D&D 5E Is Warlock broken?

[The Crimson Binome]

What about Adventurers League, then? In that case, something that's been heavily promoted in this edition, you would have different DM's and "random" tables in that instance.

Yeah, it's kind of a conflict of design intent. They want to encourage variation between tables, but then they also want to sell their official shared-game experience. The goals aren't strictly mutually exclusive, but they are definitely in different directions.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I haven't played under AL, but I don't think it is "privileged" over home games in the 5e design philosophy anymore than PFS is in the Pathfinder design. To be more specific, I think WotC figures out what they want the class/spell/feat/item/monster to do, then they give it to the AL coordinators to figure out how and if it will fit into AL. If the AL coordinators (sorry if this is the wrong title) feel it will cause problems in AL, it doesn't go it AL, but the tail doesn't wag the dog, and the game element is still released to the general gaming audience.

Some people will assume that AL is "privileged" (see the claims that the unchained summoner replacing the "chained" summoner in PFS "marginalizes" the ARG summoner outside of PFS for an example from a similar system), but I think that is unfounded, because if they felt that way, they wouldn't release anything that couldn't be used in AL, and they clearly have.

In short (and to bring this back to the warlock), there is set of assumptions about what you can do with a warlock in AL, but I don't believe that WotC thinks that is the "right" way to play the warlock in all games.

 

[Chris Tooley]

Thread Necomancy.
Im playing 5e right from 3e. What bothers me most about the 5e warlock is it feels more like a spellcaster with a few tricks. Or even an Eldritch Knight with a couple tricks. In 3e they were mysterious forces of the unnatural. No spell lists but a limited number of useful invocations. The classes greatest feature was it's ability to cast EB at will. In 5th edition EVERYONE can have at will damaging cantrips (albeit many classes require a feat). 3e EB could have hindering CONDITIONS applied to the target with the right Invocations.
Invocations have been changed into users per day spell slots in some cases and straight 1 use per day abilities in other cases. EB is a great cantrips, sure but even a barbarian can use it with a feat. Or any class can with a dip. 5e warlocks who wish to remain optimum HAVE to pick certain Invocations. And yes while some of the higher level Invocations are great, many of them are merely utility. I've never thought the warlock wad underpowered or over powered in 3e. Had wizards hand me my butt a few times.
I just don't feel like 5e warlocks have anything that makes them stand out as a character I'd happily take from level 1 to 20 anymore...

 

[Ancalagon]

I was quite happy with the hexblade pact when it came out - finally I can make a proper gish on the warlock frame!

But then I realized that it was much better as a dip than single class :/

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I was quite happy with the hexblade pact when it came out - finally I can make a proper gish on the warlock frame!

But then I realized that it was much better as a dip than single class :/

I would argue that fits the theme of the warlock just as well as a straight warlock (maybe better); it is a cheap deal for the patron--you get the soul (or whatever) for the price of a level or three of warlock, instead of potentially having to pay for potentially all 20 level's of warlock worth of power. The return on investment (ROI) is really good and you can claim "leveraging local resources" in your next staff meeting.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I was quite happy with the hexblade pact when it came out - finally I can make a proper gish on the warlock frame!

But then I realized that it was much better as a dip than single class :/

That's pretty much the story of the warlock. 2 levels then get back to paladin, bard or sorc.

 

[ccs]

5e warlocks who wish to remain optimum HAVE to pick certain Invocations.

Given the rest of your inaugural post I'm fairly certain we're going to disagree, but.... What do you think those are?

Better yet, how do you define being optimum?
Because optimum for me is one where all of the choices I've made support the character I'm presenting. My character is not merely Class + modifiers - with a name tacked on as an afterthought.

 

[Chris Tooley]

Because optimum for me is one where all of the choices I've made support the character I'm presenting. My character is not merely Class + modifiers - with a name tacked on as an afterthought.

Yes, yes. I get the "build for the concept, not numbers" ideology. Many arguments concerning 5e warlocks is that it's damage with EB is on par with a ranged fighter. But most fighters are going to boost their damage dealing potential. In order for the 5e warlock to do this a blaster must take Agonozing Blast as an Invocation. A Bladelock must take Lifedrinker Invocation. Both must bump charisma when possible. A Tomelock has to take Book of Ancient Secrets to enjoy it's pact feature to its fullest. This is an old argument and while I think those Invocations should have been made a part of the pact features at the given level, it doesn't change my opinion thy the warlock is lacking the neat factors that would make it more than a dip class. Why sell your soul for a dip?

 

[Cascade]

I just don't feel like 5e warlocks have anything that makes them stand out as a character I'd happily take from level 1 to 20 anymore...

Generic warlock is really a flavored archer. One trick pony and generally pretty boring.
You hope to add flavor with patrons, but it still comes down to EB spam.

You certainly can become melee focused and at least be able to stand in combat helping distribute damage.
You can also add more spells with magic additions; pact keeper wand, staves and other wands.

Other than those, it's too front heavy and is campaign situational...it can be tremendous (using catnap) or with lots of non timed events - lots of short rests...or mind numbingly boring...I EB then EB then EB...etc etc. (like an archer).

 

[Chris Tooley]

Yes. This
In 3.5 you could control the battle a little better with more effective invocations and Conditions applied to targets of EB.
In 5th ed, if my party is in a fight with say 8 combatants. The warlock casts Hold Person and the spell is resisted. Then next round casts it again and is successful. All out of spells until short rest. Rely on weapons or cantrips for rest of this encounter and probably next couple until you find a place to take a break. In 3.5 the "at will" spells as invocations may have left you doing the same things over and over but you were also more limited than other casters. It was a good balance that felt more like the warlock was different enough to be special and it remained effective.