Warlocks, they only want to be loved.

[Vuzzmop]

I am getting really tired of hearing people claiming that warlocks are under powered and useless.

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

Open!!!!!!!

[Caduceus]

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

That's why I don't play them.

[Fax Celestis]

Comparison of a warlock to a wizard of comparable level:

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

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

[Vuzzmop]

Warlocks are definately worth playing.

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

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

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

[Jack Mann]

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

[Krimm_Blackleaf]

Warlocks are kinda weak. But I still love them.

[Vuzzmop]

Warlocks are good for almost all play styles as well.

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

[Gralamin]

Warlocks are weak, except in the Worlds Largest Dungeon (Which is where their infinite use can be used to the full degree)

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

[Vuzzmop]

True.

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

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

[the_tick_rules]

i planned to say something, but i've grown so weary about these debates about why anyone who isn't a wizard stinks that these threads bore me.

[dragonwings]

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

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

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

[TheOOB]

Warlocks are not underpowered, they are underpowered in comparison to wizards. You can be a good deal less powerful then a wizard and still be useful. People still play rangers and paladins, and neither class is especially powerful.

[Erk]

It's like people are playing for character interest and story involvement rather than sheer damage output/combat effectiveness or something....

[SpiderBrigade]

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

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

[Jack Mann]

Warlocks are not underpowered, they are underpowered in comparison to wizards. You can be a good deal less powerful then a wizard and still be useful. People still play rangers and paladins, and neither class is especially powerful.

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

[Vuzzmop]

the warlock is not a caster!

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

[Jack Mann]

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

[The_Snark]

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

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

[Erk]

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

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

[Jack Mann]

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

[Dhavaer]

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

[LordLocke]

Warlocks are crappy casters. They're a Sorcerer stuck in Blaster mode with a handful of utilities. If you're looking to compare a warlock to Wizard/Sorc/CoDzilla, forget about it.

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

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

[Erk]

dual-wielding wands is a lot of fun.

PPPPLEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAASSSSSSSE tell me you named your wands Hurt and Burn?

[JellyPooga]

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

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

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

[Ceres]

In the 3.0/3.5-hybrid campaign I'm playing in, warlocks can have a serious damage output. At lvl 6:

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

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

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

[Arbitrarity]

You have... 4 feats at level six, all of which you used on metamigic spelllike abilities, some of which are illegal as your CL is too low?

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

[Meat Shield]

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

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

[BardicDuelist]

You have... 4 feats at level six, all of which you used on metamigic spelllike abilities, some of which are illegal as your CL is too low?

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

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

[AtomicKitKat]

The list of invocations is pretty large. The amount you're allowed to select is small.

[Larrin]

The list of invocations is pretty large. The amount you're allowed to select is small.

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