D&D 5E Is Warlock broken?

[Zeezeltop]

I wouldn't call it broken...

...but I would say it is not very fun as written.

The class is the most front loaded class in the game. It is really good if you are going to be doing a low level campaign and never go past level 3. After that it just gets boring.

I feel like the core of the class is being a slave to a eldritch creature in a quest for power. There needs to be a greater sense of a Faustian pact. The flavor text says this explicitly but it doesn't come through in the mechanics. The player needs to pay for that power in a thematic way. Possible ways to implement (this is just spit ball ideas):

Patron requires that you cast a spell from a certain school in each combat. (it would never be Eldritch blast)
Patron requires that you burn every location where you have a combat or sleep so there is no evidence of your passing.
Patron requires that you ...

Basically, you need a way to keep being a Warlock from just being easy mode. Paladin is restricted by his alignment. (at least he used to be), and the fact that he is kind of a jack of all trades master of none. When I DM, I always make the Paladin earn his alignment by presenting him with moral quandaries frequently. If he fails he loses his power until he re-earns the favor of his diety. (Yes, I'm like that)

I suppose you could do something similar with Warlock but if you are using a pre-made module that is kind of tough. But in a similar way, there needs to be a sense that the Warlock is in a Faustian pact or it is just "mage in easy mode". This would be different than a Paladin, if a Paladin abandons his path he is just a bad Fighter. If a Warlock abandons their path they are now going to be taught a lesson from an eldritch titan.

 

[Giant2005]

I am wondering how often the darkness interferes with the rest of the party though. I mean, the area is large and surely it impedes the warlocks movement as they cant go where the rest of the party is. I can see my DM making good use out of the darkness on the monsters behalf

It doesn't really interfere with the party unless the party has Advantage on their attacks already (conversely it is a boon if the enemies had advantage on their attacks, or the players had disadvantage on their attacks).
The players attack with disadvantage for being blind but also with advantage for attacking a blind target. It just comes out as a wash where everyone but the warlock attacks regularly (unless they are attacking the warlock) regardless of what the conditions of the combat was like prior to the spell.

 

[Flamestrike]

No, that says nothing about class balance vs short & long rests, number of encounters per rest as a balancing mechanic et al. I don't recall this discussed in the DMG at all.

Yes it does. It explicitly says that when you shorten long rests that spellcasters (in particular) will dominate, being able to blow spells at will (and conversely in the longer rest variant they will be nerfed the other way).

It also clearly states in the 'adventuring day' section of the 'building encounters' section that the party should average around 2 short rests in a 'standard adventuring day', and should be able to handle 6-8 medium to hard encounters in a standard adventuring day (or less if you dial up the difficulty, but this increases the chance of a TPK as per the description of 'deadly' encounters).

Its up to the DM to enforce the adventuring day (as non obtrusively as possible). You basically want the players to control the pacing of the story, subject to guidelenes and the overall direction of the DM.

It should play out like an improvised play, with the players taking the lead, subject to the direction of the DM (making sure no one player dominates or overshadows the others, ensuring the challenge is appropriate, that all the classes have a change to contribte and shine etc).

Give your fighters, monks and warlocks a break and throw them a 5 encounter/ 5 short rest adventure from time to time. The throw a single encounter day at the PCs to let your spellcasters go nova. Then maybe an 8 encounter/ no rest adventure to keep them on thier toes (and give the Rogues and Champions a chance to really shine).

Mix it up. Shift the spotlight between the PCs. As long as you average around the 6-8 mark, and around 2 short rests, there wont be any problems.

This is all referenced in the DMG.

Personally I stick to a roughly 5-6 medium-hard (with one deadly) structure to my game. I tend to allow 2 short rests per long rest also. Very rough ballpark though.

 

[Bacon Bits]

My problem with Warlock is that the class's mechanical focus doesn't follow the class's theme or flavor. There's a ton of flavor around the Warlock class, and there has been since it's introduction in 3.5. Otherworldly patrons, lost secrets, forbidden knowledge, demonic pacts, terrors of the unknown, and worse. Yet, mechanically, the class is usually an Eldritch Blast turret. That's lame.

Worse, it feels like you have to chose between being useful in combat and being on-theme. It feels like the class is spread too thinly between the small number of spell slots, the small number of invocations, and very little beyond that. I feel like the invocations that effectively are "Add $Spell to your list of spells known, but you cast it once a day because reasons." are really uninteresting if they're not 6th level or higher spells. I feel like there's an excessive number of "Cast a $SituationalLowLevelSpell at will, without spending a slot." invocations, too.

I feel like Warlock has a huge amount of flavor, a huge breadth of potential abilities, and very shallow access to any of it.

 

[Prism]

It doesn't really interfere with the party unless the party has Advantage on their attacks already (conversely it is a boon if the enemies had advantage on their attacks, or the players had disadvantage on their attacks).
The players attack with disadvantage for being blind but also with advantage for attacking a blind target. It just comes out as a wash where everyone but the warlock attacks regularly (unless they are attacking the warlock) regardless of what the conditions of the combat was like prior to the spell.

Good point I never thought about that. I bet its all a bit slapstick from the Warlocks point of view being the only one in the room that can see. Lots of wild flailing of weapons with opponents accidently walking into the attacks.

Having seen a few eldritch blast ranged warlocks I'm looking to do something with a melee version for my next character, so that's why I was wondering about the darkness combo. Probably go green flame blade rather than bladelock though. Damage is close enough and it feels more magical. Booming blade might be even better as you can attack then back off without comeback

 

[Giant2005]

Having seen a few eldritch blast ranged warlocks I'm looking to do something with a melee version for my next character, so that's why I was wondering about the darkness combo. Probably go green flame blade rather than bladelock though. Damage is close enough and it feels more magical. Booming blade might be even better as you can attack then back off without comeback

I have played plenty of melee Warlocks and I can vouch for the effectiveness of what you have planned, although in spite of that, I still wouldn't recommend it.
It is a cheesy tactic that gets pretty old pretty fast - not just for you but for everyone involved. If you abuse it, it is likely that the enemies will all start showing up with inexplicable Devil's Sight powers and render the combo useless (that is what happened to me and I don't really blame the DM for it).
I had a lot more fun playing a Fiend Warlock that made a lot of use out of Armor of Agathys and Fiendish Vigor (I also took two levels of Necromancer for Grim Harvest). It is less cheesy, and an argument can be made for it being just as effective (or maybe even more-so). Yet, the mechanics aren't really what I am endorsing about the class design. My endorsement is earned purely by virtue of it being the most fun method of play possible in 5e. It is effectively a case of active defenses that require careful consideration when playing - you need to consciously choose weak targets in order to proc Dark One's Blessing and you need to consider whether or not to take the target's life with a level 1 or higher spell in order to proc Grim Harvest. In absence of weak targets, you need to consider whether or not you are better off attacking or using a spell slot on Armor of Agathys (or taking a moment to cast Fire Shield in order to inspire passive procs of both Dark One's Blessing and Grim Harvest).
Basically, the build rewards you for making good choices far more than any other and that inspires you to strive to be attentive and thoughtful enough to make those right choices. If you do it well, you are tremendously powerful. If you do it poorly, you are probably too dead to be wondering what went wrong.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I disagree. Every other ability that allows you to do something during a short rest (Arcane Recovery, Monk Ki meditation, et al) explicitly states "you can do this during a short rest." Why would concentration be any different?

Arcane Recovery and Ki meditation are things which require a short rest. You cannot activate them unless you're taking a short rest.

Concentration is something that you can always do, unless it's specifically shut down (by unconsciousness, for example). In terms of energy expenditure and focus, it's a lot like standing upright.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

It doesn't really interfere with the party unless the party has Advantage on their attacks already (conversely it is a boon if the enemies had advantage on their attacks, or the players had disadvantage on their attacks).
The players attack with disadvantage for being blind but also with advantage for attacking a blind target. It just comes out as a wash where everyone but the warlock attacks regularly (unless they are attacking the warlock) regardless of what the conditions of the combat was like prior to the spell.

Really? I never read it like that. I always thought if your target was blind you get advantage because he is blind and you are not. Like, if you're hitting an actual blind person at noon.
But if you are in darkness and suffering disadvantage, I don't see how the other guy also being blind has any bearing on your ability to see (and therefore hit) him. His being also blinded does not mean that your blindness is less, well, blinding. You are both at disadvantage.
The only one who isn't is the guy with Devil's Sight.
YMMV, but that's how I see (no pun intended) it.

 

[SailorNash]

What invocations did you plan to take, and which ones did you actually get to?

It's been a while, so honestly any answer would almost be a rebuild. I had taken the tome invocation, as well as the disguise self at will. I also took the agonizing blast because of course I did. Repelling blast sounds more fun, honestly, but 5e is a little less tactical and theatre of the mind even less so.

After that, the plan was to go Magical Rogue for someone who didn't like the Rogue or INT-based classes. Invisibility, arcane eye, truesight, mask of many faces. Max out Dex and Cha and become "Captain BS" with the Charlatan background. I avoided Devil Sight + Darkness because it sounded a little cheesy, plus troublesome for my cohorts.

More invocations would have been fun at higher levels, but then again, the measly two spell slots would only be more and more painful as time went on.

 

[SailorNash]

I believe it is the division of short rest based classes, and long rest based classes, that is broken balance wise, as opposed to the warlock specifically, although the warlock is the classic short rest class.

I disagree about if you can take a 1 hour rest, you can take 8 hours, we often don't find that in practice. What we have seen is, if the adventure allows for short rests but not long rests (eg dungeon), the short rest guys dominate. If on the other hand long rests come easy, eg wilderness or city adventure, the long resters dominate. The number of encounters per day is also a big deal.

There is a fundamental class balance problem due to different power reset times. Sometimes the warlock suffers for this, other times it is to their advantage.

In theory yes, but in practice I personally haven't seen this. Outside the Underdark most dungeons can be cleared in a single session. Not sure if this is DM design or PC pacing. Resting in a dungeon seems dangerous, and if the majority of the party are Full Rest classes they'll either insist you push onward (since all you do is blast anyway) or be so spent they're forced to fall back.