D&D 5E Warlock: Best Designed Caster?

[Fion]

My feylock has Unseen Servant basically so it can feed him grapes when he's not busy killing bad guys.

Besides the dreadful invocations that take a precious spell slot (who's idea was that?) my only qualm really about Warlock is the Fey Lineage. It's mechanically very similar to Great Old One but it's bonus abilities (save the 1st lvl one) are almost identical but quite significantly weaker, requiring things like concentration when a similar GOO ability does not, or being blocked via saving throw where the GOO never is.

I still chose to play one because thematically I like them best and 4e feylock was my favorite.

 

[doctorhook]

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.

(Bolding added for emphasis.)

I've highlighted a key assumption from your post: warlocks are perhaps great for new players when built correctly. However, I don't think it's fair to assume that a new player would know how to build their warlock "correctly" (i.e.: in such a way that maximizes the character's utility) if they aren't familiar with 5E, D&D, or even RPGs in general.

You're certainly correct that a low-level warlock is quite a bit simpler (than a higher-level warlock, than certain other classes, etc.), but I still believe that the warlock has too many moving parts and too narrow a focus to be ideal for learning D&D. I've introduced a number of players to D&D over the 15 years I've been playing, and my experience is that new players are often very indecisive or noncommittal regarding their character concept, especially as they play through their first adventure and learn more about the features of D&D. Wizards and clerics can change their role and concept every time they prepare their spells; neither class demands commitment to a class concept, and for some players (especially new and casual ones), that's a feature not a bug.

 

[frankthedm]

My only qualm really about Warlock is the Fey Lineage. It's mechanically very similar to Great Old One but it's bonus abilities (save the 1st lvl one) are almost identical but quite significantly weaker, requiring things like concentration when a similar GOO ability does not, or being blocked via saving throw where the GOO never is.

Rebounding a Charm is way more powerful than sharing the reduced psychic damage. Damn right that's a save.

14th Fey charms an active foe, the GOO 14th only works on a defeated foe.

 

[Kobold Stew]

There's a lot that's really interesting about the design of the Warlock -- that's certainly true. I am concerned about how the mystic arcanum will play out in reality as the warlock moves through the upper levels. With only a single spell to select from each of levels six through nine, it means that the choice can only ever be tied to character concept - there is no flexibility for actual tactical decisions. The player decides whether the character will ever be able to case planeshift or glibness or whatever, but that choice becomes immutable, and can't respond to the actual situation being faced.

I'm curious to see how this works out in play.

 

[Dausuul]

(Bolding added for emphasis.)

I've highlighted a key assumption from your post: warlocks are perhaps great for new players when built correctly. However, I don't think it's fair to assume that a new player would know how to build their warlock "correctly" (i.e.: in such a way that maximizes the character's utility) if they aren't familiar with 5E, D&D, or even RPGs in general.

You're certainly correct that a low-level warlock is quite a bit simpler (than a higher-level warlock, than certain other classes, etc.), but I still believe that the warlock has too many moving parts and too narrow a focus to be ideal for learning D&D. I've introduced a number of players to D&D over the 15 years I've been playing, and my experience is that new players are often very indecisive or noncommittal regarding their character concept, especially as they play through their first adventure and learn more about the features of D&D. Wizards and clerics can change their role and concept every time they prepare their spells; neither class demands commitment to a class concept, and for some players (especially new and casual ones), that's a feature not a bug.

Agreed. They should have made eldritch blast a class feature, 3E-style, rather than a cantrip. Unless you're a dedicated bladelock (which has its own, highly demanding set of requirements to be effective), you're crippled in combat without eldritch blast, and Agonizing Blast as soon as you can get it. And if you don't learn EB by level 4, you'll have to wait till 10th before you get another crack at it.

That's okay if you want to build a combat-weak character, but it's far too easy for a novice player to cripple him/herself without realizing it.

 

[Fion]

I see a lot of posts in this thread about 'properly building a Warlock' and that if players don't they are crippling themselves. I haven't delved into making pregens as much as others, so I'll ask, what do you folks consider a properly built low-level warlock in the different Pacts or Lieges?

 

[Andor]

The complexity of the Warlock lies during build/leveling, but it has almost no moving parts inplay. This is the opposite of the cleric who makes one decision in build, but must pick spells and juggle resources every day.

This does make the Warlock a good "newbie" class, I think, because a more experienced player, or the DM can help with the build/leveling decision making during downtime. A wizard or Cleric who have to shuffle spell lists during game time are more likely to delay the game for the player who needs hand holding.

 

[Uskglass]

The complexity of the Warlock lies during build/leveling, but it has almost no moving parts inplay. This is the opposite of the cleric who makes one decision in build, but must pick spells and juggle resources every day.

This does make the Warlock a good "newbie" class, I think, because a more experienced player, or the DM can help with the build/leveling decision making during downtime. A wizard or Cleric who have to shuffle spell lists during game time are more likely to delay the game for the player who needs hand holding.

I see it in these terms: the Warlock doesn't have much of a strategic overlay once in play, since its resources are fixed upon build. However the class may be more tactically involved than others, given the very limited number of spell slots compared to known spells. How you decide to spend those slots can make a big difference. Also there are a number of 'parts' to juggle: cantrips, 'short rest' slots, daily spells (from lv 11+), Invocations, Patron Boons.

I do like the class - probably more than any other spellcaster in 5e, but I don't consider it particularly newbie-friendly or representative of a 'simple caster'.

 

[Andor]

I see it in these terms: the Warlock doesn't have much of a strategic overlay once in play, since its resources are fixed upon build. However the class may be more tactically involved than others, given the very limited number of spell slots compared to known spells. How you decide to spend those slots can make a big difference. Also there are a number of 'parts' to juggle: cantrips, 'short rest' slots, daily spells (from lv 11+), Invocations, Patron Boons.

I do like the class - probably more than any other spellcaster in 5e, but I don't consider it particularly newbie-friendly or representative of a 'simple caster'.

Any class that has expendable resources can misuse them, that's the whole point. But a Warlock with no spell slots is still going to have a lot of his effectiveness in his eldritch blast and invocations. And his spell slots are only a siesta away.

Honestly there is no caster class in 5e that any reasonably bright new player cannot handle. Even better, there is no class which is a trap, especially with multi-classing.

 

[77IM]

They should have made eldritch blast a class feature, 3E-style, rather than a cantrip.

This. Warlocks lack a clear focus. They're dripping with flavor, but it's not obvious what they're supposed to do.