D&D 5E More about the Warlock. L&L March 3

Gundark · Mar 3, 2014

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20140303

I like melee warlocks. Looking forward to seeing it.

Discuss

Falling Icicle · Mar 3, 2014

It sounds pretty cool. It sounds kind of like a mix between the 3.5/4e warlock, with a bit of binder and hexblade mixed in.

I love the sound of the at-will invocations, though I'd like to see some examples. I hope they get quite a few invocations, because with only 2-4 spell slots, their spells aren't going to go very far. As for their spell slots "migrating" to higher levels, I've been wondering why they don't do that for all spellcasters. They did that in 13th Age and it seems to work pretty well. Hopefully, we'll see something like that as an optional casting module.

He mentions spells per day, though they said in the live stream that warlocks have encounter spells. Either this is a mistake, they've changed their mind, or warlock spells technically are "per day" but they have something like arcane recovery that let's them get their slots back with a short rest.

He mentions that chain warlocks get things like pseudodragons or quasits as pets. That seems like a pretty bad deal for your subclass to give you a mere familiar, something wizards can get with a 1st level spell and 100gp. Hopefully, a warlock's pet options improve as they go up in level.

Hopefully there will be a true binder option, even if it comes in a later book. I think that would work well as a warlock subclass, where instead of making a pact with some being you instead summon entities and bind them to yourself. They could even do it with warlock ritual spells.

1of3 · Mar 3, 2014

Mostly consolidated information. The last sentence here is new indeed, although we could have surmised that much:

A warlock uses spells in a slightly different manner than other arcane casters. The warlock gains a small number of spells per day, but all those spells are cast at a spell slot level determined by the warlock's level. A high-level warlock casts fewer spells than a wizard of the same level, but each of those spells is cast at a heightened level of potency. Warlocks select spells from the class's spell list, in addition to gaining bonus spells based on the entity with which they forge a pact.

Warlock might be nice container for shamans, too, that is ancester or spirit pacts.

variant · Mar 3, 2014

The warlock has always been my most sought after class. I was largely disappointed with the previous version of it and then the idea of rolling it into a single class with the wizard, but this version of it sounds really promising.

GX.Sigma · Mar 3, 2014

I like that all the arcane classes have their own distinct feel. It actually makes me wish they do something similar to differentiate the Cleric and Druid.

I'm A Banana · Mar 3, 2014

It's a bit of a big sloppy bucket of things, but I suppose any warlock hoping to swallow the 3e and all 4e versions of it as wells as reaching back around to the 3e inspiration of some of the 4e versions can't help but be a big sloppy bucket of things.

If I can play a witch who is invisible all the time and/or constantly surrounded by a swarm of biting, stinging insects, or somehow otherwise customize my character based on "always-up" magic effects, I'll get what I'm looking for out of the 5e Warlock. What I liked about the 3e warlocks at-will magic was that it re-examined some campaign assumptions. If I can always be invisible, for instance, interaction with NPC's becomes a much more....interesting sceene. Mearls's mention of "specific" spells makes me arch my eyebrows a bit in the suspicion that maybe what he actually means is "only the boring spells," but that's probably just some paranoia.

For them to truly inherit the Binder torch, they need to be able to be entirely and remarkably different based on what entity they're currently bound to...which might be possible, but certainly is not where the 4e bindlock came in at, so I'm a little suspicious. But I'm also not necessarily looking for the 3e binder play experience in the 5e warlock, so if they don't get that spot-on, it just means that there's room to grow.

So it might just work! And if it doesn't, that's just a place to dig into in the future.

howandwhy99 · Mar 3, 2014

I feel magic becomes cheap when it can be cast "at will", meaning it's no longer a resource anymore. So I'm not all that amenable to the Warlock class to start. Plus I don't really care for the current character-power or tool use design of the magic game. It still smacks far to much of M:tG design where I much prefer magic being its own vast system where the eldritch secrets of the multiverse lie within and lie behind. And then spells are a result of effects possible within that magic system, tied to the understanding of everything in world, but no spell list could ever completely cover. IOW, the focus is on discovering and mastering magic, not firing off powers in or out of combat.

That said, I believe the Warlock class will greatly satisfy the desire for Gish players. And they can place focus on not solely combat or magic, but "pets" as well. That's a potential solution to a problem I've had with the Sha'ir class for sometime now. The Warlock class is custom suited to the Sha'ir and Gens or at least Genasi should be added into that list toot sweet.

Plaguescarred · Mar 3, 2014

The D&D Next warlock seems like a good blend of 3E/4E/Essential versions with unique ways to use its abilities through spells and invocations.

Minigiant · Mar 3, 2014

I like how Next is broadening arcanist strategies from the start. No longer are you locked into a "Predict and prepare" strategy for a arcanist.

You can "React to the moment" via sorcerers or "Go with what you got" with warlocks. Library, Flexibility, or Quantity. I wished tinkers come early so we could get "predict and prepare" in a character not focused on magic.

Either way, I hope the blade or tome warlock comes off like a magic rogue and not a spell warrior. Have Devils eyes on ahead of time, cast a darkness spell on the enemy, then stab them with your pact blade. Or Misty step, stab, misty step way. Or earthen grasp and kite with eldritch blast. Or invisibility then hideous blow. All with utility like Leaps and Bounds, spidercrawl, and beguiling influence. Basically a Rogue - Dexterity - Skill + Infinite Weak Magic.

The scaling spell slots thing is new. Sorta like 4e dailies when you replace the weak ones.

gyor · Mar 3, 2014

howandwhy99 said:
I feel magic becomes cheap when it can be cast "at will", meaning it's no longer a resource anymore. So I'm not all that amenable to the Warlock class to start. Plus I don't really care for the current character-power or tool use design of the magic game. It still smacks far to much of M:tG design where I much prefer magic being its own vast system where the eldritch secrets of the multiverse lie within and lie behind. And then spells are a result of effects possible within that magic system, tied to the understanding of everything in world, but no spell list could ever completely cover. IOW, the focus is on discovering and mastering magic, not firing off powers in or out of combat.

That said, I believe the Warlock class will greatly satisfy the desire for Gish players. And they can place focus on not solely combat or magic, but "pets" as well. That's a potential solution to a problem I've had with the Sha'ir class for sometime now. The Warlock class is custom suited to the Sha'ir and Gens or at least Genasi should be added into that list toot sweet.

Now I'm wondering which Patrons one can choose from. Fey is obvious, as is Infernal, but demon, Vestiage, and star seem likely as well. I say demon because Quasits are demons, not devils Star because it was one of the key pacts of 4e, and Vestiage because they drew inspiration from Binders as well.

So this could get interesting. What kind of pet would a Vestiage Warlock get? Star pact maybe beholderkin? Infernal would obviously be imp.