unfold, at character creation.

Predict wrong, and you may end up with a nerfed Warlock.
(...) Of these, the only one that is legitimately outside of the Warlock's control is the 1-2 encounters per day issue. This, however, breaks a number of classes. It just breaks the day-long casters more than the Warlock.

Even so, the Warlock's numerous "at will" abilities and his ability to assume that he's gotten a short rest whenever there's been enough downtime to shift scenes - even if there's no combat in them - means he can almost treat his Pact Magic slots as "always" available. He can just about cast his spells at will. Not quite, especially with fights happening, but normally, it's pretty fair to assume he's not used it up since his last short rest, unlike the wizard or bard, who has to track it by the day. It also allows the Warlock to be more casual in his spell usage. A casual toss of unseen servant just for the dramatics, or of fly because he wanted to lounge in the air for a bit or avoid that dirty water through which the others slogged, can be assumed replenished before the next time he cares to use it, assuming it's not been an action-packed day of non


Book of ancient secrets is awesome

In my experience it's very rare for the party to find scrolls for ritual spells that aren't on the Wizard spelllist. So Book of ancient secrets is essentially a slightly more useful Ritual Spellcaster feat. Neat, but not really that impactful. GM-dependent, yes, but then, Ritual Spellcaster for anything but "wizard" suffers the same problem. The DM does need to work with you.

Though you can at least slip Warlock ritual spells in, too, if you're willing to go a level with each in your known spells list. Swap them out every level. Not great, but an option.

Honestly, my biggest problem with ritual spells is that the 10 minute casting time feels more artificial than the short rest mechanic. "Alright, everybody, stop what we're doing so I can spend 10 minutes casting detect magic!" And this is speaking as somebody who encountered this issue as a wizard, not as a warlock.

Still, 3 cantrips from any list you want? That leads to some fun potential. I'm fond of guidance for that +1d4 to any skill check I care to do when I'm not concentrating on something else, and thaumaturgy because it's even better at "I'm a scary spellcaster" dramatics than prestidigitation.


Invocations are cool

I see the Invocations mentioned here as "cute" but not really impactful abilities.

Mask of Many Faces: Your voice doesn't change by the mask, so it's not like you can impersonate other people. Only the caster is disguised, so the rest of the party will have to stay behind. A disguise kit replicates most of the ability, unless you want to pass off as a non-humanoid, in which case you probably don't know their language anyway. Stealth, Pass without Trace & Invisibility are much better to not be detected. Multiclass a bit into Assassin, or use minor illusion for your speech. If you really need to be tense about it, use minor illusion to provide a suggestion of your tone of voice and cadence and then use Awakened Mind (courtesy of the Great Old One Patron) to put the meaning right in their heads.

You are casting friends when you do this, right? So you have Advantage, including on the Deception check to convince them they're hearing your actual voice and not a ghost sound and telepathy.

And, even without this chicanery, you have the ability to rapidly change your appearance so that, with only a modicum of normal voice-alteration that anybody can do, you can be Bob when you use friends on that merchant, Charlie when you use friends on the guard asking about the disturbance down the way, and Dave when you use friends on the barmaid to ferret out all of her secrets. So that later, as yourself, you can hit on the barmaid without friends and she's mad at Dave, not you, while you know all the buttons to push. You cad.


Devil’s Sight: Most parties can't see in the dark so you are not helping them any. Instead of Darkness, something like Faerie Fire would be much more effective.Honestly, darkness+Devil's Sight is only useful if you need Concentration for something else in combat (maybe you're flying or using hex). Without it, you're just as capable of making a thick, impenetrable fog with Misty Visions (because silent image, unlike minor illusion, can do "phenomena" rather than just "objects"), and using the fact that you KNOW it's an illusion to see quite clearly through it, giving yourself Advantage and your enemies Disadvantage (in terms of targeting you, at the least).

Worst-case scenario, your darkness spell or your Misty Vision of thick fog will blind both friends and enemies. Giving your friends Advantage for targeting foes who can't see them, as well as Disadvantage for not being able to see the foes. Same to the foes, but vice-versa. All balancing out so that nobody has either, except you and those attacking you.

Better-case scenario, you're using eldritch blast or a crossbow from the back lines or reasonably far from the fight, so your sight-obscuring effect only covers you, not any of your allies. Now, you see through it just fine, and thus gain Advantage on all your attacks while enemies suffer Disadvantage in targeting you.

Best-case, though this only works with Misty Visions and not Darkness, is that you have a code word or other signal you use so that the party knows in advance that your "fog spell" is actually an illusion, and thus makes the Intelligence(Investigation) check, possibly with Advantage for being told what to expect, so they share your ability to see through the illusion. Meanwhile, the enemies have no such notion (unless the DM is being a jerk and no-selling illusions), and so the whole PARTY has Advantage on attacks and all the enemies have Disadvantage to hit them!


Eldritch Spear: How often does combat at this range really come up? How often do you choose to make it come up? Snipers pick their battles.


Misty Visions: Requires concentration, and the minor illusion cantrip replicates most of this.Minor illusion, while fun, only does objects. Albeit a loose definition of "objects" to a degree (as it can do a pile of mud with footprints in it, or other aggregate constructions). Silent image does creatures and phenomena, too, and one of the greatest weaknesses of the spell (being one thing you have to stick with) can be overcome by it being at will. While not unique to the Warlock, you can also use the "sound" version of minor illusion to provide sounds to back up your silent image. Unique to the Warlock is the ability to do both at will, rather than just one.


Beast Speech: Replicates a highly situational level 1 ritual spell...Only situational if the player doesn't work to make it more useful. Admittedly, familiars are better at this, but take the Urchin background's pet mouse, and now you can talk to it at will. Having the ability to do this at will, constantly, means you're never relying on "occasional" discussion. You can chat up any creatures you happen to come across, rather than hoping this one's the plot-relevant one.

This is way better than the Invocation I had a whole thread griping about. Because seriously, jump at will won't come up often enough that it wouldn't be better as a 1st level Warlock spell. Let alone restricted to 9th level or higher!


In my experience the Warlock's familiar is roughly as good a scout as the Wizard's familiar or the Druid in Wild Shape. Beside, there is plenty of powerful ways to scout (Rogue with Stealth, Invisibility, Pass without Trace, Arcane Eye, Divination magic, etc). The Warlock is not really shining any more than the other spellcasters here.Even if you're 100% right, here, all you're saying is that Warlocks keep up with the best scouts in the game. That's hardly an indictment.

I will say pass without trace is not much of a scout power. But that's beside the point.

The Warlock familiar is as smart as the PC options, so can do things with greater intellectual discernment. The active, constant, at-will invisibility of a couple of them make them better scouts than anything short of the arcane eye and other divination magic for undetectability; using the spell invisibility costs a slot. (Of course, a Warlock can get that, too, and do it up to twice per short rest for most of his career.)

Others have discussed Help options. They also make good servants and aids. Heck, the invisible Quasit can fake unseen servant pretty darned well.


Free Jump & Levitate that can only be cast on the Warlock, and are only available at level 9+...Otherworldly Leap is lame. Levitate at will at least has the "at will" angle be useful, since the power is going to get you as high as you like without worrying about where to land or even landing at all.


Want to save spellslots? Just throw a grappling hook, or ask the Wizard's familiar to loop a rope. Less flashy, sure, but as effective.Assuming the climb check is passed.


Problem - other players will prefer a long rest since it restore their resources too. Here's the biggest problem. You keep insisting long rests should be de riguer when people want to rest at all. 8 hours is a lot longer than 1 hour. And if you adventure for 15 minutes, get in a fight, then wait 16 hours before you can actually benefit from the next 8 hour rest, you're wasting tons of daylight. Unless the DM isn't running a living world, the world moves on without you while you do that. Heck, you're likely to be either attacked, or have enemies set up ready to ambush you when you come out of your highly-obvious redoubt. This only works if your DM allows it, and he's kind-of foolish to do so. (I don't mean "forbid players from doing it." I mean he should play the game as a world that reacts to such tactics intelligently.)


The party's responsibility is to be in optimal shape to have the highest likelihood of victory. The party's responsibility is not to handicap themselves by taking short rests instead of long ones just so the Warlock can feel like a competitive class.It's the DM's responsibility to make 15-minute adventuring days as unattractive in game as they would be IRL.

[Aeros1]

In terms of mechanical effectivess, the thing I love best about warlock is its surprising versatility.

I'm running a celestial tomelock with a 1 lvl dip in forge cleric. I can do a lot out of combat. I have about 10 cantrips all the cleric lvl 1 rituals including identify through forge. My persuasion is high enough to be a face. I have an owl familiar for additional advantage on perception checks. I have an unseen servant triggering pretty much every trap possible.

In combat I obviously have EB with repelling blast and agonizing, so I have solid single target damage. Obviously I am not going to do the single target damage of a fighter dedicated to SS/xbow feats. But then again I'm also pushing creatures around like nobodies business while sacrificing no damage. On top of that I can throw aoe spells that that same fighter who specializes in single target damage can't possibly compete with. Aoe spells like wall of fire from the patron synergizes well with my ability to push creatures into the fire as well.

And I'm a full caster so I can play hard control by banishing hypnotic pattern and although not ideal because of the minimal spell slots I can counterspell in a pinch. Add on celestial patron I can heal with my bonus action.

I'm fairly tanky with medium armor and a shield. As well as the tomb of Leviticus invokation for additional survivability shenanigans.

To be honest this character is a Swiss army knife and I haven't had any encounter where I was completely useless. I can't say the same for other characters I've played, like melee characters who can throw two javalins and call it quits after that in a full aerial fight.

For not having many short rests, that has not been my experience at all. You can't have more than one long rest every 24 hours, so I'm not sure why people have trouble with short rests in between when they are an hour long. I can understand if you have a gauntlet style encounter and you don't have time to rest in between but is it all that common while out in a dungeon or adventuring in a dangerous area the party is going to have time to wait 24 hours at a time for long rests?

[JakOfAllTirades]

So for all your argle-bargle about people not engaging with you seriously, you then go and admit you are working off a sample size n=1 poor experience with warlocks.

Called it!

[sophontteks]

Bard: Lore
Cleric: Life
Druid: Moon
Wizard: Divination

So naturally, when I compare a Warlock to other spellcasters, I compare them to the most powerful subclasses. However, it doesn't seem that there is a top tier option for Warlock subclasses - even the Hexblade is best suited to a simple dip.
Nope, Nope, Nope, Nope.
None of these are 'the most powerful' subclass.
Nowhere is this more true then with the druid. Did you even read what a shepherd druid can do? Land druids have always gone toe to toe with moon no problem.
Cleric, plenty of other strong choices.
Bard- Glamour I'd argue is just as strong.
Wizard- again, there are several equally strong options.

[Arial Black]

My DM thinks my Bar 1/War 5 (fiendish bladelock) is OP.

We've just successfully completed another section. I melee'd a vampire toe-to-toe, and was worried because of his AC 20 (plate + shield), 3 attacks per round, and his attack rolls seemed to hit the mid-20s AC most of the time. I was wrong to be worried. I ended the fight with him destroyed (even though I missed a lot!) and me with 54 of my 67 HP remaining. The first two times he hit me he took 15 cold damage each time (even though my AofA had only 4 THP left; I love damage resistance from Rage. His first hit did 7 damage, halved to 3, leaving 1 THP and meaning he took the damage twice).

Later (after a short rest) we got a good tactical position and my friend the single-class warlock cast hunger of hadar. Earlier, she cast it through the open door into the room where the swarms of bats and three Dhampyr were, and closed the door! LOL!

Now, when she cast it again, I realised that I could just fireball the whole lot of enemies who were all caught in the HofH, but I didn't want to spoil her fun.

Earlier, I had used Mask of Many Faces to impersonate the vampire I just destroyed, and ordered his cult fanatics to attack his mercenary allies, while we just mopped up the survivors.

I can do so much stuff. I'm a tank with AC 18, 67 hp, 15 THP and doing 15 cold damage to anyone who hits me in melee, and damage resistance.

I'm a striker, with 2d8+7 slashing while raging, plus 1d4 necrotic from my magical greatsword, 2 attacks per round. I'm mobile in that I willingly attract opportunity attacks so that they take cold damage and so move through the battlefield at will. I even know misty step for when they are really hard to reach or if I want to get straight to the BBEG without bothering with his meat shields, with the otherwise useless blade ward to give me damage resistance when I arrive; I'll start Raging on my next turn.

I have plenty of utility. As a caster I have both fly and fireball, disguise self at will, all sorts of caster-type stuff.

The only thing I hate is missing at +8 with my greatsword. Never mind, we've just hit 7th level and I'm taking a 2nd level in barbarian, giving me advantage on all my attack rolls (I have GWM BTW!), and the usual drawback of giving enemies advantage to hit me actually works to my benefit, making them more likely to suffer the cold damage!

If my DM thought I was OP before, wait 'til he sees me now! :smallsmile:

Next level, I'll take Bar 3, zealot, and add 1d6+1 necrotic the my first successful attack each round, as well as a 3rd Rage each day. After that it'll be warlock all the way to 17th.

And then I read a thread about how pointless warlocks are above level 2....:smallsmile::smallsmile::smallsmile:

[Sigreid]

Nope, Nope, Nope, Nope.
None of these are 'the most powerful' subclass.
Nowhere is this more true then with the druid. Did you even read what a shepherd druid can do? Land druids have always gone toe to toe with moon no problem.
Cleric, plenty of other strong choices.
Bard- Glamour I'd argue is just as strong.
Wizard- again, there are several equally strong options.

Funnily enough when I asked what my party would prefer my wizard be, they all preferred evoker. Seems they like the idea of a wizard that can devastate an area without hurting them. In short, they prefer him be more weapon than tool.

[coyote_sly]

I feel like a lot of this boils down to 'holy %>$# are Paladins and Wizards OP if they only have to fight one battle per day!' which, uh, sure. That's why the game EXPLICITLY TELLS YOU NOT TO DO THAT.

[JoeJ]

I feel like a lot of this boils down to 'holy %>$# are Paladins and Wizards OP if they only have to fight one battle per day!' which, uh, sure. That's why the game EXPLICITLY TELLS YOU NOT TO DO THAT.

And even with only one fight, they're only OP if the player knows there will only be one fight. If, for example, all they know is that there will be 2d6-1 fights then they can't nova without taking a big risk.

[Segev]

And even with only one fight, they're only OP if the player knows there will only be one fight. If, for example, all they know is that there will be 2d6-1 fights then they can't nova without taking a big risk.

The issue for most of those who complain of this is that pattern recognition tells them that there will only be one, MAYBE two fights in any given day. Sure, it's not guaranteed, but having multiple fights in a day just never happens. So they learn to plan accordingly.

[MaxWilson]

My DM thinks my Bar 1/War 5 (fiendish bladelock) is OP.

We've just successfully completed another section. I melee'd a vampire toe-to-toe, and was worried because of his AC 20 (plate + shield), 3 attacks per round, and his attack rolls seemed to hit the mid-20s AC most of the time. I was wrong to be worried. I ended the fight with him destroyed (even though I missed a lot!) and me with 54 of my 67 HP remaining. The first two times he hit me he took 15 cold damage each time (even though my AofA had only 4 THP left; I love damage resistance from Rage. His first hit did 7 damage, halved to 3, leaving 1 THP and meaning he took the damage twice).

Later (after a short rest) we got a good tactical position and my friend the single-class warlock cast hunger of hadar. Earlier, she cast it through the open door into the room where the swarms of bats and three Dhampyr were, and closed the door! LOL!

Now, when she cast it again, I realised that I could just fireball the whole lot of enemies who were all caught in the HofH, but I didn't want to spoil her fun.

Earlier, I had used Mask of Many Faces to impersonate the vampire I just destroyed, and ordered his cult fanatics to attack his mercenary allies, while we just mopped up the survivors.

I can do so much stuff. I'm a tank with AC 18, 67 hp, 15 THP and doing 15 cold damage to anyone who hits me in melee, and damage resistance.

I'm a striker, with 2d8+7 slashing while raging, plus 1d4 necrotic from my magical greatsword, 2 attacks per round. I'm mobile in that I willingly attract opportunity attacks so that they take cold damage and so move through the battlefield at will. I even know misty step for when they are really hard to reach or if I want to get straight to the BBEG without bothering with his meat shields, with the otherwise useless blade ward to give me damage resistance when I arrive; I'll start Raging on my next turn.

I have plenty of utility. As a caster I have both fly and fireball, disguise self at will, all sorts of caster-type stuff.

The only thing I hate is missing at +8 with my greatsword. Never mind, we've just hit 7th level and I'm taking a 2nd level in barbarian, giving me advantage on all my attack rolls (I have GWM BTW!), and the usual drawback of giving enemies advantage to hit me actually works to my benefit, making them more likely to suffer the cold damage!

If my DM thought I was OP before, wait 'til he sees me now! :smallsmile:

Next level, I'll take Bar 3, zealot, and add 1d6+1 necrotic the my first successful attack each round, as well as a 3rd Rage each day. After that it'll be warlock all the way to 17th.

And then I read a thread about how pointless warlocks are above level 2....:smallsmile::smallsmile::smallsmile:

Heh. Your Warbarian is perfectly illustrating why it is in fact barbarians who are pointless above level 3.

[strangebloke]

I feel like a lot of this boils down to 'holy %>$# are Paladins and Wizards OP if they only have to fight one battle per day!' which, uh, sure. That's why the game EXPLICITLY TELLS YOU NOT TO DO THAT.


And even with only one fight, they're only OP if the player knows there will only be one fight. If, for example, all they know is that there will be 2d6-1 fights then they can't nova without taking a big risk.


The issue for most of those who complain of this is that pattern recognition tells them that there will only be one, MAYBE two fights in any given day. Sure, it's not guaranteed, but having multiple fights in a day just never happens. So they learn to plan accordingly.

I mean, to be fair a lot of the people making this sort of thread are players, not DMs. So they're just playing the game they were dealt. Even some DMs are free from excuse, since a lot of the published adventures follow this pattern as well. I'm told this is true of SKT, anyway.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I mean, to be fair a lot of the people making this sort of thread are players, not DMs. So they're just playing the game they were dealt. Even some DMs are free from excuse, since a lot of the published adventures follow this pattern as well. I'm told this is true of SKT, anyway.

It's also true-ish of Tomb of Annihilation and mostly Out of the Abyss outside the major dungeons, because running six to eight random encounters a day is rare for all the reasons Vaarsuvius explained thirteen years ago. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0145.html) The gritty realism rest variant gets at this pretty well, but requires significant work in retooling the dungeons - or straight different rest rules that make adventuring in a dungeon more restful somehow than living in a city.

[strangebloke]

It's also true-ish of Tomb of Annihilation and mostly Out of the Abyss outside the major dungeons, because running six to eight random encounters a day is rare for all the reasons Vaarsuvius explained thirteen years ago. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0145.html) The gritty realism rest variant gets at this pretty well, but requires significant work in retooling the dungeons - or straight different rest rules that make adventuring in a dungeon more restful somehow than living in a city.

For me, random encounters are purely a matter of flavoring the environment that the players are walking through. (and are therefore significantly non-random.)

If you want to signal that the region the players are in is relatively safe and peaceful, have them 'encounter' a merchant whose cart has collapsed on the side of the road.
If you want to signal that the region the players are in is rife with crime, have them encounter a bunch of highwaymen.
If you want to signal that the region is wild and untamed, give them a flooded river to cross... with alligators midstream!

etc.
etc.

Balance doesn't matter because the tension of "can we beat them" is not the point of the encounter.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

For me, random encounters are purely a matter of flavoring the environment that the players are walking through. (and are therefore significantly non-random.)

If you want to signal that the region the players are in is relatively safe and peaceful, have them 'encounter' a merchant whose cart has collapsed on the side of the road.
If you want to signal that the region the players are in is rife with crime, have them encounter a bunch of highwaymen.
If you want to signal that the region is wild and untamed, give them a flooded river to cross... with alligators midstream!

etc.
etc.

Yeah, I do this as well when it's appropriate.

I've been running Tomb of Annihilation, and it is frankly a struggle to populate an adventuring day with enough combat encounters to meaningfully test a party. So I've given up trying, more or less. We'll see how it goes when they get into Omu.

[Talionis]

I think you missed that you can be a Hexblade and get Charisma to weapon attack and damage off of and get medium armor at level one. If you are making a Gish style character you also get access to Armor of Agathys, which you maybe able to upcast in your non-Warlock slots.

But to look at other breakpoints:

Level 3

I also think that getting a three level dip in Warlock is often undersold. At level three you get Two rechargeable second level spells. That can be a very big benefit especially if you want to buff with a spell like Mirror Image (for example) each combat. But you also get access to the Pact Boons. Chain getting an improved familiar is a huge boon to characters, especially say a Dex Rogue that does exploring. Tome will get you a lot of access to Ritual spells of 1st and 2nd level and can get you access to any cantrip in the game, example Guidance. Both those Pacts are pretty useful.

Level 11

Its no longer a dip, but at this level you are getting a third spellslot per short rest and are casting all those spellslots as 5th level spells. This may create the most possible spell slots because as you get to higher levels in a regular caster you gain fewer spell slots per level, so if you are content with only 5th level spells you can get more spell slots with a level 9 full caster/11 Warlock than a level 20 full caster. You won't have access to the high level spells, but you will be able to cast low level spells at medium high levels more often during the day, if you get a decent amount of short rests.

[JoeJ]

The issue for most of those who complain of this is that pattern recognition tells them that there will only be one, MAYBE two fights in any given day. Sure, it's not guaranteed, but having multiple fights in a day just never happens. So they learn to plan accordingly.

That's true, but a DM can also use player expectations to discourage that kind of thinking. You only have to have a sinkhole drop the party into a dungeon they weren't expecting one time and most players will spend their next ten levels making sure they're prepared, just in case it happens again.

Or make the pattern that there are usually only 0-2 encounters in a given day, but sometimes one of those encounters is the lair of some monster tribe.

[MaxWilson]

That's true, but a DM can also use player expectations to discourage that kind of thinking. You only have to have a sinkhole drop the party into a dungeon they weren't expecting one time and most players will spend their next ten levels making sure they're prepared, just in case it happens again.

Or make the pattern that there are usually only 0-2 encounters in a given day, but sometimes one of those encounters is the lair of some monster tribe.

Or occasionally have something attack them in the late afternoon, after all their Mage Armor/Foresight/Aid/etc. spells have expired and the players feel like they're all done for the day.

[JoeJ]

Or occasionally have something attack them in the late afternoon, after all their Mage Armor/Foresight/Aid/etc. spells have expired and the players feel like they're all done for the day.

If you're having wilderness encounters at all, they should be able to occur at any hour, but anybody who's ever gone camping knows they're most likely to happen at dusk and at dawn because more creatures are active at those times.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

If you're having wilderness encounters at all, they should be able to occur at any hour, but anybody who's ever gone camping knows they're most likely to happen at dusk and at dawn because more creatures are active at those times.

Dawn and dusk are also good times for encounters specifically in Tomb of Annihilation (and if we make that before and after travel, Out of the Abyss) because they raise the possibility of the party losing more stuff when they run away. If an encounter forces the party to abandon their *camp* rather than just running, there's a chance they'll lose a significant portion of their food, water, ammunition... possibly backup weapons or armor as well. In games that have a certain emphasis on wilderness survival, that could be a major setback. \

[Segev]

I wonder if it wouldn't be better to take the "expected encounters per level," assume 1.5 encounters per short rest and 6 encounters per long rest, and then just give out "short rest tokens" amounting to the number that would be expected to be taken throughout levels. These can just be spent whenever the party isn't in combat by a given player to "take a short rest" instantly. But they replace the short rest mechanic entirely, so you only get n per level.

Now you're rationing the resource between levels, rather than across adventuring days.

I don't entirely like this idea, but figured I'd share it in case it sparked better ones in others.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

I'm thinking of something along those lines with my current group - transitioning to 24 hours per short rest and 7 days of nothing more strenuous than downtime activities for a long rest, and giving out second wind tokens that can act as rests after the party completes a long rest. That way you're on a 168-hour adventuring day, but the party has resources to burn in dungeons and other high-density areas.

[tieren]

Before I played a warlock I always optimized potential characters with pact of the tome, for adding more rituals to my sheet or getting a charisma based shillelagh cantrip, etc... Which always felt more impactful in theorycraft than writing "cooler familiar" on the sheet.

In practice though I played a fey lock who went chain pact with the sprite familiar because I thought it most thematic choice, and boy did I love it.

It is a significantly better scout than the wizard familiar, if for no other reason than range. The owl can report back for 100 feet, then you have to hope it survives whatever else may happen to it until it is back to within 100 feet of you. the sprite could circle in a perimeter 100 feet out (and help with those infrequent long range encounters).

Even if it wasn't long distance outdoors. I could leave the familiar hidden in a location we wanted to spy on and could get in person accounts of what was going on.

Yeah, you might replicate that effect with arcane eye for the use of a 4th level spell slot for only 1 hour, but the whole point is avoiding the resource expenditure.

You can even talk through the familiar and cast touch range spells at any distance, even further than with projected image (saving the 7th level spell slot), but definitely way further than the 100 feet for the touch spells with the wizard familiar.

Between having my own sprite companion, and at will illusions (9 times larger than minor illusions), I felt like a pretty magical fey knight, even without spending a single spell slot.

[Willie the Duck]

I don't entirely like this idea, but figured I'd share it in case it sparked better ones in others.

Honestly, I have never had a problem (or pushback) with--"you cannot get in a long rest on the road (the travel is too strenuous and you don't get enough sleep). You'll be able to spend a day preparing for the dungeon when you get there, and that will count as a long rest. Same with spending a day after the dungeon before you set out for home."

[MaxWilson]

In practice though I played a fey lock who went chain pact with the sprite familiar because I thought it most thematic choice, and boy did I love it.

It is a significantly better scout than the wizard familiar, if for no other reason than range. The owl can report back for 100 feet, then you have to hope it survives whatever else may happen to it until it is back to within 100 feet of you. the sprite could circle in a perimeter 100 feet out (and help with those infrequent long range encounters).

The combination of human-level intelligence, invisibility, and Stealth +8 is very powerful. And if they die they can be easily resurrected at minimal cost, so the sprite can take risks (like scouting out an ancient dragon's lair or a mind flayer citadel full of magical traps) that even a very stealthy human PC would not take. I love chainlocks. :-)

Plus, it adds another recurring NPC to the party, with all the dramatic potential that entails.

[Segev]

You can even talk through the familiar and cast touch range spells at any distance, even further than with projected image (saving the 7th level spell slot), but definitely way further than the 100 feet for the touch spells with the wizard familiar.

I will point out that 5e's projected image dropped the ability to cast spells through it, but also greatly increased the range. Honestly, I'm not sure when you'd really use a day-long Concentration spell, nor how well it would really work for anybody other than an illusionist abusing malleable illusions and pre-placed permanent major images/mirage arcanes.

[ErHo]

I wish you told me this BEFORE is sold my soul, OP!!

Seriously, I like them but they tend to be a one trick pony in the average player's hands.

[tieren]

I will point out that 5e's projected image dropped the ability to cast spells through it, but also greatly increased the range. Honestly, I'm not sure when you'd really use a day-long Concentration spell, nor how well it would really work for anybody other than an illusionist abusing malleable illusions and pre-placed permanent major images/mirage arcanes.

Sorry I wasn't clear, I know projected image can't cast spells now. I was thinking of what I have in my head as the intended use of projected image, having a long distance chat with someone (not your familiar) or perhaps appearing at an important conference by proxy. The lock familiar can travel there for you, allow you to converse, plus cast spells and not require concentration or ridiculous high level spell slot.

Point being a wizard might be able to replicate most of what the special familiars can do but at the cost of resources the warlock doesn't have to worry about.

[JellyPooga]

... but the whole point is avoiding the resource expenditure.

The longer this thread goes on, the more I'm convinced that this is the true strength of the Warlock; he saves everyone else from spending their resources on the "little stuff".

Sure, a Rogue with Expertise in Stealth that has Pass Without Trace and Invisibility cast on him is the best scout, or Arcane Sye can do better still, but why bother spending the spell slots on them when the Warlocks familiar can do almost as well and is expendable to boot?

Sure, the Ranger is better at ranged combat with Sharpshooter and Hunters Mark up, but the Warlock is almost as good without spending any spell slots and doesn't need ammo.

Sure, the Warlock isn't doing anywhere near as much damage in melee as the Paladin or Barbarian, but if he's Blade Pact, he can mix it up in a scrap when the Paladin is crying for his Holy Avenger because itxs been confiscated or the Barbarian has misplaced his axe. With the likes of AoA the Warlock doesn't mind being stripped of his armour either, so while the Fighter is running in terror from a Rust Monsted because he didn't bring a spare suit of chainmail, the Warlock is laughing all the way to the big pile o' loot at the end of the dungeon.

It may sound situational or niche, but isn't that what adventures are made of; a series of niche situations? When the Warlock is shining in all these circumstances, he's saving everyone else from having to deplete themselves for the non-sitiational, or "normal" encounters, allowing them to shine in those.

[Angelmaker]

Taking a short rest isn't very difficult. Many characters depend on it to keep at full fighting capacity throughout the day. Its realistic, given how exhausing fighting is, that the party would rest after a couple scraps.


Given how exhausting fighting is, in a realistic scenario, I expect most people to shy away from combat for about... Let's say the rest of their life? :D

Nothing about an assumed adventuring day is realistic.

"Say, Sir Kunibert? Shall we plan a short rest after the breakfast bout with the bandits, or would you rather kill the wolves a bit further down the road as well, before? I suppose we shan't delay the afternoon tea, since the trolls of watertown bridge pack a mighty whallop. I guess we could make room for the giant spiders of old ma warwick's attic before we have dinner. A light exercise with the evil possessed townspeople, finishing off with killing the evil priest of nekharmur should do just fine to give us the necessary tiredness for a hearty sleep."

"Well planned, magister, onward to riches, glory and two contractually obliged short rests."

HUZZAH!

Currently I'm trying to get my group away from D&D 5E. My oppinion of this system has shifted over the past years and othe systems, at least for me personally, do the job better.

[sophontteks]

Given how exhausting fighting is, in a realistic scenario, I expect most people to shy away from combat for about... Let's say the rest of their life? :D

Nothing about an assumed adventuring day is realistic.

"Say, Sir Kunibert? Shall we plan a short rest after the breakfast bout with the bandits, or would you rather kill the wolves a bit further down the road as well, before? I suppose we shan't delay the afternoon tea, since the trolls of watertown bridge pack a mighty whallop. I guess we could make room for the giant spiders of old ma warwick's attic before we have dinner. A light exercise with the evil possessed townspeople, finishing off with killing the evil priest of nekharmur should do just fine to give us the necessary tiredness for a hearty sleep."

"Well planned, magister, onward to riches, glory and two contractually obliged short rests."

HUZZAH!

Currently I'm trying to get my group away from D&D 5E. My oppinion of this system has shifted over the past years and othe systems, at least for me personally, do the job better.

Says realism isn't the concern.
Goes on to explain how unrealistic it is.
Doesn't see the irony.

How about when a fight ends the players actually roleplay as if it was a terrible exhausting major life-threatening event instead of a raid from WoW.

[Sudsboy]

At endgame, an optimized blade pact Hexblade GWM with Foresight and Elemental Weapon is going to perform very close to an optimized GWM fighter in DPR while his Hexblade's Curse is available, and he'll be significantly better at utility play and out of combat. Not sure how much more reason you need from a munchkin perspective.

[JoeJ]

There are no rational grounds to play or not play any character or any race other that how well it matches what you, personally, enjoy.

[krugaan]

The longer this thread goes on, the more I'm convinced that this is the true strength of the Warlock; he saves everyone else from spending their resources on the "little stuff".


Pretty much this, I think. Warlocks at wills are pretty damn good. It's a bit of a shame they don't get more invocations quicker, to incentivize straying past level 2.

[Asmerv]

Because no other caster can cast Scrying twice in the morning, have breakfast, and then walk out the door with zero effective resource expenditure.

Also, no other caster can take a short rest before bedtime and cast Dream a bunch of times.

I went into playing a Warlock with the same issues you raised. I admit gameplay was frustrating for the first 5-10 sessions with the Warlock. I admit again that the class does occasionally run into issues. However, as you spend time with the class you find out it really is uniquely capable of very powerful things. Above are just two examples.

[Malifice]

The OPs premise for this thread is laughable.

While I agree that Warlocks are lacking when the adventuring 'day' is off (either through not enough short rests, or too few encounters per long rest as a campaign median), he flat out refuses to conceed the opposite is true; Warlocks rule when the campaign features many short rests per long rest, and plently of encounters per adventuring 'day'.

Come on OP, yes Warlocks arent great when you're only getting 1-2 encounters per Long rest (and you never short rest) like in your home campaign, but in another DMs campaign where the PCs regularly get 6+ encounters per long rest on average, and 3+ short rests per long rest, the are amazing.

Your issue isnt with Warlocks; its with the adventuring day expectations of 5E, and the rest recharge mechanic of abilities.

Warlocks are not objectively bad, its just your own campaign that makes them so.

In my campaign I get 2 short rests/ long rest every day (the DM has reduced them to 5 minutes long, but has limited them to 2/day). We're 7th level and routinely deal with 6+ encounters per long rest (PotA - Lots-O-Dungeons), getting a short rest every 2-3 encounters or so.

Even playing as a Hexblade (saving at least one slot per short rest for an Eldritch smite) I'm going fine. I use my Sorcerer slots (Hexblade 5/ Sorc 2) for shield spells and Hex, and Warlock slots for Eldritch smite (around 50 percent of the time), and spells. Gives me a 3rd level slot per encounter generally (plus at will high damage thanks to GWM and Thirsting blade, and Eldritch blast + Agonizing blast + Hex).

[Merudo]

In my campaign I get 2 short rests/ long rest every day (the DM has reduced them to 5 minutes long, but has limited them to 2/day).

Not a bad homebrew change - it definitely makes the Warlock a more reliable class.

Without it though, would you really take 2 short rests per day everyday? Doubtful.

My original question regarding the Warlock assumed the default rule for short rest, not a homebrew variant where short rest take 1/20 of the time they are supposed to.

The fact that so many on this thread mentioned how they play with homebrew rest rules ("Gritty Realism" variant, quicker short rests, short rest "token" system, etc) tells me volume on how broken the short rest system is.

[Merudo]

Because no other caster can cast Scrying twice in the morning, have breakfast, and then walk out the door with zero effective resource expenditure.

Also, no other caster can take a short rest before bedtime and cast Dream a bunch of times.

I went into playing a Warlock with the same issues you raised. I admit gameplay was frustrating for the first 5-10 sessions with the Warlock. I admit again that the class does occasionally run into issues. However, as you spend time with the class you find out it really is uniquely capable of very powerful things. Above are just two examples.

Thank you. That's exactly the kind of tips I was hoping to get when I created the thread.

It does seem Warlocks are uniquely well qualified to cast spells that have long lasting impact but can be cast in relative safety (where short rests are easy to take).

I already heard a similar trick with casting Hex before breakfast (so it lasts through the day) but using Scrying or Dream seems much more powerful.

[Malifice]

Not a bad homebrew change - it definitely makes the Warlock a more reliable class.

Rest variants are as much 'homebrew' as are feats or multiclassing or magic items. They're variants, presented in the DMG (a core rulebook).


Without it though, would you really take 2 short rests per day everyday? Doubtful.

See? Now you're doing it again. Youre making assumptions about my game.

To answer your question, yes we regularly take 2 short rests per long rest. The same thing happened in my recent Age of Worms campaign that I ran for 3 years (converted to 5E) from levels 1 through to well past 20th. The median number of rests per adventuring day were 2-3 short rests, and on average the PCs got about 6 encounters per long rest.

That was using the 1 hour/ 8 hour normal resting times also.

I managed to police the adventuirng days over an adventure path not even designed for 5E, over levels 1-20+. Apparently your DM lacks the skills to do it.

Thats not the Warlock class' fault; that's the fault of your DM.


My original question regarding the Warlock assumed the default rule for short rest

The default rule for short rests is the assumption of 2-3 short rests per long rest, and 6 or so encounters over that period of time as a rough median.

If you're getting them at a different frequency then thats your DMs fault.

Also (and again) your problem isnt with the Warlock; its with the rest/ resouce paradigm of 5E. They're different things.


The fact that so many on this thread mentioned how they play with homebrew rest rules (either with the "Gritty Realism" variant or with significantly quicker short rests) tells me volume on how broken the short rest system is.

Gritty realism resting is as much Homebrew as is the Great Weapon Master feat. They are both variant rules contained in core rulebooks.

Do you consider GWM to be 'Homebrew?'

And its not a question of it being broken. The game literally gives you options to increase or decrease rest frequency and duration to suit your campaign.

Its ****ing weird man. You're saying your game has problems with short rest classes having a hard time getting short rests. Why on earth dont you use the rules provided to you in the DMG to address that (or simply kick your DM up the backside and get him to do his job)?

[Arial Black]

I really find it hard to grasp that some people are having difficulty getting short rests throughout a normal adventuring day.

I'm not talking about constant dungeon-bashing, I'm talking about pottering about town getting supplies and gossip, or having a lunch break when travelling, or the like.

At any point you can ask your DM, "How long has it been since we did anything stressful?" If the answer is 1 hour or more then you have just had a short rest and can take the benefits if you want to. Including getting your 2 pact magic slots back.

[Merudo]

Rest variants are as much 'homebrew' as are feats or multiclassing or magic items. They're variants, presented in the DMG (a core rulebook).


I actually didn't know the gritty realism rest variant was in the DMG. It's not mentioned in the PHB. Thank you for pointing that out.



I managed to police the adventuirng days over an adventure path not even designed for 5E, over levels 1-20+. Apparently your DM lacks the skills to do it.

Thats not the Warlock class' fault; that's the fault of your DM.


That's completely true - however the reality is that not all DM are talented or assertive enough to "police" the adventurer day in such manner (I mentioned that point in my original post).



Why on earth dont you use the rules provided to you in the DMG to address that (or simply kick your DM up the backside and get him to do his job)?

Because I'd rather limit the "unfun talks" to be had with my DM, and I'd rather not appear to be a whiny or entitled player.

Let me give you an example. In the Curse of Strahd campaign, the grand finale takes place in a castle. Our DM ruled that short rests would be impossible to take in the castle because the place is crawling with monsters. That significantly weakened the Warlock, who only had access to two spells for the whole day, for what is the most important and memorable day of the campaign.

If I were the Warlock, I would have HATED to argue with the DM that yeah, we should totally be able to safely take two short rests in an haunted castles filled with monsters and traps that is the home of a genius spellcaster who wants us dead because of "balance".

Similarly at some point in the campaign our Wizard who was out of spellslots after 3 encounters flat out said he would refuse to go forward without a long rest because doing so would be suicide. I can't really blame him - he would have been more or less useless without his spells, and we were not obviously short on time - but again, I would have hated to be the Warlock and try to argue that a short rest would be enough.

[Malifice]

I really find it hard to grasp that some people are having difficulty getting short rests throughout a normal adventuring day.

I'm not talking about constant dungeon-bashing, I'm talking about pottering about town getting supplies and gossip, or having a lunch break when travelling, or the like.

At any point you can ask your DM, "How long has it been since we did anything stressful?" If the answer is 1 hour or more then you have just had a short rest and can take the benefits if you want to. Including getting your 2 pact magic slots back.

This.

DM: Youve been walking along the forest trail for 1 hour (everyone gets a short rest)...

That said it's not the issue with getting short rests (although the 1 hour requirement is jarring, and difficult to justify in a dungeon environment, which is the default setting of the game) the bigger issue is with DMs only throwing down 1-2 encounters per long rest (making short rests obsolete).

Its a pretty simple equation for the DM though. If your players arent getting enough short rests per long rest (at a 2-3:1 ratio median), add in more short rests (shorten the time required, increase encounters per long rest, lengthen the time required for long rests, time limit quests etc).

I could have just as easily started the same thread whining about how my Wizard sucks badly, and our party Warlock is God because my DM is really loose with Short rests, but pushes tons of encounters per long rest on us, and Im always out of spell slots really early, while the Warlock keeps on trucking.

Its in the hands of the DM. He can increase rest frequency or alter them to taste.

[Malifice]

That's completely true - however the reality is that not all DM are talented or assertive enough to "police" the adventurer day in such manner (I mentioned that point in my original post).

I agree with you. But thats not an issue with the Warlock class (your original premise). Thats a problem with the rest/ resouce mechanic and the 5 minute advenuturing day.


Because I'd rather limit the "unfun talks" to be had with my DM, and I'd rather not appear to be a whiny or entitled player.


Its not unfun to have a chat with the DM about the above. At least to see if he understands the paradigm used in 5E (2-3 short rests/ long rest).


Let me give you an example. In the Curse of Strahd campaign, the grand finale takes place in a castle. Our DM ruled that short rests would be impossible to take in the castle because the place is crawling with monsters. That significantly weakened the Warlock, who only had access to two spells for the whole day, for what is the most important and memorable day of the campaign.

And your DM is probably sadly ignorant of the impact of that decision.


Similarly at some point in the campaign our Wizard who was out of spellslots after 3 encounters flat out said he would refuse to go forward without a long rest because doing so would be suicide.

Firstly any reason the Warlock could pull the same sooking every 1-2 encounters?

Secondly, I wouldnt really care if I was the DM. The Wizard wants to blow all his slots early, he gets to spam cantrips for the rest of the day.

In my games I make it very clear what the task is at hand, what the consequences for falure are, and how much time the PCs have to do it.

Example (unsure if you know Age of Worms plus a few other modules I added in, but here is how I structured the various adventures)

Adventure 1. PCs get to town to find everyone is dying of the Plague. Every day more NPCs die. They are hired by a local herbalist to find three ingredients for a cure, and given 3 days within which to find those ingredients to save the NPCs in town. Every day they wait more people die. They dont get paid if they dont get the ingredients in 3 days (the plague will have gone too far), and to top it off, one of the PCs has caught the disease and is getting worse by the day. (2-3 encounters per day follow, short rest after each encounter, PCs are 1st level and fragile).

Adventure 2: A Kobold captures some kids from the villiage. The PCs have to save them before midnight or the Kobolds will kill them in a ritual. (8 encounters, enough time for 3-4 short rests)

Adventure 3: PC storm a local dungeon, but catch wind of a rival advenuring party headed there as well. The rivals are higher level that the PCs and will be there in 24 hours to clear it out. Can the PCs clear it out first (8 encounters, enough time for a short rest whenever).

Adventure 4: One of the PCs is possesed by a Ghost, and cursed. The PCs have 24 hours to lay the ghost to rest or else the curse wreaks havok on the PC.

Adventure 5: On the way to Blackwall castle, the PCs get there in time to witness a Seige by lizardfolk. They have to capture the NPC before the lizardfolk devour her at midnight (8 encounters 2-3 short rests follow).

Adventure 6: The PCs find themselves trapped in a dungeon on a deserted island. Can they find the exit before the ship that took them there leaves, marooning them on the island in 3 days time? (18 encounters, and onus on the players to manage their time over those 3 days).

Adventure 7. The players are hired to recover Whelm, Blackrazor and Wave from Whiteplume mountain. Problem is the Archmage Keraptis is returning to the dungeon... that night at midnight! They have only 5 hours to locate and recover all three weapons before the angry archmage turns up and they are trapped in the dugeon forever!

Etc etc etc.

Your DM doesnt do any of this. He is the one that is ultimately responsible for policing the adventuring day, and ensuring short rests and long rests are availabale to be taken so one class doesnt outshine any other (and for many other reasons, including its more fun that way).

He aint doing his job. Thats not the fault of the Warlock class.

[Citan]

I have indeed never played a Warlock, as I view it as an inferior choice (I've never played Beastmaster for the same reason).

Each time a Warlock was in our party, they ended up not pulling their weight. Now it may have been because they didn't know how to play the Warlock right, but it wasn't obvious what, exactly, they were doing wrong.

For example, in our last campaign, every character was far more useful than the Warlock:

- The GWM Fighter with a 1 level Rogue dip could do much better damage than the Warlock, and had Expertise in Athletics. Many fights were won because the Fighter successfully grappled the BBEG.

- The GWM Paladin could do damage similar to the Fighter without expending resources, could Nova like crazy, and boosted our saves by a lot, in addition to the occasional spell.

- The Clerics would Bless the martials to improve their DPS, did amazing battlefield control/damage with Spirit Guardians, could improve our skills with Guidance, saved people from dying with Healing Word & Sanctuary, occasionally repealed hordes of undead, could predict the future with Divination spells, and could tank even better than the two martials. The Tempest Cleric would do significant AoE damage with maximized Shatter & Destruction Wave, while the Life cleric would totally save our asses when our team was low on HP.

- The Lore Bard was amazing at all things social, would regularly debuff enemies with Cutting Words & Faerie Fire, could also save lives with Healing Word, would do huge damage with Animate Objects, would incapacitate hordes of enemies with Hypnotic Pattern, could Counterspell better than anyone, and could heal even better than the Life Cleric with Healing Spirit.

- The Divination Wizard was the king of versatility, with a spell ready for any situation. They would also use their Portent effect to devastating effects, and would let us long rest nearly anywhere with the Tiny Hut spell. They were supported by a small army of skeletons through the Animate Undead spell. Their owl familiar could both scout & provide advantage to the martials without getting hit. Wall of Force trivialized many encounters.

Meanwhile, the Warlock... typically cast Eldritch Blast for okay damage. They basically acted similar to the GWM Fighter, except they couldn't do nearly as much damage, couldn't tank, and couldn't grapple...

In combat, their Quasit familiar were also less useful than the Wizard's because the Quasit couldn't fly to safety after performing the Help action. Out of combat, the Owl familiar could scout as well as the Quasit outdoor, and both couldn't scout inside (every other time the Quasit would open a door he would get attacked by the creatures waiting behind it).

I first I thought the Warlock was not doing well because they picked poor spells. However, after I took a look at their spell list I had to conclude the Warlock just had a mediocre spell list. They only had a handful of spells of note not available to the Clerics, Lore Bard, or Wizard. Their "unique" spells & abilities were typically only buffs to themselves (Shadow of Moil, Darkness + Devil's Sight, Armor of Agathys, etc) - the Warlock was almost devoid of "force multiplier" spells & abilities, which are so valuable in 5e. Often, their best actions was to cast Fear or Hypnotic Pattern - level 3 spells that the Lore Bard & Wizard could have cast just as well.

Overall, the Warlock didn't contribute anything unique that the other spellcasters couldn't do, and had absolutely no synergy with the rest of the group. Awful.
Thanks for sharing that. :)

I understand MUCH better where you're coming from.
My analysis will be short: the problem does not lie in the class, it lies in your group.
Basically, your party already covered everything extremely well, being a large party (5+ is a crowd ^^) with a kind of dream team in class composition (access to potentially 90% of rituals, plenty of healing, plenty of expertise in skills, access to potentially 80% of all utility spells). Whatever 6th player would be mostly unneeded whatever class he would pick...

That assessment becomes even worse when considering that everyone else is a long-rest based class, mostly (barring Action Surge, Channel Divinities and Bardic Inspiration), so you probably don't care that much about taking short rests (especially with Cleric, Bard and Paladin having healing options): like, when you can it's a nice cherry, but overall your party does fine without.

That Warlock player probably just didn't find how to fit in your group, something that can happens much more easily than with other classes precisely because player has so much more responsability on building choices than if building, say, a Cleric/Druid or a Barbarian.

For your current party, Warlocks and probably Monks would probably end frustrated, so your intuition of it being inferior in that context is right.

However, you are very wrong on Warlock's spell list: it's not my favorite because many of its spells are not really my cup of tea (or the kind of campaign I play into), but considering the number of spell known, there are far enough great spells available (eeeespecially since Xanathars) to be potentially a great addition to most parties.

For you to have a nice framwork in which to try a Warlock, I'd suggest playing in a smaller group (4 max) with at least another class which would really like short rests (Monks, Battlemasters, Swords Bard -kinda-) and one reliable source of short rests (Catnap / Rope Trick / Leomund's Tiny Hut).

[Merudo]

Citan, I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. The party we were in was not the right fit for the Warlock.

If we ignore the short vs long rest issue though, do you think it's still possible to build synergistic Warlock for a large party?

From what I read in this thread, it seems to me the Warlock is sort of a jack of all trades - he can do ranged damage, scouting, social, utility casting, etc. well enough and typically at low cost, but not as well as dedicated classes.

In a large party, it's probably more important for a character to do a few thing exceptionally well, and have one or two "unique" tricks, than to be able to replicate what everyone else can do.

You are right than 6 people is a lot, and it's hard to contributed something distinctive in such huge party. Still, instead of the Warlock, I would have much preferred to have one of these characters:

- Totem Barbarian: Wolf could give advantage to the whole team in melee.

- Shepard Druid: could have boosted everyone's HP & healing with the totems. Spells such as Plant Growth, Conjure Animals, Conjure Woodland Beings, etc are not available to other spellcaster and can have high impact on the battlefield. Healing Spirit is still the most efficient healing spell.

- Sorcerer: Twinned Haste would be wonderful for the martials, Careful Spell would help with Hypnotic Pattern while engaged in close combat.

[Justin Sane]

Its in the hands of the DM. He can increase rest frequency or alter them to taste.Also, nobody is forcing you to use the same frequency all through the campaign. My group uses Gritty rules during travel and city scenes, Heroic when dramatically appropriate, and normal everywhere else.

[Malifice]

- Sorcerer: Twinned Haste would be wonderful for the martials, Careful Spell would help with Hypnotic Pattern while engaged in close combat.

You're going to run out of SP and slots with twinned Haste cast all the time arent you, factoring in a 6 encounter adventuring day (6 encounters between long rests).

Pretend your DM is sticking to the expectation of the game and policing adventuring days (however he or she is doing it), and you're getting 6 encounters per long rest, and 2 short rests in that time (as a median).

Warlock (Fiend) 5 has enough juice for a 3rd level slot every encounter (fireball) plus at will eldritch blast (2d10+8) and is wearing light armor with d8 HD, plus a book full of nice rituals.

Compare to a Wizard 5 (Evoker). He's dropped a 1st level spell on mage armor, only has a d6 HP, a slightly worse cantrip and only enough juice for a 3rd level slot every OTHER encounter (but can also drop a 2nd and 1st level slot here and there as well). He also has rituals, and a broader spell selection.

At the 6 encounter/ 2 short rest ballpark they even out. Add more short rests and/ or encounters and the Warlock pulls ahead. Subtract encounters and short rests and the Wizard pulls in front.

As DM you have your hands on these dials (encounter and rest frequency). If classes are falling behind or pulling in front, it's not the fault of the classes it's the fault of the DM (and to an extent the rest mechanic chosen by the devs).

[Malifice]

Also, nobody is forcing you to use the same frequency all through the campaign. Our use uses Gritty rules during travel and city scenes, Heroic when dramatically appropriate, and normal everywhere else.

I have days with single encounters (the smallest possible adventuring day). I also have days where short resting is impossible (environmental constraints). On the flip side I have days where there are several encounters in a row, and long resting is impossible (but the players get a short rest instead due to nightmares, environment or fiat).

I just aim for a median of around 6/2 and it works out. Some days favor the short rest guys, some days favor the long rest guys. The marathons favor the Champions and Rogues (who are pretty resource neutral).

[Drascin]

A note about the short resting is that most of the time when there's 1 or 2 short rests a day, players don't actually KNOW there's going to only be one or two encounters. Wizards always end up holding spells in reserve just in case. Warlocks can just throw them willy-nilly because, hey, a short rest is easy to get. "Okay, guys, close the doors and let's get a twenty minutes breather while we stitch our stuff back together and count the spoils" is a lot easier to convince the DM of than "welp, let's camp here for eight to ten hours". So what ends up happening most of the time a short day happens is that in the end the Warlock actually casts significantly more spells than the Wizard even on a 2 short rest day, and prepared casters end up with half their spell slots unspent.

[Malifice]

A note about the short resting is that most of the time when there's 1 or 2 short rests a day, players don't actually KNOW there's going to only be one or two encounters. Wizards always end up holding spells in reserve just in case. Warlocks can just throw them willy-nilly because, hey, a short rest is easy to get. "Okay, guys, close the doors and let's get a twenty minutes breather while we stitch our stuff back together and count the spoils" is a lot easier to convince the DM of than "welp, let's camp here for eight to ten hours". So what ends up happening most of the time a short day happens is that in the end the Warlock actually casts significantly more spells than the Wizard even on a 2 short rest day, and prepared casters end up with half their spell slots unspent.

The OP mentioned he has Wizard PCs blowing their loads in 3 encounters and then sooking to the DM that they needed a rest.

IMG all that Player gets from the DM is a very evil smile and a shrug of the shoulders, and a reminder about the doom clock currently in effect and the consequences of failure. He gets to spend the next half a dozen or so encounters relying on cantrips, rituals, a staff and robes and his d6 HD.

[Willie the Duck]

Merudo, I think this post is very informative to the rest of us. Thanks. I think it informs us of how all these many multiple (arguably pretty badly-ending) threads you have keep happening. I am going to try to respond very honestly, and withholding judgment.


I actually didn't know the gritty realism rest variant was in the DMG. It's not mentioned in the PHB. Thank you for pointing that out.

That is good to know. This means that, to us, it seems like you have been very loudly complaining about an edition of a game you aren't wholly familiar with (and, within the context of DM-based decisions, have been relying upon the assumption that the way your DM does things is the norm/baseline/etc.).


That's completely true - however the reality is that not all DM are talented or assertive enough to "police" the adventurer day in such manner (I mentioned that point in my original post).

Yes you did. And it is a reasonable complaint. Despite the pushback you have gotten, the challenge of conforming to (or adjusting for deviation from) the assumed standard rest structure genuinely is one of the bigger DMing challenges of this edition.

Regardless, the designers were aware of these challenges, and included numerous avenues of addressing them, including variants, advice, and of course tailoring your class choice decisions based upon what type of game you are going to be in.


Because I'd rather limit the "unfun talks" to be had with my DM, and I'd rather not appear to be a whiny or entitled player.

Okay, this is the big one. You have basically created an online persona of 'guy with serious axe to grind with this edition,' complaining in multiple threads on multiple sub-subjects about how the game has serious inter-character-choice balance issues (warlock over other classes, high level cleric over other spellcasters, etc.), all based on their performance in your very specific campaigns with your DM and adventuring group, with your assumptions, and apparently using the one adventure module you guys have (CoS, which it not representative of the whole universe of 5e gaming), all of basically an argument which posits that 5e D&D is flawed because it doesn't work perfectly for you and your very specific situations which you refuse to modify... and you're afraid of appearing 'whiny or entitled?' Do you somehow not see the contradiction there?


Let me give you an example. In the Curse of Strahd campaign, the grand finale takes place in a castle. Our DM ruled that short rests would be impossible to take in the castle because the place is crawling with monsters. That significantly weakened the Warlock, who only had access to two spells for the whole day, for what is the most important and memorable day of the campaign.

If I were the Warlock, I would have HATED to argue with the DM that yeah, we should totally be able to safely take two short rests in an haunted castles filled with monsters and traps that is the home of a genius spellcaster who wants us dead because of "balance".

Similarly at some point in the campaign our Wizard who was out of spellslots after 3 encounters flat out said he would refuse to go forward without a long rest because doing so would be suicide. I can't really blame him - he would have been more or less useless without his spells, and we were not obviously short on time - but again, I would have hated to be the Warlock and try to argue that a short rest would be enough.

Other than once again pointing out that the entirety of 5e is not balanced around a single final dungeon in a singular adventure simply because in your arguments you keep going back to that well, I am going to point out that you are now hopelessly mixing your argument. The warlock is screwed and SOL because they can't get a recharge, but the wizard is also out of slots after 3 encounters... so how is this a problem with either the warlock of the short-rest recharge mechanic? This sounds more like either 1) your party (naturally or because of how your DM structures encounters) overspend their resources, or more sympathetically, 2) an argument against expendable resources at all. Which... well, there are actually plenty of games like that. Hero System has a baseline mechanic which powers everything of ENDurance, which recharges in usually no more than a minute or two (minimum recharge is 4/12 seconds, total pools rarely exceed ~100).

[KorvinStarmast]

The OP mentioned he has Wizard PCs blowing their loads in 3 encounters and then sooking to the DM that they needed a rest.

IMG all that Player gets from the DM is a very evil smile and a shrug of the shoulders, and a reminder about the doom clock currently in effect and the consequences of failure. He gets to spend the next half a dozen or so encounters relying on cantrips, rituals, a staff and robes and his d6 HD. Offering such a situation tests the player's imagination and resourcefulness.

[Unoriginal]

5e is not based around having 6 Medium Encounters a day. The *classes* are balanced on how they can handle 6 encounters an adventuring day with a few short rests (not a travel day) before running our of ressources.

If we want to have realistic expectations about a campaign, you're likely getting far less encounters most of the time, and far more (or more dangerous than Medium) during dungeons or when the plot's rythm intensifies.

[Malifice]

Offering such a situation tests the player's imagination and resourcefulness.

Exactly. Time to get some staff practice.

It usually only happens once.

[MaxWilson]

Similarly at some point in the campaign our Wizard who was out of spellslots after 3 encounters flat out said he would refuse to go forward without a long rest because doing so would be suicide. I can't really blame him - he would have been more or less useless without his spells, and we were not obviously short on time - but again, I would have hated to be the Warlock and try to argue that a short rest would be enough.

If you were short on time, you have might tried arguing that a short rest would be enough because the wizard would regain enough spell slots via Arcane Recovery to be worthwhile.

Or you might have tried simply proceeding ahead without him. Just because you're not short on time doesn't mean everyone isn't going to get bored waiting around for 24 hours while the wizard rests. (One DM technique for enforcing this: make resting require real-time breaks. If you're in a dungeon and the players can't sit still for twenty minutes before opening that next door, what are the odds that the PCs are going to be able to sit still for 24 hours before opening the door?) As a DM, I love it when players split the party, and I try to incentivize it as much as possible, e.g. by tempting them with treasure.

Intra-party drama is the best part of D&D.

[Malifice]

If you were short on time, you have might tried arguing that a short rest would be enough because the wizard would regain enough spell slots via Arcane Recovery to be worthwhile.

Or you might have tried simply proceeding ahead without him. Just because you're not short on time doesn't mean everyone isn't going to get bored waiting around for 24 hours while the wizard rests. (One DM technique for enforcing this: make resting require real-time breaks. If you're in a dungeon and the players can't sit still for twenty minutes before opening that next door, what are the odds that the PCs are going to be able to sit still for 24 hours before opening the door?) As a DM, I love it when players split the party, and I try to incentivize it as much as possible, e.g. by tempting them with treasure.

Intra-party drama is the best part of D&D.

Bore the players and make them fight each other?

Great advice man. Sounds like a fun game.

[Cynthaer]

That assessment becomes even worse when considering that everyone else is a long-rest based class, mostly (barring Action Surge, Channel Divinities and Bardic Inspiration)

Not to distract from the rest of your very good post, but this is the second or third time in this thread that Bardic Inspiration has been used as an example of a short rest mechanic.

While it certainly feels intuitively like something that would recharge on a short rest, it's actually a long rest mechanic.

EDIT: Oops, never mind. I forgot that Font of Inspiration kicks in at 5th level, making it a short rest.

Everyone carry on. :smalltongue:

[MaxWilson]

Not to distract from the rest of your very good post, but this is the second or third time in this thread that Bardic Inspiration has been used as an example of a short rest mechanic.

While it certainly feels intuitively like something that would recharge on a short rest, it's actually a long rest mechanic.

At Bard 5 it becomes a short rest resource.

[Sinon]

If you were short on time, you have might tried arguing that a short rest would be enough because the wizard would regain enough spell slots via Arcane Recovery to be worthwhile.
And the Lore Bard can use Song of Rest and refill his Font of inspiration.

The Fighter can renew his Action Surge and his Second Wind.

Everything about the OP's arguments suggest that he lacks experience with this edition and that the rest of his group is either a rhetorical fictionalization or at least as confused about the game as he.

I don't blame people for being confused about things like the guidelines for rests versus encounters.

But once the clarifications have been made, one's errors identified and explained, that should be the end of it.

It hasn't ended because this was never about the warlock, and after reading the context provided by Wille the Duck, I suspect it was never really about rests either.

[Malifice]

Not to distract from the rest of your very good post, but this is the second or third time in this thread that Bardic Inspiration has been used as an example of a short rest mechanic.

While it certainly feels intuitively like something that would recharge on a short rest, it's actually a long rest mechanic.

Not from 5th level its not. It changes to short rest recharge.

[mgshamster]

There is another option than changing the short rest mechanics:

Change the Warlock to a long rest class. Somply triple the number of castings they get per day and have them reset on a long rest instead of a short rest.

[Citan]

Citan, I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. The party we were in was not the right fit for the Warlock.

If we ignore the short vs long rest issue though, do you think it's still possible to build synergistic Warlock for a large party?

From what I read in this thread, it seems to me the Warlock is sort of a jack of all trades - he can do ranged damage, scouting, social, utility casting, etc. well enough and typically at low cost, but not as well as dedicated classes.

In a large party, it's probably more important for a character to do a few thing exceptionally well, and have one or two "unique" tricks, than to be able to replicate what everyone else can do.

Hey : )

I would like to stress a thing. I sincerely think it is hard for any 6th player to fit in ans I think it is a bit harder for Warlock than for other classes. But not because the class would be flawed in itself or too "good at everything great at nothing" like. Rather simply (only) because it is the most DIY of all so actual efficiency depends much more on your choices (much like Sorcerer).

But even in that particular party you describe, even with those shortcomings that come from context (little short rest, close combat encounters, long rest heavy party, all kind of casters present) there were still many ways for a Warlock to be plenty useful in different ways.
I ll put some examples later if you want but not now because I m on mobile and suffering harshly whem typing on this support. Xd

In summary if you want a good chance of enjoying a Warlock I suggest you follow my previous suggestion bur besides that, as per your experience so far it really cannot be taken as representative of anything about Warlock except for the following statement : warlock is a bit trickier to build than a Bard or Cleric. : )
It is totally a preconception/wild judgemeny here but my guess is your player did not know enough of the game or was inexperienced enough in general to either make a "generically good" Walock bud neither a build that could fill one particular need in the context of that party in that canpaign. Both being not necessarily trivial especially the latter. : )

Plus as others pointed out there is also a group responsibility here : everyone should support Warlock asking for short rest, everyone should politely push back Wizard whining for long rest after nova, DM should politely but firmly describe and enforce situations that strongly lead you towards better paced adventuring days.

[Unoriginal]

Bore the players and make them fight each other?

Great advice man. Sounds like a fun game.

Well WotC tried that with 3.5.

[MilkmanDanimal]

There is another option than changing the short rest mechanics:

Change the Warlock to a long rest class. Somply triple the number of castings they get per day and have them reset on a long rest instead of a short rest.

Which is pretty much removing what makes them unique, and just changes them to being a crappier version of a Wizard or Sorcerer?

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Which is pretty much removing what makes them unique, and just changes them to being a crappier version of a Wizard or Sorcerer?

Perhaps if you play them as a full caster, so it's maybe more damaging to a tomelock. More combat/hybrid warlocks would probably remain distinct.

[tieren]

If we ignore the short vs long rest issue though, do you think it's still possible to build synergistic Warlock for a large party?


Absolutely.

Hey, that was a good fight yall, while fighter loots the corpses and wizard looks over that book we found I'm going to sit here and take a drink. Rogue, are you going on to scout about? here take Stryx with you, I'll instruct him to follow your commands and Help you out whenever you need it.

Lets bandage our wounds finish searching the room and be ready to move out in about an hour ok?

[Cynthaer]

At Bard 5 it becomes a short rest resource.


Not from 5th level its not. It changes to short rest recharge.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I've been playing a bard for a few months but haven't hit 5th level yet, and I've constantly had to remind myself that it's a long rest recharge. I guess that problem's going to disappear soon enough. :smallbiggrin:

[mgshamster]

Which is pretty much removing what makes them unique, and just changes them to being a crappier version of a Wizard or Sorcerer?

Not really.

You're still getting 6 max level spells per day, and no other class can do that. And it's a hell of a lot better than only getting 2 max level spells because your DM and group never give you a short rest.

Plus you still have all your other abilities (invocations, patron, and pact), all of which are unique to the warlock.

Short rest spell slot reset isn't the only thing that makes them unique.

If the OP's DM isn't going to change and the OP wants to play a warlock, it's a solution that can work.

[Sinon]

Not really.

You're still getting 6 max level spells per day, and no other class can do that. And it's a hell of a lot better than only getting 2 max level spells because your DM and group never give you a short rest.

Plus you still have all your other abilities (invocations, patron, and pact), all of which are unique to the warlock.

Short rest spell slot reset isn't the only thing that makes them unique.

If the OP's DM isn't going to change and the OP wants to play a warlock, it's a solution that can work.
It is a slippery slope to change one set of mechanics because another set of mechanics is being poorly implemented.

What if my next character is a Mood Druid? Can I have more wildshapes per day?

Another significant factor that matters is that in addition to not handling short rests properly, this “group” is mishandling long rests. If full casters have long rests at will, this dramatically increases their power relative not just to the warlock, but to every other class as well.

Adding spell slots to the warlock just ramps up their power without addressing the other, underlying problems.

There has been a lot of good advice on this thread regarding the rest/encounter guidelines and how to implement them in a way that is both practical and fair while still challenging all different kinds of characters.

Trying those is going to be a lot better than implementing fixes to things that aren’t broken.

[MaxWilson]

There is another option than changing the short rest mechanics:

Change the Warlock to a long rest class. Somply triple the number of castings they get per day and have them reset on a long rest instead of a short rest.

In fact, you can offer this option across the board to all PCs: you choose at character creation whether you're going to keep your "short rest" abilities as short rest, or switch them to triple frequency but on a long rest. There are pros and cons to each.


What if my next character is a Mood Druid? Can I have more wildshapes per day?

As a player, I'd stick with 2/short rest instead of 6/long rest. It's more valuable to me being able to wildshape as much as I want, at no real penalty for wildshaping in non-combat scenes, because I can always just rest and get more. Essentially I get to wildshape every 30 minutes on average.

Why would I want to limit myself to only 6 times per day?

[krugaan]

It hasn't ended because this was never about the warlock, and after reading the context provided by Wille the Duck, I suspect it was never really about rests either.

Welcome to the internet!

It's not about the bridges you build, it's about the trolls you find underneath!

[Sinon]

In fact, you can offer this option across the board to all PCs: you choose at character creation whether you're going to keep your "short rest" abilities as short rest, or switch them to triple frequency but on a long rest. There are pros and cons to each.
But wasn't this a proposed solution to the problem of the DM not allowing for enough short rests?

If you "solve" the problem of insufficient short rests in this way for the warlock, how will there be sufficient short rests for the druid?


because I can always just rest and get more. So then the warlock could, too?


Welcome to the internet!Thanks. It really is everything I was told it would be.

[MaxWilson]

But wasn't this a proposed solution to the problem of the DM not allowing for enough short rests?

If you "solve" the problem of insufficient short rests in this way for the warlock, how will there be sufficient short rests for the druid?

I'm not following your question, but I suspect the answer is "No, this proposal was not custom-tailored to this thread. It's just something that you can do as a DM if you don't particularly want to feel bad about 'disrupting class balance' if you're not married to 2 short rest/day encounter pacing." It puts all PCs on essentially equal footing no matter what your adventure pacing is.


So then the warlock could, too?

Sure, if he wants to. It's up to the player which one he prefers. Casting warlock spells every 30 minutes may or may not be as much fun as turning into a new animal every 30 minutes (warlock spells tend towards the combat-oriented, so unlike the wildshaping druid you're rate-limited by how often suitable targets present themselves) but either way, the player makes his own decisions and gets to live with them.

[Merudo]

This means that, to us, it seems like you have been very loudly complaining about an edition of a game you aren't wholly familiar with (and, within the context of DM-based decisions, have been relying upon the assumption that the way your DM does things is the norm/baseline/etc.).


Complaining? Lol!

Is that really how people see an argument about balance? Are people so emotional fragile that they interpret any discussion about the potential shortcoming of a class as some sort of attack on D&D?

From my play experience and analysis of the class, it seemed to me that the Warlock is not as strong as the other spellcasting classes. I made a thread to show how I arrive to the conclusion, and hoped people would be able have a rational conversation on what I might have overlooked or misunderstood.

I never pretended to be an expert at 5e, and indeed, that's the main reason I posted here - so I could get feedback from more experienced players and DMs.

I'm a bit disappointed though that my post have triggered knee-jerk reaction from many posters. Apparently, I should have kept my doubts regarding the Warlock to myself, because expressing them here offended quite a few people.



Okay, this is the big one. You have basically created an online persona of 'guy with serious axe to grind with this edition,'

I actually like 5e a lot - otherwise I wouldn't spend so much time trying to figure out the strengths and weaknesses of each class.

One of my favorite thing is to figure out how to make the most impactfull character that could join a given party. That's why I try to understand each class, so to figure out what they have to offer. And when my analysis differs significantly from the shared wisdom of this forum (mainly, I think Warlocks and high level Clerics are not as good as people claim), I post here to "test" my theories, to see how they hold up against "peer review".

For the record I care much more about finding out the truth regarding the Warlock's usefulness than I do about whether or not the class is actually underpowered or not. If I see the light and figure out the Warlock is indeed a top tier class, I'll play as one - otherwise I'll just keep playing Lore Bard / Divination Wizards / Life Clerics / etc.

[MaxWilson]

Complaining? Lol!

Is that really how people see an argument about balance? Are people so emotional fragile that they interpret any discussion about the potential shortcoming of a class as some sort of attack on D&D?

FWIW, the way I perceive your posts is totally different from how WillieTheDuck perceives them. He speaks for himself, not for me. I don't always agree with your opinions, but I don't perceive you as complaining or anything. You're just asking questions, and you generally put it in terms of, "This is how it looks to me--what have I overlooked?"

[Kane0]

Cool things a warlock can get (obviously not all at once):

- Telepathy
- Cha to hit and damage with weapons, plus to damage again at level 12
- A smite that includes a knock prone effect
- Short rest spell slots
- Automatic upcasting
- A 3rd layer of build choice (pact, boon, invocations) before feats and spells
- Always having your weapon available
- Fantastic Ritual casting
- Resistance to any damage type, changeable after every rest
- Hurl Through Hell (no action on your part, single creature loses a turn and takes a bundle of damage)
- See through Darkness. See pretty much everything (and through some things) for that matter, if you want to build for it.
- Optional Extra Attack (great for multiclassing, can use the space for something else)
- At-Will Illusions
- Bonus action healing that doesn't stop you from casting, and a generous amount to boot
- Lots of sources of Temp HP (not as awesome as an Abjurer, but still notable)
- Ignore death which includes dealing a bit of damage
- Crit on a 19 (Only the Champ Fighter also gets this)
- Never need to sleep (even more efficient than an Elf or Warforged!)
- Maximize Healing on yourself
- At-will forced movement with your attacks

And that's just mechanically speaking.

Warlock isn't a class that's always the best in any situation, but there are plenty of reasons to go for more levels than a dip in it.

[MaxWilson]

- At-will forced movement with your attacks

+1 for this one. Blowing enemies through Wall of Fire/Spiked Growth is great on paper, but in actual play it gets even better when the warlock seizes the opportunities to blow enemies off cliffs, off the side of spelljamming ships, off their flying mounts, etc. It's battlefield removal and extra damage (sometimes a LOT) as a free rider on an attack you were probably going to use anyway.

Agonizing Repelling Blast, hooray!

[Oerlaf]

I'm playong a Cleric 6/Warlock 9 - and I like it. The healing from Life Cleric and Celestial Warlock is heavy, so unlike full spellcasters I spend little to no resources and still effective at healing the party.

Warlock is good for those players that are fond of tactical gaming and utiliizing those solutions that bring maximum effectiveness for minimum resource expenditure.

While noone is severely damaged, I cast Agonizing Repelling Blast.

At the beginning of any adventure my party starts with 41 extra thp - 21 from Inspiring Leader and 20 from aid cast as a 5th level slot - a slot I immediately restore through the Rod of the Pact Keeper.

A familiar through the Pact of the Tome grants me access to nearly all rituals, and allows me to cast cure wounds at a distance.

Then, neither Preserve Life for 30 hp nor Healing Light fir 6d6 hp can be counterspelled.

[Malifice]

At the beginning of any adventure my party starts with 41 extra thp - 21 from Inspiring Leader and 20 from aid cast as a 5th level slot - a slot I immediately restore through the Rod of the Pact Keeper.

Hate to be the one to tell you but Temporary HP don't stack.

If you get them, and already have them, you choose which to keep.

[Oerlaf]

Hate to be the one to tell you but Temporary HP don't stack.

If you get them, and already have them, you choose which to keep.


Aid does not gove you thp. It increases your maximum h

[Malifice]

Aid does not gove you thp. It increases your maximum h

Ahh cool mate.

[Unoriginal]

You're just asking questions, and you generally put it in terms of, "This is how it looks to me--what have I overlooked?"

Except, you know, he spent the rest of this thread arguing that he totally didn't overlook anything significant and denying others' argument, not to mention trying to re-frame the situation by calling others "emotionaly fragile" for saying he's complaining.

This is not the actions of someone who wish to learn what they might have missed.

[Mordaedil]

When accused of complaining, clearly it is because the others are too emotional. Right. Yes, they are the problem.

[Asmotherion]

Well, wile level 2 is Agonising and a great dip level, every level beyond that is awesome. As long as Pact Magic is DMed correctly, it can be actually a more dependable resource for higher level spell slots than regular spellcasting (at least it is supposed to be designed this way). Some builds profit more from this than others, Warlocks themselves half included.

Truth is, if you want to play a Blastlock (and, specifically, an Eldritch Blastlock), yes 2-3 levels are all of Warlock that you'll ever need, and then go Sorcerer. But the Warlock has a lot more rich options to offer than just Eldritch Blast, witch is just an amazing Main Weapon for an amazing toolkit.

3 levels (other than your Pact) means 2nd level spell slots. The higher your spell slots, the higher your Short Rest refreshable Maximum Capacity. Mix and Match with regular Spellcasting (perhaps with Sorcerer?) for a lot of Spellcasting. Some Duration spells (Alter Self for an easy example) can allow almost superpowers on demand from an early level of play, wile others (Danse Macabre/Darkness+Devilsight) can be real game changers, and you'll be able to do them more times per day, more often, as long as you rest. Even as a pure Warlock, you have amazing options, you just need to be more careful about how to use them.

Overall, Creativity can give you great options and RP with a Warlock. It's not for everyone, but people like me who enjoy it, realy do so.

[Sinon]

From my play experience and analysis of the class, it seemed to me that the Warlock is not as strong as the other spellcasting classes. I made a thread to show how I arrive to the conclusion, and hoped people would be able have a rational conversation on what I might have overlooked or misunderstood.

Experience?
Yes, that one experience in which the warlock was not even played by you, but rather a guy who in spite of being the only ranged combatant in the party couldn’t find anything to do (which considering he also couldn’t figure out why an a intelligent familiar with language, thumbs, and the power of invisibility wasn’t more practical than an animal might indicate other cognitive problems); however, that might not be his fault since he had to function in such a typical party, what with four full casters, three of them healers, and a half-caster, also with healing spells, who fought what I can only presume were predominantly middle-school wrestlers, as the GWF routinely decided it was in his interest to eschew his GW and grapple them to death before anyone had a chance to do much else.
No, I’m kidding – middle school gymnasiums are so much larger than the 30x30 rooms the least communicative DM in the world set his encounters in, but it’s hard to fault the guy, considering his acute understanding of the impracticality of short rests when you can take all the long rests you want.

When your in-depth analysis of a class is built on a rock-solid foundation like that, it is hard to fault you for sticking to your guns and ignoring the responses of less experienced players and DMs because there's no way this could have been a smokescreen for complaints about a mechanic you don't like.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Except, you know, he spent the rest of this thread arguing that he totally didn't overlook anything significant and denying others' argument, not to mention trying to re-frame the situation by calling others "emotionaly fragile" for saying he's complaining.

This is not the actions of someone who wish to learn what they might have missed.

I especially enjoyed the part where he accused an experienced warlock player of having never played one, then later admitted that he actually hadn't played a warlock, and had only seen a warlock played in one campaign.

The thread title promised comedy gold, and he did not disappoint. :amused:

[Willie the Duck]

Complaining? Lol!

Is that really how people see an argument about balance?

No. Not 'an argument about balance' as the platonic ideal of the concept. This one specific argument you are making and how it is being conducted.

If, in all genuine honesty, you do not believe what you are doing is complaining about the game/the implementation of short-rest recharge classes in the game, then there is a fundamental disconnect between the person <real name> sitting at the keyboard and the person Merudo who is coming forth on the forum page, which is all the information the rest of us have to go by. That is, of course, just my opinion and you are free to reject it. I would suggest, however, that you not out-of-hand reject any conclusion simply because it might require self-reflection on your part. I think, if you honestly have no axe to grind here, then you have a problem with communication. I guess that's what I have. Take it or leave it as you see fit.



For the record I care much more about finding out the truth regarding the Warlock's usefulness than I do about whether or not the class is actually underpowered or not. If I see the light and figure out the Warlock is indeed a top tier class, I'll play as one - otherwise I'll just keep playing Lore Bard / Divination Wizards / Life Clerics / etc.

In that case, I would at least suggest finding a playtest environment where there is a reasonable opportunity for them to be tested at their best and at their worst. In the very specific example you have provided, the player was playing a tomelock in a party full of Long Rest-recharging spellcasters (plus a fighter w/ rogue dip, unclear if battlemaster or EK or what). This meant that 1) their ritual casting is redundant except as a backup, and 2) no one else was urging there to be short rests. Perhaps the next one-off would be a good time to try one out.

[Unoriginal]

Experience?
Yes, that one experience in which the warlock was not even played by you, but rather a guy who in spite of being the only ranged combatant in the party couldn’t find anything to do (which considering he also couldn’t figure out why an a intelligent familiar with language, thumbs, and the power of invisibility wasn’t more practical than an animal might indicate other cognitive problems); however, that might not be his fault since he had to function in such a typical party, what with four full casters, three of them healers, and a half-caster, also with healing spells, who fought what I can only presume were predominantly middle-school wrestlers, as the GWF routinely decided it was in his interest to eschew his GW and grapple them to death before anyone had a chance to do much else.
No, I’m kidding – middle school gymnasiums are so much larger than the 30x30 rooms the least communicative DM in the world set his encounters in, but it’s hard to fault the guy, considering his acute understanding of the impracticality of short rests when you can take all the long rests you want.

When your in-depth analysis of a class is built on a rock-solid foundation like that, it is hard to fault you for sticking to your guns and ignoring the responses of less experienced players and DMs because there's no way this could have been a smokescreen for complaints about a mechanic you don't like.

At least they made an awesome series based on this campaign:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWqCEa2hYeA

[Protato]

You can get a pact boon, mystic arcanum, and invocations if you keep going, in addition to subclass features and more access to spells. Simply put, you get a good amount of options.

[SpanielBear]

It feels to me that the way to have fun as a warlock is not in what you do, but how you do it. It may not stack up with the most optimal classes, and it may be jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none, but seriously, don't play it as throwing dice at a stat-sheet. You are mortal blessed with the power of a demon-lord/fae royalty/a mystical Old One/a really shiny sword. Lean into that!

My favourite moment in almost ten years (I'm late to the party) of role-playing was as my warlock using mage hand. We opened a door we knew had bandits waiting behind it, and a skull, carried by a tentacle formed of pure void-stuff floated into the room. As the bandits took a fearful step back, I moved the skull into the torch one was carrying.
Whereupon, the strong liquor it had been doused in burst into violent flame.

Could any wizard, sorcerer, arcane trickster or any combination thereof have done that? Yes. Absolutely.

But they didn't. I did. And it was in character, bad-ass and warlocky as stink.


See, what I've found is that the short-rest, low slot mechanic does limit you in some ways, but it also pushes you to be creative with what you've got. And there is something very, very satisfying about using the tricks and peculiar skills of the class; the telepathy, the misty step, the perfect dark vision etc. to resolve a situation in an out-of-the box way.

Why take more than 2 levels of warlock? Because no-one knows what you'll do next.

[Tanarii]

If, in all genuine honesty, you do not believe what you are doing is complaining about the game/the implementation of short-rest recharge classes in the game, then there is a fundamental disconnect between the person <real name> sitting at the keyboard and the person Merudo who is coming forth on the forum page, which is all the information the rest of us have to go by. Second this and well put.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think, if you honestly have no axe to grind here, then you have a problem with communication. I guess that's what I have. Willie, no problem understanding you and your posts.
I especially enjoyed the part where he accused an experienced warlock player of having never played one, then later admitted that he actually hadn't played a warlock, and had only seen a warlock played in one campaign. I found it saddening.
The thread title promised comedy gold, and he did not disappoint. Hmm, not sure how funny this is, but there has been some amusement.
Why take more than 2 levels of warlock? Because no-one knows what you'll do next. *golf clap*

Hey, Merudo: how about you read about someone who played a Warlock in the first season of AL play? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22794682&postcount=17)
MC: 1 Sorc/12 Warlock.
User name Dyndrilliac
That post, and a few others in that thread, answer your OP directly. I told you about this the other day, and I again suggest that you read that post, and browse that thread.

For more details, read this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22797960&postcount=45)
Some good information there.

[Citan]

I have indeed never played a Warlock, as I view it as an inferior choice (I've never played Beastmaster for the same reason).

Each time a Warlock was in our party, they ended up not pulling their weight. Now it may have been because they didn't know how to play the Warlock right, but it wasn't obvious what, exactly, they were doing wrong.

For example, in our last campaign, every character was far more useful than the Warlock:

- The GWM Fighter with a 1 level Rogue dip could do much better damage than the Warlock, and had Expertise in Athletics. Many fights were won because the Fighter successfully grappled the BBEG.

- The GWM Paladin could do damage similar to the Fighter without expending resources, could Nova like crazy, and boosted our saves by a lot, in addition to the occasional spell.

- The Clerics would Bless the martials to improve their DPS, did amazing battlefield control/damage with Spirit Guardians, could improve our skills with Guidance, saved people from dying with Healing Word & Sanctuary, occasionally repealed hordes of undead, could predict the future with Divination spells, and could tank even better than the two martials. The Tempest Cleric would do significant AoE damage with maximized Shatter & Destruction Wave, while the Life cleric would totally save our asses when our team was low on HP.

- The Lore Bard was amazing at all things social, would regularly debuff enemies with Cutting Words & Faerie Fire, could also save lives with Healing Word, would do huge damage with Animate Objects, would incapacitate hordes of enemies with Hypnotic Pattern, could Counterspell better than anyone, and could heal even better than the Life Cleric with Healing Spirit.

- The Divination Wizard was the king of versatility, with a spell ready for any situation. They would also use their Portent effect to devastating effects, and would let us long rest nearly anywhere with the Tiny Hut spell. They were supported by a small army of skeletons through the Animate Undead spell. Their owl familiar could both scout & provide advantage to the martials without getting hit. Wall of Force trivialized many encounters.

Meanwhile, the Warlock... typically cast Eldritch Blast for okay damage. They basically acted similar to the GWM Fighter, except they couldn't do nearly as much damage, couldn't tank, and couldn't grapple...

In combat, their Quasit familiar were also less useful than the Wizard's because the Quasit couldn't fly to safety after performing the Help action. Out of combat, the Owl familiar could scout as well as the Quasit outdoor, and both couldn't scout inside (every other time the Quasit would open a door he would get attacked by the creatures waiting behind it).

I first I thought the Warlock was not doing well because they picked poor spells. However, after I took a look at their spell list I had to conclude the Warlock just had a mediocre spell list. They only had a handful of spells of note not available to the Clerics, Lore Bard, or Wizard. Their "unique" spells & abilities were typically only buffs to themselves (Shadow of Moil, Darkness + Devil's Sight, Armor of Agathys, etc) - the Warlock was almost devoid of "force multiplier" spells & abilities, which are so valuable in 5e. Often, their best actions was to cast Fear or Hypnotic Pattern - level 3 spells that the Lore Bard & Wizard could have cast just as well.

Overall, the Warlock didn't contribute anything unique that the other spellcasters couldn't do, and had absolutely no synergy with the rest of the group. Awful.


Sooo... @OP I'm back for suggestions.
Several people gave you 'generic' ideas on what good/great/fun/original things Warlocks can do. And I myself probably won't have the brightest ones either because I didn't play the class that much either.

But, considering your specific party composition, your Warlock friend could...
1. Help the Fighter succeed on Grappling/Shoving EVEN when the DM was/is gonna throw highly agile/strong enemies (Hex).
2. Push(pull) enemies into self AOE (Hunger of Hadar) or friends's AOE (typically Spirit Guardians) with Repelling Blast (or Thorns Whip for Tome).
2bis. Free one or two allies from a dangerous OA threatening zone by pushing/pulling enemies away from them (same).
3. Spare Bard's concentration for Animal Objects by using Hypnotic Pattern himself.
4. Bring back a downed ally in range of another's Healing Words while also dealing damage with Thunder Step.
5. Potentially trivialize a fight by taking care of an upcast Fly (not on Bard spell list, Wizard probably concentrates on save or suck spell).
6. Banish two of the most dangerous creatures for your party (typically casters with turning spells, because Paladin's Aura is still 'only' 10 feet).
7. Take care of any target that would be normally out of bounds (150 feet cantrip, Earthbind).
8. Greatly facilitate in/exfiltration by making up to 4 people Invisible at the same time (sure, Wizards and Bards can do it, but that kind of upcast would be a big deal for their resources. For Warlock? There is no limitation on "separate distance", and you can short rest while concentrating (AFAIR, I'll ask for a confirmation from others on RAW) so Warlock could perfectly be one of the targets, Hide himself and rest comfortably, in the end, no expense of slot.

And these are only examples limited to "any" Warlock (except one), I didn't even brush the Patron features and spells (like Plant Growth to make your pals's Spirit Guardians reaaaal sticky XD) nor the Invocation variety nor the higher level spells.

Also, looking back on the post in which you described "everyone-but-Warlock-prowesses", I have a strong feeling there is also a balance problem, aka DM having trouble designing encounters that can challenge you while not landing straight into TPK territory because of too strong special effects. But with half the party being capable of Healing Words and a half being very sturdy, I understand how he could have trouble. ^^

[MaxWilson]

If, in all genuine honesty, you do not believe what you are doing is complaining about the game/the implementation of short-rest recharge classes in the game, then there is a fundamental disconnect between the person <real name> sitting at the keyboard and the person Merudo who is coming forth on the forum page, which is all the information the rest of us have to go by.

Again, Willie speaks for himself, not "all the rest of us."

Anyway, Merudo, have your questions been answered at this point or do you have further questions about how to play warlocks effectively? I don't want to beat a dead horse.



7. Take care of any target that would be normally out of bounds (150 feet cantrip, Earthbind).

What is this in reference to, please? The only Earthbind I know of in 5E is a 2nd level spell with 300' range.


8. Greatly facilitate in/exfiltration by making up to 4 people Invisible at the same time (sure, Wizards and Bards can do it, but that kind of upcast would be a big deal for their resources. For Warlock? There is no limitation on "separate distance", and you can short rest while concentrating (AFAIR, I'll ask for a confirmation from others on RAW) so Warlock could perfectly be one of the targets, Hide himself and rest comfortably, in the end, no expense of slot.

Yes, noncombat-type spells are great on Warlocks. A Warlock/Druid can, like a Shadow Monk, keep the party stealthy (Pass Without Trace) essentially all the time, just by taking a break whenever he starts to get low on spell slots.

However, you don't need to be a pure warlock to pull this off, so it's not necessarily an argument in favor of going beyond Warlock 2. Even a bog-standard Bardlock (Warlock 2, Bard X) can fling around Unseen Servant spells like there's no tomorrow. "[gestures] Unseen Servant, do these dishes for me!" An hour later he's got that slot back, assuming relatively restful circumstances in between, so there was no real cost to not doing his own dishes...


Also, looking back on the post in which you described "everyone-but-Warlock-prowesses", I have a strong feeling there is also a balance problem, aka DM having trouble designing encounters that can challenge you while not landing straight into TPK territory because of too strong special effects. But with half the party being capable of Healing Words and a half being very sturdy, I understand how he could have trouble. ^^

It could be that the DM is adhering too closely to DMG guidelines, which tend to be on the extremely easy side. Perhaps the players should let the DM know that it's okay to amp things up.

[Willie the Duck]

Again, Willie speaks for himself, not "all the rest of us."

That was put right in my reply. See:

That is, of course, just my opinion and you are free to reject it.


Yes, noncombat-type spells are great on Warlocks. A Warlock/Druid can, like a Shadow Monk, keep the party stealthy (Pass Without Trace) essentially all the time, just by taking a break whenever he starts to get low on spell slots.

However, you don't need to be a pure warlock to pull this off, so it's not necessarily an argument in favor of going beyond Warlock 2. Even a bog-standard Bardlock (Warlock 2, Bard X) can fling around Unseen Servant spells like there's no tomorrow. "[gestures] Unseen Servant, do these dishes for me!" An hour later he's got that slot back, assuming relatively restful circumstances in between, so there was no real cost to not doing his own dishes...

That is a useful siderole for the warlock. Particularly for Long Rest dominant classes. It's nice to have some abilities that recharge no matter which rest the party gets the most of. Plus, especially for lore bards, it is really nice to have some at-will combat options once vicious mockery starts to suffer (from most opponents having more than one attack).

[Merudo]

No, I’m kidding – middle school gymnasiums are so much larger than the 30x30 rooms the least communicative DM in the world set his encounters in

I think part of the problem is that we played on roll20 - the maps seemed relatively small, with the total play area often much less than 150 feet wide.


I especially enjoyed the part where he accused an experienced warlock player of having never played one

I don't remember making such claim?



If, in all genuine honesty, you do not believe what you are doing is complaining about the game/the implementation of short-rest recharge classes in the game


I really have no problem with the implementation of the rest system, I just think Warlocks don't work well with it.



Perhaps the next one-off would be a good time to try one out.

The groups I play with are not really interested in 5e one-off.

[Merudo]

Hey, Merudo: how about you read about someone who played a Warlock in the first season of AL play? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22794682&postcount=17)
MC: 1 Sorc/12 Warlock.
User name Dyndrilliac
That post, and a few others in that thread, answer your OP directly. I told you about this the other day, and I again suggest that you read that post, and browse that thread.

For more details, read this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22797960&postcount=45)
Some good information there.

There is not much new stuff there that wasn't discussed in this thread. He dipped sorcerer + took Book of Ancient Secrets so of course he had a tons of cantrips (11 total). Apparently his level 13 party lost their mind by him casting stuff like Light, Mending, Message, Friends, & Thaumaturgy... I'm not exactly sold on this.

The rest of the stuff I covered already (Book of Ancient Secrets rituals, Ascendant Step, Misty Visions, Mask of Many Faces).

[Merudo]

Sooo... @OP I'm back for suggestions.
Several people gave you 'generic' ideas on what good/great/fun/original things Warlocks can do. And I myself probably won't have the brightest ones either because I didn't play the class that much either.

But, considering your specific party composition, your Warlock friend could...
1. Help the Fighter succeed on Grappling/Shoving EVEN when the DM was/is gonna throw highly agile/strong enemies (Hex).
2. Push(pull) enemies into self AOE (Hunger of Hadar) or friends's AOE (typically Spirit Guardians) with Repelling Blast (or Thorns Whip for Tome).
2bis. Free one or two allies from a dangerous OA threatening zone by pushing/pulling enemies away from them (same).
3. Spare Bard's concentration for Animal Objects by using Hypnotic Pattern himself.
4. Bring back a downed ally in range of another's Healing Words while also dealing damage with Thunder Step.
5. Potentially trivialize a fight by taking care of an upcast Fly (not on Bard spell list, Wizard probably concentrates on save or suck spell).
6. Banish two of the most dangerous creatures for your party (typically casters with turning spells, because Paladin's Aura is still 'only' 10 feet).
7. Take care of any target that would be normally out of bounds (150 feet cantrip, Earthbind).
8. Greatly facilitate in/exfiltration by making up to 4 people Invisible at the same time (sure, Wizards and Bards can do it, but that kind of upcast would be a big deal for their resources. For Warlock? There is no limitation on "separate distance", and you can short rest while concentrating (AFAIR, I'll ask for a confirmation from others on RAW) so Warlock could perfectly be one of the targets, Hide himself and rest comfortably, in the end, no expense of slot.




I like point #1 (Hex to give advantage on Grappling/Shoving) and point #2 (push enemies into self AOE). However, both abilities can readily be obtained trough a mere 2 level dips...

Other points can typically be done just as well with other spellcasters, so they aren't really unique to the Warlock.

[Zalabim]

I think part of the problem is that we played on roll20 - the maps seemed relatively small, with the total play area often much less than 150 feet wide.
That seems like a matter of inexperience, since the play area can be increased in size a great deal, with hardware being the only limit.

Other points can typically be done just as well with other spellcasters, so they aren't really unique to the Warlock.
I fail to see how this is relevant. Like the complaints about EK evocation spells. Yes, a wizard can cast them earlier, but the wizard isn't a fighter, and it's still useful to cast them in the right situation. In many situations where fireball is good, two fireballs is also good.

[MaxWilson]

I like point #1 (Hex to give advantage on Grappling/Shoving) and point #2 (push enemies into self AOE). However, both abilities can readily be obtained trough a mere 2 level dips...

Other points can typically be done just as well with other spellcasters, so they aren't really unique to the Warlock.

Most other spellcasters will become MAD if they dip warlock. Of classes with 9th level spell slots, only the Bard and Sorcerer are as Charisma-based as the warlock. Sorcerer has a crummy spell list. Bard has a good spell list, so comparing bardlock (warlock 2/bard x) vs. full warlock or some derivative thereof, the advantage of full warlock over bard is basically "more invocations" i.e. better at-will magic. With a 2-level dip you can get Agonizing Repelling Blast or Agonizing Eldritch Spear, but you cannot get Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Spear of Lethargy + Grasp of Hadar + Tomb of Levistus + Voice of the Chain Master, for example. In fact you'd need to be a Warlock 15 in order to get all that stuff, and at that point you might as well go warlock 17 for True Polymorph or Foresight (depending on taste).

The warlock 2/bard 18 will have both True Polymorph and Wish (which unlocks Find Greater Steed, Magic Jar, etc.), but he won't have as good of an at-will attack. Also he takes about twice as many XP to get True Polymorph as the pure Warlock does, due to the two-level dip.

That's basically the tradeoff. You do damage worse than a specialized Fighter but better than a regular spellcaster; but unlike a Fighter you get a ton of spells to cast, including Armor of Agathys V, Fear, Counterspell, and True Polymorph.

[SpanielBear]

I like point #1 (Hex to give advantage on Grappling/Shoving) and point #2 (push enemies into self AOE). However, both abilities can readily be obtained trough a mere 2 level dips...

Other points can typically be done just as well with other spellcasters, so they aren't really unique to the Warlock.

Let's rephrase the question- what would a warlock need to do to be worth more than 2 levels for you?

You seem to place a lot of emphasis on being unique compared to other spell casters. Well, clerics druids and rangers all overlap, as do bards wizards sorcerers and, uh, warlocks. You didn't complain that the druid and paladin failed to stand out, but the warlock having to share tricks with the bard and wizard- too much? Well, if you say so. So a warlock would need a spell list that no other class can access?

Or the recharge on short-rests issue. Glossing over the idea that a short rest is unavailable but a wizard can long rest whenever they want (really?), do you find the same problem limits the monk or the battlemaster? If so, does simply increasing their available power points to match the number they could expect on an average adventuring day solve the problem for you?

The final argument is synergy. I... actually don't know what you want here. How could a class with multiple cantrips, potentially all the rituals, at will spell abilities and recharging spell slots be made *better* at synergising with other casters? Oh, and those spells can be changed out as they level up. A trick becoming less useful? Fine, let's go back to the spell book and rethink. But you want improved synergy so... spells that impose bonus effects if the target is hit by another caster?

So yeah. Would I be far off the mark saying that you don't want a Warlock class at all, you want a sorcerer subclass? Because that seems to fit the bill for you- spell slots over a day, expanded spell list and maybe meta-magic that works in conjunction with other classes?

If so, fine. That's fine, it's a preference. But it does seem to sell a fun, flavourful, useful and popular class exceedingly short.

[Citan]

I like point #1 (Hex to give advantage on Grappling/Shoving) and point #2 (push enemies into self AOE). However, both abilities can readily be obtained trough a mere 2 level dips...

Other points can typically be done just as well with other spellcasters, so they aren't really unique to the Warlock.
Yeah, well, who cares really? The point is not about other casters having these spells.

The point is other casters usually have many other great spells (some would say too much) to choose from.
That's why you have no intrinsical problem having two of the same class in a party either.

It's like saying "meh, Paladin spells are lackluster barring the few exclusive".
Except that when Paladin gets Bless and Shield of Faith, Cleric will have Spiritual Weapon and Aid.
When Paladin gets Aid, Clerics get Spirit Guardians.
Already at level 5 for Cleric "in the void" there is a hard choice to make: with a Paladin in party, no hard choice anymore.
Same with Ranger and Druid: yeah when Ranger gets Fog Cloud, Druid has been able to cast it since some time already. When Ranger finally gets Pass Without Trace, Druid has access to Conjure Animals or Sleet Storm.
Does that make Ranger's spellcasting is useless?
I'll be blunt: if your answer to that question is yes, then you didn't understand anything about playing D&d 5e (or any rpg for that matter).
Because having someone else that can cast one good concentration spell is ALWAYS a great addition to the party, and not all can find Rings of Spell Storing.



Yes, noncombat-type spells are great on Warlocks. A Warlock/Druid can, like a Shadow Monk, keep the party stealthy (Pass Without Trace) essentially all the time, just by taking a break whenever he starts to get low on spell slots.

However, you don't need to be a pure warlock to pull this off, so it's not necessarily an argument in favor of going beyond Warlock 2. Even a bog-standard Bardlock (Warlock 2, Bard X) can fling around Unseen Servant spells like there's no tomorrow. "[gestures] Unseen Servant, do these dishes for me!" An hour later he's got that slot back, assuming relatively restful circumstances in between, so there was no real cost to not doing his own dishes...

No, it's not the same at all, you apparently completely missed the point (as Merudo).

Warlock can make a whole group invisible for free.
How is that?
Warlock has auto-force-upcast, and Invisibility can be upcast to include one more person.

Invisibility lasts for 1 hour while concentrating.
Short-rest is no strenuous activity for one hour.
Concentration does not precludes taking a short rest.
>>> You can "chain" Invisibility.

Sure, a lvl X Bard or Wizard could do the same... But opportunity cost would be heavy, especially for the Bard (who doesn't even have a short-rest arcane recovery): he just blew his highest level slot on a "infiltration/securization situation" so party can rest/move safe, which is a slot he won't have to spend on "encounter-changing for level" spell such as Heat Metal / Silence / Fear / Slow / etc...

Same with Shadow Blade: what will be a crux of choice for other people is a no-question asked for Warlock: if you chose it, it's because you intend to go into melee , so you won't need much else as spellcasting. One spell for encounter is enough.
Or with Danse Macabre: other casters may prefer spells with higher risks but better benefits because chances are those zombies/skeletons won't last long in the first place. For a 9th level Wizard, between this and a Cloudkill or Dominate Person the former seems not enough. Same for a Bard that could have learned Animate Objects.
Because in both case, they are blowing their best wad on that fight and until the next long rest, so they just have to hope it was the right decision because outside of their spells they are much, much less contributing (at least Bard has Bardic Inspiration).
Warlock has better chance to manage to find a short rest, and if not, he's still very functional for the next fight with Patron features, cantrips and invocations.

Same with Suggestion: since it's mainly used in non-combat situations, you can usually cast it "for free" since with an 8-hour duration, you can meet the target, blow your two spells if needed to make the effect stick, then take your lunch and have your slots back.

Same with Dream: your party has to fight a group of powerful people? Provided party agrees to take some preparation time and play dirty, Warlock could spend half the day to set the negative condition on several enemies and still be 100% functional the rest of the day
About Dream while I'm at it, two notes:
- Technically, per RAW, even an animal could be used as a transmitter ("you or a creature"): although most DMs could legitimately bar any discussion -except if animal has ability to speak for some reason- when you just want to inflict the condition you don't care about conversation or up-to-10-words sentence (make it 0 and be done with it)..
- Technically, per RAW, there is a blurry zone on what would happen if you cast Dreams repeatedly on the same target while it makes the save: is Dreams a boolean spell (A: neutral effect, B: bad effect)? If so, do we consider that in B case a successful save ends the effect so you can recast it or is it also considered as a 8-hour effect whatever roll target makes? I think RAW is "8-hour duration all cases", but with some lenient DM this could make it extremely powerful in the hands of a Warlock.

Same with Tongues: non-concentration, 1-hour long means whenever your party needs a guy to infiltrate/befriend some faction which speaks a foreign language, your Warlock bests everyone except. Especially when paired with Disguise Self / Alter Self at will invocations.

Even for Comprehend Languages (or Unseen Servant since you quote it) it's an improvement since you don't need to cast it as a ritual (so you can perfectly maintain concentration on something else... Like Invisibility, Suggestion, etc...).

It's exactly as someone pointed out above in thread.
D&d 5e is not "I declare I'll take a short rest right now" -DM: "yes/no".
D&d 5e is "I spend the hour talking to that merchand to negociate prices on equipment" -DM "nothing special happened, you underwent a short rest and regained your slots" or "I sit at the table, taking lunch while waiting for friends" -DM "friends arrived two hours later, you got a short rest".

Once you *really* sink in the consequences of that, you realize how much Warlock (can, depending on build choices) trumps basically everyone else from level 1 to level 10 at least when talking about anything more subtle than "fight the opposing guy straight".

Oh, by the way, one trick that Warlock can do: self-control a bunch of people (and possibly deal damage to them) with Repelling/Arm Blast (push/pull) and Hunger of Hadar / Cloud of Daggers / Darkness / Silence (Undying) / Evard's Black Tentacles (GOO) / Stinking Cloud or Wall of Fire (Fiend).
Grab a multiclass to pick Spike Growth (2d4 for every 5 feet: first ray push him 10 feet, second pull 10 feet, you just dealt an automatic, irresistible 8d4 extra damage) or the like or work together with another caster to bring much, much goodness to the table.

And we still didn't dig deep into what you can do with Invocations, neither of Patron features which are usually close enough to the effect from a spell you could learn at that level.

[Sinon]

I think part of the problem is that we played on roll20 - the maps seemed relatively small, with the total play area often much less than 150 feet wide.
Then warlocks must suck.


I like point #1 (Hex to give advantage on Grappling/Shoving) and point #2 (push enemies into self AOE). However, both abilities can readily be obtained trough a mere 2 level dips...But you can't get those, and the ability to use EB to pull, and to slow, and to damage adjacent creatures, and also get the ability to see in magical darkness, and to cast some spells at will, and get aid from an invisible familiar with opposable thumbs or the potential to use any ritual you can find unless you take more levels than that.

Two levels of warlock can add a lot to a lot of other classes and concepts.

But that doesn't mean that warlocks don't benefit from gaining more levels as warlocks.

[Protato]

Something that can only be done by going Warlock is a "full platter" blaster moveset. Anywhere from one to four times a turn, you can add just about any effect you like to your blast if you got the invocation. Keep an enemy still with Lance of Lethergy, push forward or backward anywhere from 10 to 40ft., and you have good damage, along with adding range, or getting other good buffs. Plus, there's the subclass features. Improved Misty Step with no spell slot, luck manipulation, imposing disadvantage and getting advantage, among others. These are all level 6 features, too.

[beargryllz]

Extra levels in warlock help break the game extremely easily. I'll explain why.

My warlock is level 5, hexblade, human. We are doing Tomb of Annihilation right now.

I have a magical reach weapon. Nobody in my party has a magical weapon. Nobody in my party has a reach weapon (anymore). Nobody in my party can fly unless I allow them to. The last several encounters have all been against golems, which require magical weapons to hit. I've also killed many undead that require magical weapons to hit. Huge amounts of damage are dedicated solely to the fact that I picked a 3rd level in warlock to gain a magical +1 weapon. I am mathematically superior in encounters now because I'm always rolling +1 to hit and to damage rolls over other builds. That is why I got more than 2 levels of warlock.

My warlock has agonizing blast and 18 charisma

My warlock can fly, hover 10 feet over an enemy and chop their head off. My warlock can force an end to combat just by moving over the enemies and covering my party while they retreat or ambush to just end the encounter before initiative is rolled. What are they going to do? Pursue my party or contest them while I just fly back and forth blowing them to pieces or chopping them up with my magical melee weapon that also has reach? That's ridiculous on their part, boring from the DM, and just free experience points to continue leveling this build up. This warlock has ludicrous battlefield control on par with a wizard easily.

My speed is 30 or 60 depending on whether I need it. I can exploit every possible form of terrain any DM can come up with relatively effortlessly, though I do sometimes lament my decisions mid-combat after the fact.

I have a magical reach weapon. Naturally, I start with polearm mastery and hex at lvl 1 to get my initial combo rolling (up to 1dx +1d4 +1d6 + 1d6 +CHAx2 damage on non-critical hits, OUCH). If an enemy *does* attack, they'll just kill themselves by entering melee, provoking and spending my reaction for a free attack, and then getting attacked multiple times next round by a warlock with a +1 magical reach weapon.

If I don't want to fight, I just hypnotize everyone and move on with my business

I do love warlock, but I also can dip anywhere I want to make my warlock better. I could dip fighter 2 and get action surge. I could dip paladin (I won't) or sorcerer (I won't). I've already played those classes and they're nice, but this warlock should be optimized by other means. Action surging to get extra eldritch blasts or tactical spellcasting combos faster than dipping sorcerer, and sorcerers won't get a fighting style. Sorcerers won't get as many hitpoints or second wind. Dipping sorc means massive *dead levels* in the middle of a campaign. I'd rather continue warlock and gain 4th level spells than gain 1st lvl sorcerer spells and sorc cantrips. I have the best cantrips already.

Realistically, this character has to be the party tank/big guy because 2 other melee characters died and rerolled sorc and druid. This probably means a build finishing like warlock 8/fighter 2 or warlock 9+/fighter 2. Having scry would be awesome. Having 20 charisma is going to be so, so nice. Going warlock all the way is appealing, but the Lifedrinker evocation is very far away and action surge is just comically effective on a short rest character. Rerolling my halberd 1s on damage into anything else is fun, taking armor to get a flat +1 AC is fun, and second wind is an okay use for a bonus action. Rolling d10s for hit points instead of a d8 is ok with me too. If I could get warlock 12/fighter 2, that's probably the holy grail, assuming a campaign or a character can even last this long.

Fighter levels *are not dead levels with this build*. I can gain significant defense or offense on both fighter levels and the combo is very, very strong

Warlock levels *are not dead levels with this build*. I can gain remarkable utility in the form of the highest level spells, some offense, and some defense by stacking warlock, but won't gain action surge or quickened blast novas

Sorcerer levels *are dead levels on this build*. I gain shield spell slots and maybe invisibility (which I already have on my list...) and can grow some dragon scales underneath my breastplate...... Yay? While my alternative builds are casting higher level spells and action surging to make a huge impact.... With a completely different mindset and party composition, this could work. I gain much less by going down this path currently.

Bard and paladin are old and boring options, but mechanically sound. I can't fault anyone for taking warlock x/paladin x, bard x/warlock x or warlock x/sorc 3+

[Tanarii]

My warlock can fly, hover 10 feet over an enemy and chop their head off. My warlock can force an end to combat just by moving over the enemies and covering my party while they retreat or ambush to just end the encounter before initiative is rolled. What are they going to do? Pursue my party or contest them while I just fly back and forth blowing them to pieces or chopping them up with my magical melee weapon that also has reach?Throw a few rocks at you to break your concentration, then hack you to pieces while you're separated from your party. I'd hope.

[Merudo]

That seems like a matter of inexperience, since the play area can be increased in size a great deal, with hardware being the only limit.


We are using official maps that come with the 5e campaigns. Are you sure these maps be readily increased in size?

Even if they can, it means more work for the D&D. Again, I'd rather not pick a class that pushes me to frequently request special favors from my DM to be competitive.



I fail to see how this is relevant. Like the complaints about EK evocation spells. Yes, a wizard can cast them earlier, but the wizard isn't a fighter, and it's still useful to cast them in the right situation. In many situations where fireball is good, two fireballs is also good.


Let's rephrase the question- what would a warlock need to do to be worth more than 2 levels for you?

You seem to place a lot of emphasis on being unique compared to other spell casters. Well, clerics druids and rangers all overlap, as do bards wizards sorcerers and, uh, warlocks. You didn't complain that the druid and paladin failed to stand out, but the warlock having to share tricks with the bard and wizard- too much? Well, if you say so. So a warlock would need a spell list that no other class can access?


My main issue is that there is very little unique a Warlock can do past level 2.

Hurl Through Hell is probably the most unique ability a Warlock can get, but it's gained at level 14 so for the overwhelming majority of campaigns it just doesn't exist.

Now of course classes overlap to an extend. However the other spellcasters all get unique abilities that clearly differentiate them from other classes. Limiting ourselves to level 3-9, let consider some of the most popular subclasses:

Abjuration Wizard: can learn all spells on their spell list, +2 spells known per level for free, largest spell list, scaling & projected Arcane Ward

Lore Bard: Cutting Words, Magical Secrets, Expertise

Shepard Druid: access to Plant Growth & Spike Growth, boosted Conjure Animals & Conjure Woodland Beings, scaling Totems for mass buffs, improved Wildshape for utility

Tempest Cleric: Access to Revivify, Spiritual Weapons, Spirit Guardians & Destruction Wave, Divination magic, extra Channel Divinity

Sorcerer: Metamagic.

Pretty much all these abilities are amazing, unique, and what make me want to play the class that has them. What does the Warlock gets that is unique from level 3-9?

Spell list exclusives: Hunger of Hadar (non-scaling Darkness that does 2d6), Shadow of Moil (less versatile Greater Invisibility)

3 Invocations: Discussed in detail in other posts, most are highly situational and replicate what other classes can do

Otherworldly Patron feature: minor boost for combat 1 day per short rest

I fail to see what is exciting about these 3 features...



The final argument is synergy. I... actually don't know what you want here. How could a class with multiple cantrips, potentially all the rituals, at will spell abilities and recharging spell slots be made *better* at synergising with other casters?


The rituals casting actually makes the Warlock anti-synergistic with other spellcasters - you typically only need to cast each ritual once.

I already described synergy between casters and fighters (buffs & debuffs such as Haste/Greater Invisibility/Faerie Fire, mostly) that the Warlock just can't do.

However, here are some synergy between casters that the Warlock can't take part in:

Abjuration Wizard: Can Mage armor the Moon Druid when he shapeshifts, can protect the other spellcasters with his ward

Lore Bard: Can learn Paladin aura spells such as Crusader Mantle to boost undead minions, summoned animals, & animated objects

Shepard Druid: Area control spells like Plant Growth let other casters hit the helpless opponents, Totems can boost undead minions & animated objects

Tempest Cleric: Can prevent enemies from reaching other casters through Spirit Guardians

[mgshamster]

Throw a few rocks at you to break your concentration, then hack you to pieces while you're separated from your party. I'd hope.

A mere ten feet?

My barbarian has a standing high jump of (4+3)/2 = 3.5 feet. He's 6 feet tall. He can reach 1.5 times his height over his high jump. That's a 13 foot reach; that puny warlock is going to get grappled and brought to the ground.

Give me a running start, or something to climb - like that tree over there, and it's even higher. And with my Barbarian's Ring of Jumping, I can get even higher.

No, seriously, I've only played one Barb, and the only magic item he ever had was a Ring of Jumping; no one else wanted it. I made a ton of use out of that ring. Flying wizards were brought to the ground, large walls were scaled by jumping sections at a time, quickly made it to the tops of buildings to take out archers, quickly jumped across the battlefield to get to allies in need - jump is such an understated spell.

On that note, why the heck is the Jump invocation a 9th level ability? Other first level spells don't have that high of a requirement, and even some higher levels spells have a lower requirement.

[Tanarii]

On that note, why the heck is the Jump invocation a 9th level ability? Other first level spells don't have that high of a requirement, and even some higher levels spells have a lower requirement.
Because it's a combat (movement-related) boost at-will. Not a non-combat one.

If you're playing Dungeons and Dragons as Intrigue & Urban-crawls instead of Dungeons & Wilderness Adventures, it'd probably be worth house-ruling the at-will Disguise Self and Silent Image cantrips to be level 9 instead. :smallamused:

[Merudo]

Most other spellcasters will become MAD if they dip warlock. Of classes with 9th level spell slots, only the Bard and Sorcerer are as Charisma-based as the warlock. Sorcerer has a crummy spell list.


The main benefit of dipping Warlock for a Sorcerer is to abuse the Coffeelock.



Bard has a good spell list, so comparing bardlock (warlock 2/bard x) vs. full warlock or some derivative thereof, the advantage of full warlock over bard is basically "more invocations" i.e. better at-will magic. With a 2-level dip you can get Agonizing Repelling Blast or Agonizing Eldritch Spear, but you cannot get Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Spear of Lethargy + Grasp of Hadar + Tomb of Levistus + Voice of the Chain Master, for example.


You are right - I guess I'm simply not as impressed by the invocations as most are.

[mgshamster]

Because it's a combat (movement-related) boost at-will. Not a non-combat one.

If you're playing Dungeons and Dragons as Intrigue & Urban-crawls instead of Dungeons & Wilderness Adventures, it'd probably be worth house-ruling the at-will Disguise Self and Silent Image cantrips to be level 9 instead. :smallamused:

Mage Armor? That's has no level requirement.

[Tanarii]

Mage Armor? That's has no level requirement.Good point.

Besides, I don't really feel at-will jump is worth level 9 minimum, although it is very powerful in many game genres / setting.

Someone should twit Mearls. (Not JC, since it's not a technical question.)

[mgshamster]

Good point.

Besides, I don't really feel at-will jump is worth level 9 minimum, although it is very powerful in many game genres / setting.

Someone should twit Mearls. (Not JC, since it's not a technical question.)

I think it also depends on how you rule it. JC has stated that it's not meant to go beyond your movement speed (that's what the dash action is for). While Mearls has said thst it''s magic, so go ahead and go beyond your movement speed.

[MaxWilson]

I think it also depends on how you rule it. JC has stated that it's not meant to go beyond your movement speed (that's what the dash action is for). While Mearls has said thst it''s magic, so go ahead and go beyond your movement speed.

If you take a cue from Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes and run Jump like a Steeder's Extraordinary Leap (each foot of movement expended moves you three feet while jumping) then both Jump and Otherworldly Leap suddenly make sense and feel appropriate as written. It's a worthwhile house rule--fixing WotC's oversight by making Jump work the way it probably DID work in the mind of whoever decided it was a high-level ability.

Limit the enhanced jumping to once per turn though, so it's only useful in large open areas. Steeper's description doesn't say this explicitly but I'd apply it to them too anyway, as DM.

I'd probably leave Step of the Wind untouched though since it already includes a movement boost.

[Cynthaer]

Mage Armor? That's has no level requirement.
I'm not necessarily arguing that Otherworldly Leap (Jump) should have a level 9 requirement, but I feel like Armor of Shadows (Mage Armor) is conceptually like turning one Invocation slot into one piece of equipment (the same way that for other casters it's like turning one level 1 spell slot into one piece of equipment).

Speaking for myself, I'm kind of inclined to say the level requirement for Otherworldly Leap is unnecessary if you don't let it extend your natural move range in combat. I mean, who really cares if you can let everybody jump across a chasm for free out of combat, compared to always-on Detect Magic or Disguise Self?

EDIT:
If you take a cue from Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes and run Jump like a Steeder's Extraordinary Leap (each foot of movement expended moves you three feet while jumping) then both Jump and Otherworldly Leap suddenly make sense and feel appropriate as written. It's a worthwhile house rule--fixing WotC's oversight by making Jump work the way it probably DID work in the mind of whoever decided it was a high-level ability.
Yeah, that makes sense. The converse of my point above is that it does make sense to limit it to level 9 if you do let it extend your effective move speed.

[Tanarii]

Speaking for myself, I'm kind of inclined to say the level requirement for Otherworldly Leap is unnecessary if you don't let it extend your natural move range in combat. I mean, who really cares if you can let everybody jump across a chasm for free out of combat, compared to always-on Detect Magic or Disguise Self?It has solid combat use: leaping obstacles or difficult terrain or clearing a blocking creature. If the jump is enough, you can even potentially clear a creature's reach to avoid OAs. Aalthough the typical non-bladelock doesn't invest heavily in Str to make that likely. Not to mention that requires jumping 40ft or more, plus a 10 ft running start, for a medium creature, so you run into needing a Dash action to do it.

[JoeJ]

Again, I'd rather not pick a class that pushes me to frequently request special favors from my DM to be competitive.

First, having varying battlefield sizes isn't a special favor, it just reflects the way the world works. Second, who are you competing against?

[MaxWilson]

No, it's not the same at all, you apparently completely missed the point (as Merudo).

Oh, sorry, I didn't read carefully enough. I didn't realize you were thinking of long-term infiltration/exfiltration with repeated castings over the course of a day or more. You're right, that is kind of cool, and something no other class could pull off, not even a Shadow Monk. (Though clearly Shadow Monk + Warlock together would be even better than just the warlock. Permanent invisibility AND +10 to stealth AND no tracks?)

It reminds me of A Hymn Before Battle and how the spec ops team spends weeks on end sneaking around the Posleen planet, before things go haywire and they (mostly) all get obliterated. Very cool stuff.


The main benefit of dipping Warlock for a Sorcerer is to abuse the Coffeelock.

I strongly, strongly disagree. The main benefit of dipping warlock as a sorcerer is to get access to stronger at-will ranged attacks. Converting warlock slots to sorcerer slots via sorcery points is a funny trick, but not something that actually makes a difference in play--and spending multiple sleepless days accumulating spell slots, per "Java Do'Urden" or the Coffeelock as you call it, simply doesn't occur at all.


You are right - I guess I'm simply not as impressed by the invocations as most are.

Then there's your answer. You should not play warlocks (past level 2) because you don't like invocations or short-rest-recharge.

I don't like them that much either, so I mostly avoid warlocks too. They're good at some things but they don't really tickle my fancy, usually. (Also, the flavor irks me a bit. I don't like subservience.)

[mgshamster]

It reminds me of A Hymn Before Battle and how the spec ops team spends weeks on end sneaking around the Posleen planet, before getting things go haywire and they (mostly) all get obliterated. Very cool stuff.

Now just find a way to blare out Immigrant as an illusary dragon emerges out of the waters.

[MaxWilson]

It has solid combat use: leaping obstacles or difficult terrain or clearing a blocking creature. If the jump is enough, you can even potentially clear a creature's reach to avoid OAs. Aalthough the typical non-bladelock doesn't invest heavily in Str to make that likely. Not to mention that requires jumping 40ft or more, plus a 10 ft running start, for a medium creature, so you run into needing a Dash action to do it.

Do note that by strict RAW, jumping over difficult terrain (or spells like Spike Growth) does not exempt you from the effects, because those effects are defined by movement through an area and not a volume.

A reasonable DM would of course work with you to find a sensible ruling for your situation, regardless of RAW. For example, only a loony DM would apply Spike Growth penalties to a creature moving through the affected area, if the creature is flying 30' above the ground. But if you're just jumping 15' forward (and 3' up), that might not be enough to avoid the usual 6d4 damage, depending on how big the spikes are. Or maybe the DM would call for an Athletics check to decide if you managed to clear the spikes or not.

[Citan]

We are using official maps that come with the 5e campaigns. Are you sure these maps be readily increased in size?

Even if they can, it means more work for the D&D. Again, I'd rather not pick a class that pushes me to frequently request special favors from my DM to be competitive.





My main issue is that there is very little unique a Warlock can do past level 2.

Hurl Through Hell is probably the most unique ability a Warlock can get, but it's gained at level 14 so for the overwhelming majority of campaigns it just doesn't exist.

Now of course classes overlap to an extend. However the other spellcasters all get unique abilities that clearly differentiate them from other classes. Limiting ourselves to level 3-9, let consider some of the most popular subclasses:

Abjuration Wizard: can learn all spells on their spell list, +2 spells known per level for free, largest spell list, scaling & projected Arcane Ward

Lore Bard: Cutting Words, Magical Secrets, Expertise

Shepard Druid: access to Plant Growth & Spike Growth, boosted Conjure Animals & Conjure Woodland Beings, scaling Totems for mass buffs, improved Wildshape for utility

Tempest Cleric: Access to Revivify, Spiritual Weapons, Spirit Guardians & Destruction Wave, Divination magic, extra Channel Divinity

Sorcerer: Metamagic.

Pretty much all these abilities are amazing, unique, and what make me want to play the class that has them. What does the Warlock gets that is unique from level 3-9?

Spell list exclusives: Hunger of Hadar (non-scaling Darkness that does 2d6), Shadow of Moil (less versatile Greater Invisibility)

3 Invocations: Discussed in detail in other posts, most are highly situational and replicate what other classes can do

Otherworldly Patron feature: minor boost for combat 1 day per short rest

I fail to see what is exciting about these 3 features...



The rituals casting actually makes the Warlock anti-synergistic with other spellcasters - you typically only need to cast each ritual once.

I already described synergy between casters and fighters (buffs & debuffs such as Haste/Greater Invisibility/Faerie Fire, mostly) that the Warlock just can't do.

However, here are some synergy between casters that the Warlock can't take part in:

Abjuration Wizard: Can Mage armor the Moon Druid when he shapeshifts, can protect the other spellcasters with his ward

Lore Bard: Can learn Paladin aura spells such as Crusader Mantle to boost undead minions, summoned animals, & animated objects

Shepard Druid: Area control spells like Plant Growth let other casters hit the helpless opponents, Totems can boost undead minions & animated objects

Tempest Cleric: Can prevent enemies from reaching other casters through Spirit Guardians
Hi again.
I hope I don't sound too offensive here, but I have to ask, are you really open minded here?

Because you seem to have completely put aside everything people said (me included), related to Warlock's own strengths and also how to synergize with other peoples.

Like taking back my Invisibility example, do you realize that with some added shenanigans (Tenser's Floating disk to hop on, having someone bulky carry you so you don't warlk), a level 7 Warlock could make a 4-man party perma-invisible for traveling or infiltration? Absolutely no caster could achieve such a feat.
Same with using Dream on a whole group, for example a band of thugs that escaped you on the first confrontation.

We could also discuss at length of the interest of going at least 3 levels or 5 levels of Warlock, even for a target dual-class, because there are spells you'd either like to have semi-spammable (like Counterspell, Mirror Image, Dispel Magic, Fireball, all utility spells that last one hour like Invisibility or Magic Circle) or spells that you could cast and forget at the beginning of the day (Aid, Animate Dead, Darkvision), or just spells that you use so often and that scale so well you definitely like the idea of having short-rest supply of it (Bless, Fireball, Greater Invisibility, Shadow Blade, Spirit Guardians, Blindness, Hold X, etc). Exactly like 3 levels of Sorcerer can be worthwhile for anyone because you will always find two Metamagic that suit your playstyle.

As for your examples...
- Mage Armor: yeah, Wizard could spend a whole lot of slots that could be otherwise used on Shield emergencies, to boost a couple of minions that would not last long in the first place (high-level conjuration have good AC in the first place. Low-level have so little HP that it won't make a big difference).
- Bard: so he'd concentrate on Crusader's Mantle, yeah, that's a good one... If there is no Paladin in party already, and for large parties (which is your case). In a small group would be a waste compared to, say, Conjure Animals or Slow or Hypnotic Pattern.
- Plant Growth: Fey Warlocks can learn it, and you could otherwise cast an Evards near Cleric (or take 3 levels in Sorcerer for Careful metamagic so you can cast it right under its feet).
- Spirit Guardians? What was that about in an above post? Ah right, Warlocks can frigging change the whole deal about that spell by pulling / pushing enemies and possibly reducing their speed thanks to a single cantrip improved with Invocations.
Oh, by the way, please stop with this child story about "Wizard learning all spells available". Many, many people on this forum already told you that this cannot be considered a given. It's like saying "Eldricht Knight will use all magic weapons of the game because he can wield them all o/" On that note, if that were, it would mean that Warlock has the potent to learn all rituals of the game, which is also on some kind of awesomeness level.

Either you tell us "well guys, I'll probably never like Warlock" and so be it, it's a perfectly legitimate thing to say. Not all classes/archetypes/builds are for everyone, and nobody will judge you for that. But then you should stop making threads that "open>close" discussion by putting extremely biaised postulate as a starting point.

Or you tell us, as you seemed to do in OP, "I'd like to understand how to play a Warlock efficiently" but then you also have to actually use your brain on your own time to project into tactics using Warlock features by reflecting on thread suggestions, we can't chew everything for you (we don't know everything we would need on your party and campaign) nor should we (rpg is about appropriating mechanics to exploit them into a role, we wouln't service you by trying to skip that part).

So far, again, sorry if that is hurtful, but I have to say, while I didn't have this impression at first, from the last batch of posts you seem like someone who made a thread expecting one kind of reactions, and being annoyed to see that the reactions were actually going against his opinion thus trying to "prove self right" whatever happens instead of actually reflecting back on what people say.

Because as we tried to explain, the problem lies not in the class it lies in your group as a whole (Warlock player, other players and DM).
When your party doesn't play along to try and take short rests, it's (willingly or not) undermining the player's efficiency and fun.
Between Catnap (Bard & Wizard), Rope Trick (same), Leomund's Tiny Hut (same), Polymorph (Bard, Wizard, Invocation) Mold Earth and potentially Wall of Stone (Wizard), Silence (Bard), Pass Without Trace (Magic Secrets) you already have plenty of spells in addition to skills to create the opportunity for short rests for Warlock, not even using the tricks I mentioned with Invisibility.

Meaning in turn he can use possibly 2 or 3 times more Fear/Hypnotic Pattern/Fireball/Hold Monster/Dominate Person than any caster of similar level. It's largely unique enough to be able to open at the very least half the fights of the day with an encounter-changing spell. Unless you consider those spells as lackluster but then I guess its a desperate cause. XD

And if in spite of that Warlock feels still underwhelming, then either he's not playing well for whatever reason, or he's just unneeded because encounters are too easy for a 7-people party and you're just chaining fight after fight or he just made a build that completely goes aside of what little the party would still be missing.

[MaxWilson]

- Mage Armor: yeah, Wizard could spend a whole lot of slots that could be otherwise used on Shield emergencies, to boost a couple of minions that would not last long in the first place (high-level conjuration have good AC in the first place. Low-level have so little HP that it won't make a big difference).

I think you missed the point here. Merudo mentioned the trick of Mage Armoring the Moon Druid, which is not at all the same thing as Mage Armoring a low-HP minion.

For example, a Moon Druid in Air Elemental form normally has AC 15. With Mage Armor, it goes up to AC 18. With 90 HP per short rest and resistance to nonmagical weapons, that Mage Armor is going to pay off in spades, especially if the Moon Druid is e.g. a Sentinel who can therefore Dodge without losing combat-relevance. (Enemy can't just Disengage away and ignore you, nor safely attack your allies.)

Mage Armored Fire Elemental, similarly, goes from AC 13 to AC 16, and can Dodge if desired while still inflicting 2d10 damage per turn plus an opportunity/reaction attack.

Mage Armor doesn't turn you into a real tank all by itself, but it's worth a lot more on a Moon Druid than it is on a low-HP minion.


Either you tell us "well guys, I'll probably never like Warlock" and so be it, it's a perfectly legitimate thing to say. Not all classes/archetypes/builds are for everyone, and nobody will judge you for that.

Yep.

[Citan]

I think you missed the point here. Merudo mentioned the trick of Mage Armoring the Moon Druid, which is not at all the same thing as Mage Armoring a low-HP minion.

For example, a Moon Druid in Air Elemental form normally has AC 15. With Mage Armor, it goes up to AC 18. With 90 HP per short rest and resistance to nonmagical weapons, that Mage Armor is going to pay off in spades, especially if the Moon Druid is e.g. a Sentinel who can therefore Dodge without losing combat-relevance. (Enemy can't just Disengage away and ignore you, nor safely attack your allies.)

Mage Armored Fire Elemental, similarly, goes from AC 13 to AC 16, and can Dodge if desired while still inflicting 2d10 damage per turn plus an opportunity/reaction attack.

Mage Armor doesn't turn you into a real tank all by itself, but it's worth a lot more on a Moon Druid than it is on a low-HP minion.



Yep.
Sorry, I should have been explicit. I did notice that use among the ones Merudo told.
I didn't bounce on Mage Armor for Druid because it's useless to weigh on that imo. Mage Armor is an effect. Wild Shape makes you retain "any benefit of any source as long as your new form is physically capable of doing so".
Considering the very short writing of Mage Armor, one can considers it's some kind of aura that emanates from the body. Considering there is no restriction on the kind of creature you can affect, you can perfectly well have it applied on a beast.
Now let's add the 8-hour into the mix...
>>> If it's occasional, any NPC could cast it directly or into a Ring of Spell Storing or scrolls. If it's regular, Druid might as well learn it himself one way or another.

But overall it would probably be a waste both cases: Druid can wear medium armor (even if limited) and shields. Druid would need a 16 in DEX to get more mileage from Mage Armor in human form.
As for beast form, rare are those that have both good DEX and good HP until you hit at least CR 2, possibly CR 3 creatures which then usually have a decent AC too. At CR 1, only Lion (since Giant Vulture is out until level 8) could really profit.

I mean, you do get in average a +2 AC, sometimes a +3 AC, which is always good. And after Wizard gets level 5-6, it becomes an expense he can easily live with. So overall it's indeed a nice example of cooperation.

But while it could make a difference when Druid is dueling someone, against a crowd the probabilities will play against him. And that's one slot, and more importantly one action (supposing we are talking about a fight that has begun) Wizard could have instead spent on maybe killing one enemy or providing a full cover through a Fog Cloud.

If really that was so important for Druid to benefit from Mage Armor, then anyone could dip into a class that provides Mage Armor, or Druid could just make a single level dip into Monk for guaranted 14 starting AC and up to 17-18 AC in the long run (absolute minimum of 15), or you could try and put them into scrolls or rings. It's a 1st level spell that three (or more) casters can learn. So it's not like it's a big deal either.

(Sadly, you pick one particular example to make the point, but not only is that example not representative of average AC -and HP ^^- of beast forms, it is the form of an Elemental. Which is level 10. Which thus goes beyond the newly set goalpost of OP who specifically asked for discussion to focus on level 1-9. Too bad. XD)

Plus, AFAIK, there is no Druid in his party. That's why I didn't think necessary to stress the point. Otherwise we would also need to speak about Warlock being able to...
- make invisible a whole Conjure Animals spell so you have invisible eagles or the like scouting for you or you actually make them decent to bring into fight as allies (especially animals that prone creatures). Sure, technically a Wizard or Bard *could* upcast Invisibility as a 5th level slot. Would they want to? Probably not, since they used a precious slot for the rest of the day. Also, Chain Warlock could lead them directly with own pet and Voice of the Chain Master.
- use a domesticated animal to trade information with Druid over fairly long distances (Speak With Animals ritual which both have, or Tongues,), or speak directly with him in a Beast Form.
- give Wild Shaped Druid ability to speak normally when needed ("near at-will" Tongues).
- keep enemies inside the area of a Plant Growth or Thorns Wall.
- deal automatic damage and control by pushing/pulling enemies through and inside Spike Growth (automatic, unavoidable, scalable damage) or Wall of Fire (one-time automatic, unavoidable damage). Which, by the way, could push the damage of that Warlock's turn on par with a high-level Fighter or a 1st/2nd level spell depending on the situation.
- help Druid who is in infiltration mission by using a Familiar (Tome, Chain) as a medium for buffs/heals.
- or, to double back on previous example, dip one level into Divine Soul Sorcerer to get Mage Armor and Bless or Shield of Faith. :)

Same with Wizard, to stay in the same mindset, Warlock could very well "gather" enemies in expectation of Wizard's oncoming Fireball, or push them enough so that same Wizard could completely cut off one group of enemies with a Wall of Force...
Just the ability to force-move-slow people, even if not entirely reliable (you do have to hit first ^^) is really enough to make a Warlock great in all situations. And while each effect is mostly available to any class (through different means), only Warlock has it that easy and flexible... But it does require level 5 if you want the bake and the cherry on top. XD

The most important thing is not what abilities you have, but how you use them. Thus, synergy can always be found whatever party one plays with. It's just that sometimes the best course of action is obvious, some other times less so. :)

[Merudo]

I'm not talking about constant dungeon-bashing, I'm talking about pottering about town getting supplies and gossip, or having a lunch break when travelling, or the like.

At any point you can ask your DM, "How long has it been since we did anything stressful?" If the answer is 1 hour or more then you have just had a short rest and can take the benefits if you want to. Including getting your 2 pact magic slots back.



DM: Youve been walking along the forest trail for 1 hour (everyone gets a short rest)...




Warlock can make a whole group invisible for free.
How is that?
Warlock has auto-force-upcast, and Invisibility can be upcast to include one more person.

Invisibility lasts for 1 hour while concentrating.
Short-rest is no strenuous activity for one hour.
Concentration does not precludes taking a short rest.
>>> You can "chain" Invisibility.


I believe that according to RAW, you can't take a short rest while walking, and especially not while sneaking around.

According to the PHB,



A short rest is a period of downtime, at least 1 hour long, during which a character does nothing more strenuous than eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds.


Walking is NOT included here, and walking for 1 hour is clearly more strenuous than "eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds".

Heck, the long rest entry itself describes walking as strenuous:



If the rest is interrupted by a period of strenuous activity—at least 1 hour of walking, fighting, casting Spells, or similar Adventuring activity[...]


So yeah, the Warlock CAN chain invisibility spells, but he has to stay still while doing it.

That gave me an idea though - maybe two members of the party can carry the Warlock in a stretcher or some other apparatus, so that he can benefit from a short rest even while in movement...



Like taking back my Invisibility example, do you realize that with some added shenanigans (Tenser's Floating disk to hop on, having someone bulky carry you so you don't warlk), a level 7 Warlock could make a 4-man party perma-invisible for traveling or infiltration?

Or Tenser's Floating disk could be used, too!

In either case though, I think there is a strong argument for stealth & perception checks be made at a disadvantage for those carrying the Warlock. And if a battle does happen, the Warlock would probably count as surprised because they were "refreshing their minds and spirits for Spellcasting".

[Willie the Duck]

Regardless of the technical wording, I feel that the spirit of the rules regarding short rests is that you are 'stopping and taking a quick break.' I would tend to regard any 'figure out how to make sure the warlock is short-resting at any given time' shenanigans with a skeptical eye. On a given day of shopping for supplies or the like, they aren't short resting constantly (OTOH, one should probably not have to specifically stipulate that they will get a short rest or two in during the day, either, as that will happen organically based on the situation).

[SpanielBear]

Regardless of the technical wording. I feel that the spirit of the rules regarding short rests is that you are 'stopping and taking a quick break.' I would tend to regard any 'figure out how to make sure the warlock is short-resting at any given time' shenanigans with a skeptical eye. On a given day of shopping for supplies or the like, they aren't short resting constantly (OTOH, one should probably not have to specifically stipulate that they will get a short rest or two in during the day, either, as that will happen organically based on the situation).

Shopping, haggling, carrying shopping bags, comparing prices- work.

Stopping for a cup of tea and a biscuit while nattering with the rogue for an hour- short rest.

[MaxWilson]

I believe that according to RAW, you can't take a short rest while walking, and especially not while sneaking around.

...So yeah, the Warlock CAN chain invisibility spells, but he has to stay still while doing it.

Doesn't really matter though, since he has multiple spell slots. You could alternate sneaking and resting if necessary.

[Merudo]

A recent tweet by Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1012366625985609728) explicitly states the "6-8 encounters a day" guideline is actually a maximum, not a minimum.

Twitter question:


How do you skip fights with little story relevance but keep the 4 to 6 encounters per day? It's my biggest problem to balance the short rests classes.

Answer by Jeremy:


D&D doesn’t require a certain number of encounters per day.

The “Dungeon Master’s Guide” gives the number of encounters a typical group can face before tuckering out.

There’s no minimum. #DnD

Hence when asked how to enforce the 6-8 encounters per day guideline to make the Warlock and other short rest classes more balanced, the official answer of Jeremy is "don't bother".

[Speely]

Invocations are amazing, and add lots of variability. You can choose them for so many different approaches. You can only get more with more Warlock levels.

Once you get 3 spell slots per short rest, you have enough slots to be very versatile and effective. 1 slot for a clutch CC spell. 1 slot for something offensive, like Eldritch Smite on a crit, or Hex if you prefer that route (I don't, generally.) Last slot for Armor of Agathys or Shadows of Moil. Hell, I usually use two slots on these spells and just ignore offensive stuff because I can do dependable damage at any time.

The mask invocations are amazing in non-combat encounters.

Again, Eldritch Smite is such a great "oh s**t" moment when you crit. You can only use Warlock slots for this, which means that the higher you Warlock level, the more you can use one of the best smites in the game. It's absolutely devastating.

[Unoriginal]

A recent tweet by Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1012366625985609728) explicitly states the "6-8 encounters a day" guideline is actually a maximum, not a minimum.

Twitter question:

Answer by Jeremy:


...yes?

The 6-8 Medium encounter thing was NEVER a guideline on how many encounter per day you needed and was ALWAYS described as how many encounters the classes where balanced around before being out of ressources.

Why are you acting as if it was some kind of news?




Hence when asked how to enforce the 6-8 encounters per day guideline to make Warlocks and other short rest classes more balanced, the official answer of Jeremy is "don't bother".

Ahahha no.

Sorry, but you don't get to blatantly lie and try to transparently re-purpose sentences that have a clear meaning to fit your little narrative.

Short rest classes ARE balanced. ou don't need to "make them more".

They're balanced by the fact that short rests exist, and that if long-rest classes nova early they'll spend the rest of the day without ressources.

Long-rest classes and short rest classes both perform admirably when there is only one or two encounters per day, too. The only time short-rest classes fall behind is if they blew out all their ressources before the challenge, their ressource-tied abilities are needed for this challenge rather than their at-will, AND no one decided to short rest. Meanwhile, long-rest classes fall behind if they blew out all their ressources before the challenge.

Crawford never said "don't bother trying to balance those classes which are unbalanced because Merudo said so".

He said "D&D 5e does not require you to do 6-8 encounters per adventuring days, it's just when we calculated the classes will run out of juice". Which is the truth, and has been described in the book as such since the start of the game.

I sincerely, respectfully ask you to stop trying to twist people's words to pretend they're agreeing with you in such an obvious manner.

You're only doing a disservice to yourself and to your side of the discussion.

[Segev]

Short rest classes ARE balanced. ou don't need to "make them more".

They're balanced by the fact that short rests exist, and that if long-rest classes nova early they'll spend the rest of the day without ressources.

Long-rest classes and short rest classes both perform admirably when there is only one or two encounters per day, too. The only time short-rest classes fall behind is if they blew out all their ressources before the challenge, their ressource-tied abilities are needed for this challenge rather than their at-will, AND no one decided to short rest. Meanwhile, long-rest classes fall behind if they blew out all their ressources before the challenge.

Crawford never said "don't bother trying to balance those classes which are unbalanced because Merudo said so".

He said "D&D 5e does not require you to do 6-8 encounters per adventuring days, it's just when we calculated the classes will run out of juice". Which is the truth, and has been described in the book as such since the start of the game.

I sincerely, respectfully ask you to stop trying to twist people's words to pretend they're agreeing with you in such an obvious manner.

You're only doing a disservice to yourself and to your side of the discussion.Er...

The issue people are seeking to address is that short-rest classes fall behind long-rest classes when the long-rest classes nova on the single encounter of the day.


if long-rest classes nova early they'll spend the rest of the day without ressources. This isn't an issue if there are few enough encounters/day that the nova is the only real time people are using their powers.

[Unoriginal]

Er...

The issue people are seeking to address is that short-rest classes fall behind long-rest classes when the long-rest classes nova on the single encounter of the day.

There has been quite a few pages with quite a few issues people sought to address.

That long-rest classes can do a bigger boom if they one-encounter-nova is not an issue in term of game rules. It's a burst of power that come at the cost of the PC being out of juice later if it turns out there is actually more than one encounter this day.

And short-rest classes can nova (which is admittedly smaller than long-rest nova), take a rest, and then nova again, if needed.



This isn't an issue if there are few enough encounters/day that the nova is the only real time people are using their powers.

And it is one if there is not few enough encounters/day, or a few but tough ones, in which case long-rest classes will be happy to have short-rest ones traveling with them.

You know, as if the game was balanced, or some other sorcery.

[sophontteks]

I'd rather a lesser nova if it meant I could nova again. Its a very nice trade off. Really sucks that most casters can only cast their best spells a few times per day.

[Segev]

I'd rather a lesser nova if it meant I could nova again. Its a very nice trade off. Really sucks that most casters can only cast their best spells a few times per day.

Same is true of high-level Warlocks, even moreso, in fact. Mystic Arcana are 1/day each. Period.

[MaxWilson]

Sorry, but you don't get to blatantly lie and try to transparently re-purpose sentences that have a clear meaning to fit your little narrative.

Er, Segev's post was a straightforward interpretation of Crawford's straightforward answer to a question about the scenario under discussion.

Crawford first posts:


I often DM for 7 players. Some tips:

Skip fights with little story relevance.

Make sure each character gets at least one special moment of action, description, or humor per session.

Let the characters chat. Listen. They’ll come up with great story ideas. Use those ideas.

(Emphasis added.)

Then there's a followup question:


How do you skip fights with little story relevance but keep the 4 to 6 encounters per day? It's my biggest problem to balance the short rests classes.


D&D doesn’t require a certain number of encounters per day.

The “Dungeon Master’s Guide” gives the number of encounters a typical group can face before tuckering out.

There’s no minimum.

"Don't bother" is a reasonable paraphrase of Crawford's advice here.

[sophontteks]

Same is true of high-level Warlocks, even moreso, in fact. Mystic Arcana are 1/day each. Period.
Most games don't even get that far. I've never seen past level 14. At that point they are getting more spells per day anyway.

[Unoriginal]

Er, Segev's post was a straightforward interpretation of Crawford's straightforward answer to a question about the scenario under discussion.

One, it was Merudo's post. Second, no it was not a straightforward interpretation since:



Crawford first posts:



(Emphasis added.)

Then there's a followup question:


"Don't bother" is a reasonable paraphrase of Crawford's advice here.

you're ignoring how Merudo's claim was that Crawford's official answer "when asked how to enforce the 6-8 encounters per day guideline to make the Warlock and other short rest classes more balanced" was "don't bother" aka "don't bother to try balancing those classes", rather than "D&D does not require a certain number of encounters".

Crawford was asked "how do you do X? I feel it's needed to make Y work". He answered "you don't need to do X", which implies there is no issue with Y.

As you quoted Crawford saying:


Make sure each character gets at least one special moment of action, description, or humor per session.

[Segev]

"Here is a specific problem with Y, that is solved by doing X, but I'm not sure how to do X."

"You don't need to do X."

The most generous reading of this exchange is that the second statement is missing the first part of the first statement. The less generous reading is that it's implying, "Don't bother solving that problem."

At no point does it say, "There is no problem," and it certainly doesn't back up that assertion with evidence that demonstrates why the problem does not exist.

[Unoriginal]

"Here is a specific problem with Y, that is solved by doing X, but I'm not sure how to do X."

"You don't need to do X."

The most generous reading of this exchange is that the second statement is missing the first part of the first statement. The less generous reading is that it's implying, "Don't bother solving that problem."

At no point does it say, "There is no problem," and it certainly doesn't back up that assertion with evidence that demonstrates why the problem does not exist.



The person asking the question specifically said "how do I do X but keep doing Y? I feel Y is needed to make Z work."

Crawford answered "you don't need to do Y"

Which directly implies directly that Y is not needed to make Z work.

[MaxWilson]

you're ignoring how Merudo's claim was that Crawford's official answer "when asked how to enforce the 6-8 encounters per day guideline to make the Warlock and other short rest classes more balanced" was "don't bother" aka "don't bother to try balancing those classes", rather than "D&D does not require a certain number of encounters".

Crawford was asked "how do you do X? I feel it's needed to make Y work". He answered "you don't need to do X", which implies there is no issue with Y.

Either I am missing your point, or you are drawing a distinction without a difference.

[Sinon]

OK, this entire conversation stems from a question about managing a group of 7 players, 6 of whom are new to the game.

Crawford offered some tips, including skipping encounters that lack story relevance.

A follow-up question asked about balance when such encounters are skipped, and his answer, IN CONTEXT, was to not bother with that problem.

Which makes complete sense: if you have a large group of inexperienced players, and you’re following his advice to “Make sure each character gets at least one special moment” the issue of balancing the ratio of rests to encounters is just not a priority.

OP decides to skip all the context, making this about his pet issue.

Yes, Crawford did say, “D&D doesn’t require a certain number of encounters per day.”

That does not mean that the classes weren’t designed around certain expectations.

Yes, he did say, “There’s no minimum.” But that doesn’t mean characters who choose to burn off all their resources in a single encounter get to decide that they now get to quit adventuring for the day and take a long rest.

[Pharaon]

OK, this entire conversation stems from a question about managing a group of 7 players, 6 of whom are new to the game.

Crawford offered some tips, including skipping encounters that lack story relevance.

A follow-up question asked about balance when such encounters are skipped, and his answer, IN CONTEXT, was to not bother with that problem.

Which makes complete sense: if you have a large group of inexperienced players, and you’re following his advice to “Make sure each character gets at least one special moment” the issue of balancing the ratio of rests to encounters is just not a priority.

OP decides to skip all the context, making this about his pet issue.

Yes, Crawford did say, “D&D doesn’t require a certain number of encounters per day.”

That does not mean that the classes weren’t designed around certain expectations.

Yes, he did say, “There’s no minimum.” But that doesn’t mean characters who choose to burn off all their resources in a single encounter get to decide that they now get to quit adventuring for the day and take a long rest.

Yup, the quote was brought over without any context, and the context wildly changes the meaning of what Crawford said.

And even with the most generous context-free interpretation of the comment, it still doesn't support Merudo's contention very well.

Crawford's point wasn't "don't bother," it was "change your focus" (and Crawford certainly didn't call 6-8 encounters a maximum).

[Malifice]

Walking is NOT included here, and walking for 1 hour is clearly more strenuous than "eating, drinking, reading, and tending to wounds".Heck, the long rest entry itself describes walking as strenuous:


''We stop and rest for a few minutes during the walk for a drink of water, and a quick bite to eat.''

An hour or more has now passed where you have not been walking for 1 hour or more.

Or buy horses.

[Malifice]

A recent tweet by Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1012366625985609728) explicitly states the "6-8 encounters a day" guideline is actually a maximum, not a minimum.

Thats not what he is saying at all.

He is saying that long rest (and short rest) resources are expected to last you 6-8 encounters (featuring 2-3 short rests), before being expended and you need to long rest.

In other words, if you are blowing your long rest resources after 1-2 fights regularly, you're playing against the core assumption of 5E.

5E being (mechanically) a resource management system (HP, HD, spell slots, rages, smites, sup dice, action surge, ki points, SP, X short/ long rest, XP, GP, charges etc) this obviously has implications on game play.

It goes without saying that frequent 1-2 encounter 'super deadly' fight adventuring days favor long rest classes (casters, paladins, barbarians) that can nova long rest abilities (which are more potent than short rest ones). Frequent multiple encounter/ multiple short rest adventuring days favor short rest classes ('Lock, Fighter, Monk) favor short rest classes (long rest based classes have to conserve resources, while short rest based classes can spam abilities.

You dont have to police the adventuring day as a DM. Just be aware of the consequences if you dont do so in a game that is based around resource management and depletion, in a game where different classes gain and recover resources at different rates.

For example come play in my game where you're often on a doom clock and having to face 6+ encounters per long rest, and short rests are reduced to 5 minutes long, and 2 per long rest maximum.

You'll get a very different result to another DMs game where the players only ever tend to get 1-2 encounters per long rest (the 5 minuted adventuring day is the norm),

[MaxWilson]

You'll get a very different result to another DMs game where the players only ever tend to get 1-2 encounters per long rest (the 5 minuted adventuring day is the norm),

The five-minute adventuring day involves PCs attempting to rest after every significant interaction during the game. It is not the norm.

It is fairly common, for dramatic reasons, for there to be only a few fights per adventuring day, since having lots of independent fights every single adventuring day is dramatically implausible and also tedious. Crawford's tweet recognizes this and actually agrees that it can be better for the game to have more drama and less fighting. That isn't a five-minute adventuring day though. It's just a combat-lite game.

[Segev]

I'm about to go to bed, so I won't brainstorm any right now, but it might be a good direction for this thread to go to consider what could constitute additional, non-combat encounters which would nonetheless ping the resource management game sufficiently to induce balance.

Note that they need not be formally noted as encounters, even, just... situations which prompt the characters to use resources they need rests (short or long) to recover.

[JoeJ]

I'm about to go to bed, so I won't brainstorm any right now, but it might be a good direction for this thread to go to consider what could constitute additional, non-combat encounters which would nonetheless ping the resource management game sufficiently to induce balance.

Note that they need not be formally noted as encounters, even, just... situations which prompt the characters to use resources they need rests (short or long) to recover.

Complex traps immediately come to mind. They use resources and are (if you do them right) interesting enough to be worth taking the time to play out.

[Waazraath]

And environmental hazards; cliffs that can't be scaled without the occasional fall, or use of spells like fly or levitation; storms and hurricanes, with hail and snow, that requre spells for shelter, or might give hp damage, or a level of exhaustion; etc.

[Malifice]

Traps; environmental hazards and even some social encounters.

As long as there is resource drain (HP, spell slots etc) it counts.

[Mordaedil]

So if I slap my teammates every time there is a pause causing one hit point of damage, I can drain the number of encounters per day?

[mgshamster]

So if I slap my teammates every time there is a pause causing one hit point of damage, I can drain the number of encounters per day?

Depends on the level. At level 1, that could work rather well (your fellow players may not like you for it and your DM is under no obligation to oblige). At higher levels, a 1 HP drain doesn't even mark the "easy" encounter list.

Remember, 6-8 encounters per adventuring day is actually a misnomer. And the DMG doesn't actually say "six to eight." (I take that back, it does actually say 6-8 medium to hard encounters).

Using the XP Encounter Budget numbers, what you get is 2-32 encounters per day, ranging from 2 deadly to 6-8 medium/hard to 32 easy encounters.

There's always implictions to only giving one type of encounter all the time, though. If you're always giving 2 deadly encounters per day with no variance, you'll experience a ton of Nova characters, and those who are short rest dependent will feel weaker. If you're always giving 32 easy encounters per day, your players may feel bogged down in combat.

Like most things in life, they key is variance. Keep a varried set of encounters in your game. Mix it up. Sometimes have no encounters. Sometimes have a few deadly ones. Sometimes have a ton of easy ones. Sometimes have a handful of medium ones. Sometimes do one deadly, two medium, and a handful of easy. Mix it up. Problems can arise when you only ever do one type.

The fun part is that if you keep it mixed, players won't *expect* the adventuring day to be one style, so even if you do throw out two deadly encounters in one day, your players still won't Nova every last spell slot - because they don't know if that's the last encounter.

[MaxWilson]

Traps; environmental hazards and even some social encounters.

As long as there is resource drain (HP, spell slots etc) it counts.

Assuming you mean "significant resource drain", by that metric, only Deadly encounters should count.

[Segev]

Even in a dungeon, you can build non-combat encounters out of relatively simple elements.

An unoccupied room with doors in and out locked, furnished appropriately for the dungeon or building, in which 6 basic traps, 2 decoy (low-value) loot stashes, 2 real (valuable-for-the-level) loot stashes, and one key clue or other plot-relevant thing, all hidden in different locations. The decoys and traps have moderately easy Investigation DCs to discover them, though the traps have a higher DC to identify them as traps (and maybe the loot stashes each have their own traps). The real loot stashes are better-hidden, and the plot-relevant clue is hidden at a DC the DM feels appropriate for how important/helpful it is. (Note that the three-clue rule should probably be in place, so this should be non-essential on its own.)

[Malifice]

Assuming you mean "significant resource drain", by that metric, only Deadly encounters should count.

It doesn't have to be significant.

A simple concealed and spiked 30' pit trap (DC X Perception to detect, DC X Thieves tools to disarm, DC X Dexterity save to avoid, 3d6 bludgeoning damage and Xd10 piercing damage) works just fine in most campaigns as an encounter.

A skill monkey can bypass it with no resource expenditure. Otherwise its going to drain HP and possibly other resources (slots) to bypass.

The game is literally called Dungeons and Dragons. Its been a basic premise of the game since day one that it features a group of around 4-5 characters of mixed abilities entering and plundering a 'dungeon' [an area featuring half a dozen or more traps, combat encounters, riddles and puzzles closely grouped together].

People are acting like half a dozen encounters in a day is unusual. It's not; that's how the game has been played since day one.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm about to go to bed, so I won't brainstorm any right now, but it might be a good direction for this thread to go to consider what could constitute additional, non-combat encounters which would nonetheless ping the resource management game sufficiently to induce balance.

Note that they need not be formally noted as encounters, even, just... situations which prompt the characters to use resources they need rests (short or long) to recover. There are any number of natural obstacles or non combat encounters that will pose challenges to the party either through skill checks, a spell (knock for example) or a combination of those that do not include combat. (Pool of poisonous water, quick sand, mudlice, avalanche, etc).

The list is almost endless in terms of what the DM can come up with to present the player with puzzles and challenges.

[KorvinStarmast]

People are acting like half a dozen encounters in a day is unusual. It's not; that's how the game has been played since day one. I agree with your whole post, except that back in "day one" days we often had more than 4 or 5 players. But that too varied by table ...

[Willie the Duck]

I'm about to go to bed, so I won't brainstorm any right now, but it might be a good direction for this thread to go to consider what could constitute additional, non-combat encounters which would nonetheless ping the resource management game sufficiently to induce balance.

Honestly, at this point, the only way the OP and their threads could ever go somewhere productive was to stop trying to get the forum populous (or now the designers) to 'admit' some flaw in the game as-is, and instead submit a suggested houserule for the system that addresses the perceived flaws that he sees in it, and submit it for review. He'd probably find a more receptive audience anyways.

[MaxWilson]

Honestly, at this point, the only way the OP and their threads could ever go somewhere productive was to stop trying to get the forum populous (or now the designers) to 'admit' some flaw in the game as-is, and instead submit a suggested houserule for the system that addresses the perceived flaws that he sees in it, and submit it for review. He'd probably find a more receptive audience anyways.

Some people come to these forums for insight, and not to seek emotional fulfillment from strangers.

It's frustrating, yes, to ask for insight and receive a bunch of unsatisfactory answers; and you may see some frustration vented. But the goal being sought in this case isn't an emotional one--even if someone "admits" flaws, it leaves you unsatisfied, because you still didn't get what you were looking for in the first place: new, good ideas.

As it's been said, "You'd worry less what other people thought of you if you knew how seldom they do." Sometimes, other people don't really care what you think.

[Zalabim]

As it's been said, "You'd worry less what other people thought of you if you knew how seldom they do." Sometimes, other people don't really care what you think.
I really like this message.

Remember, 6-8 encounters per adventuring day is actually a misnomer. And the DMG doesn't actually say "six to eight." (I take that back, it does actually say 6-8 medium to hard encounters).

Using the XP Encounter Budget numbers, what you get is 2-32 encounters per day, ranging from 2 deadly to 6-8 medium/hard to 32 easy encounters.
Actually, since there's no upper limit to the XP budget of deadly encounters, it's actually a minimum of 1, but since it wouldn't be possible to use up the PCs hit dice healing with only a single encounter, there has to be at least 2 to leave them exhausted. Basing it on the threshold numbers, the range is actually 3-16, with usually some remainder after the 3 deadly, and for the vast majority of levels the easy encounters number is less than 15. I don't know how you got 32.

[Unoriginal]

Some people come to these forums for insight, and not to seek emotional fulfillment from strangers.


Some people do, indeed.

Probably a majority, even.

I have not seen one post from Merudo indicating he actually seeks insight or advice rather than just wanting to prove/convince others he's right, despite how he formulated the OP.

It's possible that I'm wrong about the situation and Merudo, but given how his defence of his point included him admitting double-standard (i.e the wizard being allowed to long rest when out of spells while the Warlock wasn't allowed to short rest), prefering his one example of DM and players mishandling the warlock over the insight and advice of people who have played and DMed for the class a lot more (as well as from people who have a firm grasp on theory), and him outright lying to make his point seems relevant, I would be surprised.

Yes, it's frustrating when people don't give you what you want, but one is not entitled to have their misconceptions confirmed because of that.

[GreyBlack]

You don't include your warlock levels when determining multiclass spells per day. That's a pretty big reason right there.

Say you multiclass as Sorcerer 5/Warlock 2. When determining your daily spells as Warlock, where a Sorcerer 7 or a Warlock 7 could cast level 4 spell slots, as is you can only cast as a Sorcerer 5 with spells per day. Overall, it slows down your spell progression and makes you have that much less possible burst damage.

[Merudo]

I have not seen one post from Merudo indicating he actually seeks insight or advice rather than just wanting to prove/convince others he's right, despite how he formulated the OP.


My argumentative style is to make an unconventional argument that I believe to be at least somewhat true, and see how good the rebuttals provided by others are.

For the record I've got plenty of insight through this thread.

None of said insight came from you, though. In fact, the main purpose of your posts seem to be to attack my character and second guess my intents.

I've therefore decided to add you to my ignore list. You won't get any more replies from me.

[Merudo]

You don't include your warlock levels when determining multiclass spells per day. That's a pretty big reason right there.

Say you multiclass as Sorcerer 5/Warlock 2. When determining your daily spells as Warlock, where a Sorcerer 7 or a Warlock 7 could cast level 4 spell slots, as is you can only cast as a Sorcerer 5 with spells per day. Overall, it slows down your spell progression and makes you have that much less possible burst damage.

The Sorcerer 5/Warlock 2 can do 24 short rests in a day, which directly translates into 48 sorcery points, which can be used to create *NINE* level 3 slots for a total of eleven level 3 slots. The level 7 Sorcerer has three level 3 slots and one level 4 slot.

[Malifice]

The Sorcerer 5/Warlock 2 can do 24 short rest in a day...

...in a game that doesnt feature a Dungeon Master, or desperately needs a new one.

[MaxWilson]

My argumentative style is to make an unconventional argument that I believe to be at least somewhat true, and see how good the rebuttals provided by others are.

For the record I've got plenty of insight through this thread.

FWIW, I think it's possible that you'd be better understood if you were more public with acknowledgements when you do receive insight: "Thanks! Good point!" Rewarding those who offer valuable insights (while starving those who just want to start fights) may lead to more and better insights.

Take that for what it's worth. Just an observation.

[Unoriginal]

My argumentative style is to make an unconventional argument that I believe to be at least somewhat true, and see how good the rebuttals provided by others are.

All your arguments have been pretty standard for a "here why I don't like the Warlock" thread, so I don't know which part was the "unconventional" one.



None of said insight came from you, though.

I think it was pretty clear that you didn't consider anything I or the people I agree with said to be insight, yes.


In fact, the main purpose of your posts seem to be to attack my character and second guess my intents.

My main purpose and activity has been to provide arguments and comments to explain how the game work contrarily to your misconceptions, and , once it was clear you were going to continue to argue your point and ignore diverging arguments, to point out what you were doing.



I've therefore decided to add you to my ignore list. You won't get any more replies from me.

Valid. It's your right. Won't change when something needs to be pointed out, however.


The Sorcerer 5/Warlock 2 can do 24 short rests in a day, which directly translates into 48 sorcery points, which can be used to create *NINE* level 3 slots for a total of eleven level 3 slots. The level 7 Sorcerer has three level 3 slots and one level 4 slot.


...in a game that doesnt feature a Dungeon Master, or desperately needs a new one.

Yeah, 25 hours of short rests in a 24 hour days totally make sense (unless variant rules are used, of course).

Especially when one of Merudo's main arguments so far was that a Warlock getting 1 or 2 short rests was already something the DM needed to make a special adjustment to allow/that the other players would not agree to.

[Segev]

Yeah, 25 hours of short rests in a 24 hour days totally make sense (unless variant rules are used, of course).

Especially when one of Merudo's main arguments so far was that a Warlock getting 1 or 2 short rests was already something the DM needed to make a special adjustment to allow/that the other players would not agree to.

To be fair, while 25 short rests is a bit silly, 20-ish is certainly viable in any game where the party does 15 minute adventure days. Especially with coffeelock shenanigans to not need sleep.

And Merudo's point about 15-minute adventure days is at least as old a problem as 4e, if not earlier: the daily-resource classes just decide that, after any given encounter where they're out of their nova blasts, they'll barricade themselves up and take whatever amounts to a long rest for the system in question. 8 hours or 24, who cares? It's not like the players have to sit through it.

The solutions all require active and clever DMing, involving a reactive and active world that does things while the PCs rest.

[GreyBlack]

The Sorcerer 5/Warlock 2 can do 24 short rests in a day, which directly translates into 48 sorcery points, which can be used to create *NINE* level 3 slots for a total of eleven level 3 slots. The level 7 Sorcerer has three level 3 slots and one level 4 slot.

1 - The OP asked for reasons why you wouldn't grab more than 2 levels. Lagging behind in spellcasting power is a legitimate reason.

2 - Ctrl+Z Sorcerer, Ctrl+V wizard, cleric, paladin, bard, etc.

[Malifice]

To be fair, while 25 short rests is a bit silly, 20-ish is certainly viable in any game where the party does 15 minute adventure days.

Who is running games like this?

[Unoriginal]

To be fair, while 25 short rests is a bit silly, 20-ish is certainly viable in any game where the party does 15 minute adventure days.

If for some reasons your adventure day lasts 15 mins, why would you need short rests?

And once again, one of Merudo's main "arguments" was that according to him, a warlock could barely get a short rest, that allowing it added work for the DM, and that the group didn't want to do short rests (when for some reason the wizard was allowed to long rest after burning all their spells nova-style).

[Willie the Duck]

As it's been said, "You'd worry less what other people thought of you if you knew how seldom they do." Sometimes, other people don't really care what you think.

Fortune cookie wisdom does not elevate this discussion in any way, but in the end it boils down to a difference in perception. You see someone genuinely looking for insight. After all these threads, I see someone with an axe to grind against the system as it is that doesn't get why we aren't all rushing to agree. Perhaps it is a different level of jadedness.

[Segev]

Who is running games like this?I had the misfortune of playing in one in a 4e game. It was stupid. And it took me at least two encounters to catch on that the party was going to barricade and rest after every encounter, so I was the sucker who wasn't blowing my dailies like they were encounter powers.

It was...lame.

I have also, in much less lame circumstances but equally frustrating ones for those with "higher endurance" mechanics (e.g. martials and the like who refresh per-encounter or who can use their best abilities all day long), been in games where the encounter rate is at most two per day, with 1 per day being more common when any happen at all. This is much more due to the nature of the game involving less classic "dungeon delving" and more travel and exploration, which made it feel less artificial. But it still made the daily-resource-management classes able to treat their powers as if they were limited by-encounter rather than by the day, magnifying their strength greatly.


If for some reasons your adventure day lasts 15 mins, why would you need short rests?That's the point. You don't. And 15-minute adventure days are equivalent to 1-encounter-or-less-per-day campaigns, for all intents and purposes, when it comes to resource management.

If you aren't getting into multiple encounters on a reasonable number of days, you're going to have the long-rest classes have the same resource regen rate-per-encounter as the short-rest classes.


And once again, one of Merudo's main "arguments" was that according to him, a warlock could barely get a short rest, that allowing it added work for the DM, and that the group didn't want to do short rests (when for some reason the wizard was allowed to long rest after burning all their spells nova-style).Merudo's argument, as I understood it, is that a party would either refuse to "merely" take a short rest, insisting on a long one, or that the DM wouldn't give time to "short rest" and would force them to wait for end-of-day to have a breather.

I have never seen a DM do the latter except as a response to players trying to cheese something, but the former is in line with my experience that there are players and parties where, if they're going to rest, will insist on the long rest to recharge their daily powers.

[Merudo]

Fortune cookie wisdom does not elevate this discussion in any way, but in the end it boils down to a difference in perception. You see someone genuinely looking for insight. After all these threads, I see someone with an axe to grind against the system as it is that doesn't get why we aren't all rushing to agree. Perhaps it is a different level of jadedness.

Axe to grind? Against what?

I never played as a Warlock, the class never interested me either mechanically or thematically. I'd rather not have my powers being granted by an evil entity seeking either possession of my soul or my destruction/corruption.

I'd rather play a long rest caster, thank you very much.

The extend of my "frustration" is that I feel a little bad about those (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/76xv18/my_warlock_player_seems_unsatisfied_with_combat/) who picked (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/41kf87/bored_by_warlock_combat/) the Warlock (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/819bf9/what_makes_5e_warlocks_so_great/) and end (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?368870-DM-purposely-gimping-my-Warlock) up disappointed (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/4xvv3u/how_balanced_is_the_warlock_class_5e/) by their choices (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/8nafa0/feeling_useless_because_of_suboptimal_character/).

[SpanielBear]

Axe to grind? Against what?

I never played as a Warlock, the class never interested me either mechanically or thematically. I'd rather not have my powers being granted by an evil entity seeking either possession of my soul or my destruction/corruption.

I'd rather play a long rest caster, thank you very much.

The extend of my "frustration" is that I feel a little bad about those (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/76xv18/my_warlock_player_seems_unsatisfied_with_combat/) who picked (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/41kf87/bored_by_warlock_combat/) the Warlock (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/819bf9/what_makes_5e_warlocks_so_great/) and end (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?368870-DM-purposely-gimping-my-Warlock) up disappointed (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/4xvv3u/how_balanced_is_the_warlock_class_5e/) by their choices (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/8nafa0/feeling_useless_because_of_suboptimal_character/).

Don't really know what to say to this, except taste and tables differ. If there is confusion as to how *anyone* could enjoy the warlock as a class, there are plenty of examples in this thread, more than enough to counter a claim that it is objectively or universally unenjoyable. But by the same token and as you have pointed out, it isn't a class that is going to be enjoyed by all players.

But that's hardly unique, right? Some people will never find a monk to their taste, or a cleric. No class will be to everyone's taste, there's always going to be exceptions.

I can equally understand warlocks being more of an edge case than most, there are a lot of moving parts and they do seem to favour "thematic" players over "power" players (distinction my own). But even then, that's not to say a warlock is a drain on a party or cannot fulfil any role. Depends on how one wants to play them and what the party structure is (in your Strahd party, it's possible a hexblade may have fared better, for example).

(As an aside, the entity providing the power isn't necessarily evil. GOOlocks, deathlocks and Faelocks are all neutral leaning, a Celestial warlock could be as varied as any deities' servant, and a hexblade is pretty free to go down any alignment they choose, depending on how they see their patron at character creation.)


I'm playing a pure GOOlock in my game at the moment, pact of the tome. Party includes a arcane trickster, pact of ancients paladin, moon druid and battlemaster. I've never felt like a drag on my party, nor do I feel like I am stealing anyone's thunder (hopefully). It's just my experience, but I'm having fun.

[Sinon]

The extend of my "frustration" is that I feel a little bad about those (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/76xv18/my_warlock_player_seems_unsatisfied_with_combat/) who picked (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/41kf87/bored_by_warlock_combat/) the Warlock (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/819bf9/what_makes_5e_warlocks_so_great/) and end (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?368870-DM-purposely-gimping-my-Warlock) up disappointed (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/4xvv3u/how_balanced_is_the_warlock_class_5e/) by their choices (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/8nafa0/feeling_useless_because_of_suboptimal_character/).

You started a tread with the title, “Why would anyone get more than 2 levels of Warlock?”

In addition to getting many, good, varied responses to that question, your two specific concerns were addressed.


The main problem with Eldritch Blast is that two levels in Warlock are enough to nearly full master the ability.
No they are not. There are multiple invocations that can apply to this cantrip, making it an unlimited-use option for direct damage, area damage, and control. If you want all of them, you have to take more levels in warlock. (Even more if you want some of the other goodies invocations have to offer.)


The other problem I have with the Warlock is that spellslots management requires an almost tyrannical DM and/or an overly assertive Warlock to be balanced.Again, just not true. As it has been repeatedly pointed out.

“The extend of my ‘frustration’ is that I feel a little bad about those who” responded to your questions like they were the legitimate concerns of a person who was actually looking for answers.

I will say this for you – if you truly did this out of concern for players who might actually want to play the warlock, the responses here have a breadth and a depth that might make some of them take a second, closer look.

But at every turn you’ve demonstrated that you were actually just trying to argue about flaws you perceive in the class design, and you did so based on no real experience with the class and questionable understanding of the system in general.

Now, it isn’t really a big deal that you still don’t like warlocks. I don’t like sorcerers, but I don’t start threads trying to cast my preferences as flaws in the design. I just don’t play them.

[Merudo]

No they are not. There are multiple invocations that can apply to this cantrip, making it an unlimited-use option for direct damage, area damage, and control. If you want all of them, you have to take more levels in warlock. (Even more if you want some of the other goodies invocations have to offer.)

While there are multiple invocations related to Eldritch blast, only Agonizing Blast & Repelling Blast are really worth it.

The rest of your post doesn't really contribute to the discussion so I choose to ignore it.

[SpanielBear]

While there are multiple invocations related to Eldritch blast, only Agonizing Blast & Repelling Blast are really worth it.

The rest of your post doesn't really contribute to the discussion so I choose to ignore it.

I get that you find many of the class features, including invocations, sub-par and not to your taste or playstyle. I also understand that there are others who feel the same.

Will you at least concede that this is not an objective perspective, but a subjective one? Plenty of posts in this thread show how other players do enjoy the class, and find fun ways to use the tools it provides.

A discussion about differing tastes will never resolve.

I am still curious too about what you would like to see to make the warlock-class work for you.

(also, again gonna point out that warlock patrons are not all evil...)

[MaxWilson]

You started a tread with the title, “Why would anyone get more than 2 levels of Warlock?”

In addition to getting many, good, varied responses to that question, your two specific concerns were addressed.

*snip quote*

No they are not. There are multiple invocations that can apply to this cantrip, making it an unlimited-use option for direct damage, area damage, and control. If you want all of them, you have to take more levels in warlock. (Even more if you want some of the other goodies invocations have to offer.)

*snip quote*

Again, just not true. As it has been repeatedly pointed out.

It's a little bit unfair to quote the OP as a way of showing that a poster is stubbornly refusing to change his mind. If he'd said those things AFTER getting all of those responses you talked about, sure, you could complain that he's not listening. (Or at least not agreeing with what's said.) But all that discussion happened after he wrote the OP, so how could it possibly have affected what he wrote there?

[SpanielBear]

It's a little bit unfair to quote the OP as a way of showing that a poster is stubbornly refusing to change his mind. If he'd said those things AFTER getting all of those responses you talked about, sure, you could complain that he's not listening. (Or at least not agreeing with what's said.) But all that discussion happened after he wrote the OP, so how could it possibly have affected what he wrote there?

Do you want a full break down of every post that invocations have been dismissed? That seems clumsy, when the proposal is not entirely without merit. To whit: Merudo has explained why they dislike most of the invocation options bar two. Others have said why they like them. Merudo has not been persuaded to change their mind, which is fine. However, they do not seem to acknowledge that others enjoying the class means their distaste is subjective. They continue to assert that warlocks are objectively flawed. They disagree with arguments to the contrary. At this point, quoting every post that supports these original assertions, where there have also been no posts that show any change of postion, seems wasted effort.

In addition, in their response to Sinon's point, Merudo did not state they had been misrepresented *in that specific instance*, and indeed they restated that they find invocations uninspiring. The quote is not problematic in this case.


I do find it frustrating that Merudo uses their own experience and quotes the negative experiences of others as objective evidence of Warlocks being flawed, while dismissing experiences that run counter to this as being outliers or not-representative (e.g. the frequency of short rests, the utility of invocations, the roleplay and thematic potential of the class background). That is not to attack the poster, but it is my critique of the discussion thus far. Not liking warlocks as a class is fine.However, not liking something does not mean it is objectively bad.

[Malifice]

OP, you'll notice in the threads you linked to re Warlock dissatisfaction the discussion comes down to rest management by the DM.

And yes I said DM and not players. The ultimate responsiblity for managing rests comes down to the DM.

The DM can achieve this in a number of ways. Simple discussion with the players, and an agreement not to abuse or attempt to game the rest mechanics via social contact and table agreement is one method. Imposing a doom clock to frame adventures and/or environmental constraints on resting is another. Mechanical adjustments to the rest mechanics (gritty realism resting) is another. Rulings (you cant rest here; or alternatively - you all get the benefits of a rest) are another.

The problems you see are down to DMs not bothering with this. Usually this is down to being oblivious to the underlying mechnaics of the system (they dont understand the maths and mechanics and balancing factors behind resting).

I see many DMs claim to not bother with managing the above due to 'choice'. Unless you're aiming for an unbalanced game, and unhappy players, and jarring 5 minute adventuring days, then I highly doubt this is true.

Its inevitably down to bad DMing.

[Sinon]

While there are multiple invocations related to Eldritch blast, only Agonizing Blast & Repelling Blast are really worth it.
Whether no-save forced movement (Repelling Blast & Grasp of Hadar), slowing (Lance of Lethargy), or spreading damage to nearby foes (Maddening Hex) are “worth it” is always going to be subjective. Whether Agonizing plus Repelling Blast and something like Mire of the Mind is "worth it" is also a matter of opinion.

But it is the height of obstinacy to pretend you don’t know why these might possibly appeal to others, which was ostensibly the reason for your "question."


The rest of your post doesn't really contribute to the discussion so I choose to ignore it.
I was critiquing your motivation in beginning this thread and the way you’ve argued in it. If you have no response to that critique, you should ignore it harder.


It's a little bit unfair to quote the OP as a way of showing that a poster is stubbornly refusing to change his mind. If he'd said those things AFTER getting all of those responses you talked about, sure, you could complain that he's not listening. (Or at least not agreeing with what's said.) But all that discussion happened after he wrote the OP, so how could it possibly have affected what he wrote there?
Because AFTER getting all those responses he chose to pull the designer's words out of context and pretend he'd made a reasonable argument. I quoted the original post rather than his numerous failures to adequately address its many reasonable responses because my point was that his question was never really a question.

[Malifice]

Because AFTER getting all those responses he chose to pull the designer's words out of context and pretend he'd made a reasonable argument. I quoted the original post rather than his numerous failures to adequately address its many reasonable responses because my point was that his question was never really a question.

Telling for me was on one hand he complained about Warlocks sucking becuase they never get short rests.

Next minute he starts talking about how OP they can be when they take 24 short rests in a day.

Clearly the issue isnt with the Warlock class; its with the managment of the rest mechanic by the DM.

Which is something that's been explained to the OP over and over from the second post in the thread.

[Contrast]

Axe to grind? Against what?

For reference, intended or not, my impression of you is definitely someone who has a problem with 5E. I drafted a post commenting the exact same thing on a post of yours the other day but didn't post it in the end. Maybe just something to consider going forward tone wise.


I never played as a Warlock, the class never interested me either mechanically or thematically. I'd rather not have my powers being granted by an evil entity seeking either possession of my soul or my destruction/corruption.

I mean...nothing about the warlock says your patron has to be evil or that the relationship needs to be antagonistic. Depends entirely on your choice of patron and the setting and your character.


I'd rather play a long rest caster, thank you very much.

The extend of my "frustration" is that I feel a little bad about those (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/76xv18/my_warlock_player_seems_unsatisfied_with_combat/) who picked (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/41kf87/bored_by_warlock_combat/) the Warlock (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/819bf9/what_makes_5e_warlocks_so_great/) and end (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?368870-DM-purposely-gimping-my-Warlock) up disappointed (https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/4xvv3u/how_balanced_is_the_warlock_class_5e/) by their choices (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/8nafa0/feeling_useless_because_of_suboptimal_character/).

I played a game of Lost Mines the other day starting at level 1. The druid blew their spell slots in the first combat and had a miserable time the rest of the game because we didn't have time to long rest due to the need to go and rescue someone. The warlock meanwhile was sitting pretty (we short rested twice).

Just another data point for you to consider.

[MeeposFire]

One thing to remember is that issues with resting is not a 5e problem but rather an issue in most versions of D&D of which the particulars of the problem may change in the details but most will have problems if the DM does not find satisfying ways of ensuring a fair number of rests of all types. You will find lots of examples in 3e where groups were having to do deal with the 15 minute adventure day and it was easier to pull off then and even more devastating to the balance to the game if allowed to happen (many classes in that version get little benefit from resting but the ones that do are typically the ones that gain great power at the cost of having limited resources which the 15 minute adventure day negates). While 4e typically makes it less noticeable of a problem between classes having frequent long rests would cause problems there too where frequent use of dailies would throw encounter building off.

1e got around this somewhat since the amount of downtime required to get spells back was based around the number of spells being regained and their level with higher level spells taking more time to memorize than lower level spells. At higher levels getting all of your spells back could take a very long time (much MUCH longer than the 8 hours assumed in later versions of D&D) and so this prevented the 15 minute work day but it came at a cost. Resting times were clunky because you had to figure out the time it would take every time you rested and further it tended to eat into the fun of those playing a caster class (there is a reason why later versions of D&D went to a simpler get your spells back after resting mechanic).

[Citan]

While there are multiple invocations related to Eldritch blast, only Agonizing Blast & Repelling Blast are really worth it.

Ok... I'll be once again very blunt about it, but it is a necessary evil: that is a really stupid thing to say.

What things can be applied to an Eldricht Blast Ray?
- push 10 feet (up to 4 times per turn).
- reduce speed 10 feet (once per turn).
- pull 10 feet (once per turn).
Many people in this thread, me included, already pointed out the many interests of having a definite control over enemy position, when Warlock, as well as many other classes, can maintain AOE spells that deal damage or reduce enemy's threat one way or another.

At level 3, Agonizing Blast will add +3 to total damage. This is, to be blunt, most of the time ridiculous compared to other perks.

Let's take two iconic CR 1 creatures, a Ghoul and a Brown Bear.
Ghoul is very dangerous, as it imposes Paralyzed condition on a CON save, that few characters have a decent chance of passing.
It has 22 HP on average.
You have 0 chance to kill it by yourself, and with an average of 5 without Agonizing, and an average of 10 from martial's weapon attacks (1d6 + 3 as the worst case) the only case when Agonizing would make a difference is with several low-damage attacks from friends or one big-damage attack, because it would make a difference only when Ghoul has only 4-8 HP left.

So you have a Ghoul, that will act after you, and has at least one ally (or you) within 20 feet.
We'll suppose you are facing the Ghoul from a direction which is beneficial for you.
You have Agonizing Blast and Repelling Blast? You'll push it 10 feet away: bad luck, it still can reach a friend and Claw him: so either you'll be lucky on damage roll and kill it, or your friend may be in a hairy situation next round.

You have Repelling Blast and Lance of Lethargy? Push 10 feet + reduce 10 feet: Ghoul is now 30 feet away from friend, and can only move 20 feet.
It doesn't have Dash as bonus action. You just guaranteed your friend 100% safety, unless the Ghoul decides to Dash anyways to try and kill on OA (and I honestly wonder why a Ghoul would decide on that).

You have a Brown Bear: it has a pretty decent speed with 40 feet, and a high HP. You know your chances to kill it are slim, and it seems interested in you or another squishy. One of your tanky friends placed himself in-between but couldn't reach the bear on his own turn. He is 15 feet away.

If you use Repelling Blast, it may be enough for the bear to change targets and attack the big armored guy. Or he could still have enough to get around and attack you or another weak.
With Grasp of Hadar, you can instead try and pull the bear into friend's OA zone.

Yeah, those are hypothetical situations, that suppose some precise parameters. Does it make it niche situations though? Not in my experience. A good portion of fights happens in enclosed areas, and unless a very small, martial-heavy party, you're bound to have at least one character using AOE control spells (Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, SG, etc)... Aand the number of threads about PAM/Sentinel or Spirit Guardians builds also prove how controlling enemy position and movement can make a winning difference. In all those situations, 10 feet more or less make the difference.

You can't say that Repelling Blast is interesting without agreeing that Lance of Lethargy and Grasp of Hadar are not, just on the premise that RB is the only one that can be used several times.
Since Repelling Blast and Lance of Lethargy have opposing effects, except some Spike Growth niche case, chances are you won't want to use both of them on the same target. Good thing is, Eldricht Blast has several rays, so you can apply different effects on different targets.

You could free a friend from an enemy's OA with a push, while pulling another into a friend's OA reach/AOE (Spirit Guardians, some Barb's aura, some Paladin's aura, Spike/Plant Growth, soon-to-be-cast Fireball/Hypnotic Pattern/Fear/ whatnot -I won't list everything again ^^-), and pushing+reducing a third melee-heavy one to severely reduce its threat level... With a *single* action.
If all you care about was applying soft control on a single target, even better: with several attempts, your chance of applying effects is sky-rocketing (since once per turn only except Repelling), even against high AC without advantage. Oh, and, since it's a rider applied on an "attack" (= no save or suck), it also ignores Legendary Resistance as well (as stupid as may be to be able to push away high CR creatures with a cantrip XD).

When enemies start sporting HP by the dozens, damage boost loses effectiveness. Ways of preventing them to attack does not, because their attack scales.

Eldricht Blast's Invocations are enough of a reason by themselves to stick with Warlock for many levels, unless of course your party already has strong control options of the same pushing/pulling nature.
It does require player to act smart about it though, as many other spells and features.
Otherwise, you may just waste your action and even bother your allies. ^^

EDIT: Also, I gave a quick look at those threads you pulled out: are you aware that you are just giving credit to those thinking you are not looking for constructive discussion and just act in blatant dishonesty? Because those threads are all about...
- either DM completely breaking the short-rest system and expectations (which, by the way, can be circumvented up to a reasonable point by carefully choosing Invocations and spells): not a class design problem, a people problem.
- or level 1-2 players (honestly, who is really satisfied playing at that level?): not a class design problem, a "boring starting level" problem.
- and, at least for one of them, a player just not getting at all the way Warlock is played but at least being upfront about it (or rather, his friend ^^).

Suggestion: organize a short campaign that you DM, not telling anything about people what to expect. In a 5-6 people group, high chances are you'll get a GWM something. Now make all fights about big, open areas or flying creatures. How long do you expect the player to grit his teeth before complaining that he feels useless?
Suggestion two: organize a campaign based on the predicate there is a kind of worldwide magic that blocks the natural course of time, putting back all (living) people in the state they were each passing day... Meaning you won't XP, EVER.
Then make them play one or two handful of sessions at level 1. How much fun do you think they'll have (-provided they survive that long)? (I mean, technically, it could still be very fun, but it would mainly be thanks to your narrative talent).

[Merudo]

Ok... I'll be once again very blunt about it, but it is a necessary evil: that is a really stupid thing to say.

Another one on the ignore list it is, then.

[Citan]

Poor lad, doesn't bear the critics. Ah well... I think the topic has been turned up and down anyways, just hope we won't have another similar thread popping soon. Although to be fair nobody forces anybody to read or answer. :)

Live well Merudo (not that you can read this message now XD).