D&D 5E Warlock: Best Designed Caster?

[koga305]

I've built quite a few D&D 5E characters over the past few weeks (got to love that fresh, new Player's Handbook) and I've come to the conclusion that the Warlock is the cleanest and most fun of the full casters to build. Why?

• It has a very focused and limited selection of spells. When I play a first-level Wizard and pick Burning Hands, Charm Person, Color Spray, Find Familiar, Mage Armor, and Magic Missile as my first-level spells, (with the Dancing Lights, Fire Bolt, Poison Spray and Prestidigitation cantrips) I don't feel like any particular type of magic-user. Icould choose all blasty spells, but that would be an inferior choice - I'd have fewer options. By contrast, a Warlock with Eldritch Blast, Friends, Charm Person, and Hex feels quite distinct, as does one with Chill Touch, Minor Illusion, Arms of Hadar, and Unseen Servant.
• The class makes resource management easier while still feeling tactical. Wizards often have to choose between an inferior (to, say, a Fighter) at-will option and a significantly superior, but limited spell. Warlocks have the option to upgrade to an awesome at-will attack (almost better than an Archer fighter) or other powerful out-of-combat at-will options (Disguise Self, Silent Image). Their spells are also a bit easier to ration, in my opinion - it's easier to predict when you will next get a Short Rest than a long one.
• It's easy to learn all of a Warlock's abilities at a quick glance. Clerics and Druids are awful for this - at first level, a Cleric has six first-level spells prepared (which can be swapped out from the entire list every day), and things only get worse as the levels go up. By contrast, the Warlock gains roughly one spell per level, and many of its abilities are
• Warlocks can cover many party roles. A Blade Pact warlock can be a good secondary front-line fighter (with some other abilities for backup), while a spell-focused warlock can serve as an effective battlefield controller. The Eldritch Blast-based Invocations can make the class into a veritable missile platform (with knockback on each hit!), and the Chain Pact lends itself to effective scouting. The Warlock's focus on Dexterity and Charisma lend it to useful Exploration (Acrobatics, Stealth) and Interaction (Deception, Intimidation, Persuasion) skills as well, and the Tome Pact's Rituals can complement this.
• The Warlock's flavor is flexible yet extremely evocative. The Pact choice at first level defines the class, with simple (mind manipulation, soul stealing, telepathy) abilities that are versatile and make you feel like you've made a pact with a powerful force every time they're used - similarly, the Blade/Chain/Tome choice creates a visible class feature that further defines your character. When creating a Warlock, you have to ask "Why did this character choose to make a pact?" Warlocks tend to stand out in a crowd because they've made choices that most people would never make.

Personally I would like to see more casting classes like the Warlock - specific flavor and focus, easy-to-use mechanics (seriously, for a focus on "Simplicity," why are spells so complicated?), and well-designed resource management.

 

[brehobit]

Entirely agree. They are fun and well designed. A marriage between the 3e warlock and the 4e warlock (which are very different) and yet it still works very well indeed.

I'm a bit worried they might be overpowered. They almost certainly _are_ overpowered if you take a short rest between each encounter. But eh.

 

[doctorhook]

I love the warlock, but I disagree that they are the "best designed", because that implies that the other caster classes ought to have been designed to emulate the warlock more closely.

I believe the warlock is the most interesting caster class, for exactly the reasons you detailed, but the tradeoff is that it is one of the most complex to play: warlocks can have up to three different types of spells (spells, invocations, and mystic arcanum), each of which have their own unique rules; warlock spell slots work very differently from those of all other spellcasting classes (slots don't have a fixed level, and they are regained on a short rest rather than long); and finally, the limited number of spells/invocations/mystic arcana known will be very unforgiving to players who choose poorly (clerics and wizards who choose poor spells can change their list when they wake up the next day).

The warlock is fun and interesting caster class for sure, but it's no replacement for a wizard; any newbie to D&D who tries to learn by playing a warlock is in for perhaps the steepest learning-curve in 5E.

 

[TheGorramBatman]

For the most part I've been enjoying my Warlock.

I'm not sure I agree they're "best designed." Only having a couple spell slots is a real drag on the party. Having a Warlock on board considerably ups the need for short rests.

Eldritch Blast is far and away the best cantrip in the game. It has better attack progression than the Fighter, easily gets +CHA damage on every attack, and is force damage.

Taking all of that into account, it may very well be one of the best attack sequences in the game.

This helps make up for the fact that their actual spellcasting is terrible, but practical play style isn't much different from an Archer Ranger... except the Archer Ranger casts significant spells more often. Sort of hilarious.

The short rest thing can be a real killer though. Depending on the group Warlocks are either caught in a Nova-Nap playstyle or strained on resources continually casting Eldritch Blast.

I think I'd rather have seen Eldritch Blast toned down a bit and just a couple more spell slots. As things stand, the I'm having fun with the class but am unsure how long it'll hold my attention.

also: Why doesn't Hunger of Hadar upgrade at all? At least to a 5th level slot. It is explicitly a Warlock spell! I feel like I'm taking crazy pills

 

[Falling Icicle]

Only getting two spell slots until after 10th level is a huge downside to the warlock. They get all of these spells known but so few slots to use them with. It makes one really hesitant to ever use them unless the need is dire. Sure, they get them back with a short rest, but let's not forget, these aren't 4e's 5 minute short rests. They take an hour. In my experience, the party only takes one or two of those per day most of the time. Even in the rather extreme case that the party takes three or four short rests in a day, that still leaves the warlock with far fewer spells per day than other spellcasters. The ability to take agonizing blast and deal fighter-like at-will damage with eldritch blast is really the only thing saving the class from being really underpowered, IMO.

It's also strange that warlocks get fewer cantrips by default than other spellcasters, considering their huge reliance on at-will abilities thanks to their extremely limited number of spell slots. Pact of the tome helps with this, of course. But not all warlocks have that.

I also think the warlock spell list is too limited, especially the 4th and 5th level spells. Warlocks are also missing some spells that I would expect them to have, such as animate dead (they get create undead), planar binding and gate.

Warlocks are also more limited with their 6th-9th level spells than other spellcasters. They only get one spell known of each of those levels, and they don't even have the flexibility of using those "slots" to cast lower level spells for increased effect. One can't use their 9th level mystic Arcanum to cast create undead as a 9th level spell, for example.

I also think the invocations that give you a spell once per day (but still use a spell slot) are terrible. Most of those spells are things that I think should have been on the warlock spell list in the first place. Fortunately, there are plenty of good invocations to choose from instead. Arcane eye has always been one of my favorite spells, for example, and getting it at-will could be a lot of fun. It's just agonizing to have to wait until level 15 for it.

I also love the pact of the tome. Being able to learn and cast every ritual spell from every class is really cool. I do have a concern though. It says that if you die, your book of shadows turns to ash. That could really suck if it means you lose all of the rituals you copied.

I do really like the flavor of the class, though, and despite its mechanical shortcomings, I think it could be really fun to play. In the end, that's what matters the most.

 

[koga305]

Huh. It's interesting to hear some actual play reports - I can see how resource management might actually be a big drag on the class. I also agree that some of the 1/day invocations are really lame - when building a pregen Warlock I thought "Hm, do I want to cast bane once this adventure or have my AC go up several points?"

The warlock is fun and interesting caster class for sure, but it's no replacement for a wizard; any newbie to D&D who tries to learn by playing a warlock is in for perhaps the steepest learning-curve in 5E.

This I'm not sure I agree with, for some of the reasons I mentioned above. In fact, I'd say the opposite - the Warlock is actually a strong choice for a new player.
The thing is, when built correctly a low-level Warlock can be almost as simple as a low-level Fighter. You have a powerful at-will attack (EB or perhaps Poison Spray) and a few short rest options comparable to Action Surge or Second Wind (say, Hellish Rebuke and Hex). When you hit higher levels, your complexity matches the Battle Master with the invocations, but then starts to outpace it when you gain more and more known spells and invocations. However, I'd say the class has an easier learning curve than the Wizard or Cleric, although it might be more complex to build than a Fighter.

 

[brehobit]

I also think the invocations that give you a spell once per day (but still use a spell slot) are terrible. Most of those spells are things that I think should have been on the warlock spell list in the first place. Fortunately, there are plenty of good invocations to choose from instead. Arcane eye has always been one of my favorite spells, for example, and getting it at-will could be a lot of fun. It's just agonizing to have to wait until level 15 for it.

I agree, those seem truly horrible. I don't get them at all--they _look_ like a trap. It might be too strong if it _didn't_ use up a slot. I can see that. But move their requirement up 2 levels and have them not use a slot seems balanced. Eh.

 

[Uskglass]

However, I'd say the class has an easier learning curve than the Wizard or Cleric, although it might be more complex to build than a Fighter.

I tend to agree. It seems to hit kind of sweetspot. For me it definitely is the class I'm more keen to try out. It probably requires some strategic/tactical thinking for resource management, but that can add to the fun of it.

 

[drjones]

They seem fun. I am more concerned with which is more fun to play than build ​though.

 

[koga305]

I tend to agree. It seems to hit kind of sweetspot. For me it definitely is the class I'm more keen to try out. It probably requires some strategic/tactical thinking for resource management, but that can add to the fun of it.

Exactly! I wish more caster classes hit that balance between simplicity and options.

They seem fun. I am more concerned with which is more fun to play than build ​though.

Very true! If I get to play in a 5E game (I ran most of LMoP this summer, but that's been it so far), my first character will likely be a Warlock. I will be playing in another campaign, but one with ongoing characters (about to play a Wizard 4 with Paladin multiclass plans).