D&D 5E Warlock One of the More Complicated 5E classes?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[ChrisCarlson]

You certainly don't need EB to play an effective warlock in 5e, but if you don't know what you're doing then it's easy to end up with a character that is just plain bad, with very few mechanical options to contribute both in and out of combat compared to other casters.

Could you maybe provide an example of what you mean? Even just a rough outline?

I mean, cuz I'm just not seeing what you are seeing. Are you saying one could theoretically take things (class features, spells, etc.) they have no desire to use, then complain that they are useless? Because the only way to make an undesirable character (warlock or otherwise), AFAICT, is to take things you don't want or have no interest in.

 

[feartheminotaur]

I think he means taking spells or invocations that sound and read cool but you find have little use in the particular game you're playing (as opposed to 'the game' in general). There's a huge difference between choosing spells and features you want and have interest in and those choices being honored or having an impact in the game you're playing.

I'd agree with @lowkey13 that this is possible with any other class as well and that this can be rectified (generally) at each level break.

Examples:

You take Fiendish Vigor, only to find the party tactics ultimately result in your PC never getting attacked, so extra HPs aren't as important as you thought. Or that the warlock's strengths or your vision for your character don't mesh with the rest of the party.

You select charm person as your one of only two spells known only to find you don't interact with many persons leaving you with one useful spell until you level The wizard (the other caster) has 6 spells.

You play in a party with mostly long-rest recovery powers and they eschew short rests and carrying on for long rests, so turns out your 2/short rest spell slots function like 2/day spell slots.

*also sorry about the laugh - errant click!

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I think he means taking spells or invocations that sound and read cool but you find have little use in the particular game you're playing (as opposed to 'the game' in general). There's a huge difference between choosing spells and features you want and have interest in and those choices being honored or having an impact in the game you're playing.

That's a table problem, not a system problem, IMO.

If you take things that interest you, and the DM ignores your desires to interface with those interesting choices, I do not consider that 5e's fault. YMMV.

*also sorry about the laugh - errant click!

Huh? I love laughs! If it wasn't funny, that's okay. But no need to apologize. Why did you remove it?

 

[feartheminotaur]

And it's back! That's the Internet for you - with no context, are laughing with or at?

I do think the biggest "inexperience player hates their warlock character issue" that I've personally encountered is a system problem - namely the class reliance on the short rest mechanic. It's tough to say "hey, we need to cater to me and my class choice - knock it off with the 5MWD" when the table's preference is the opposite. Especially when joining a game where you don't know everyone well, or one where everyone's system mastery is higher than yours.

I've played enough to know to ask those kind of questions, and know enough about 5e to recognize the difference, but as [MENTION=6780410]spectacle[/MENTION] noted, if someone doesn't, they might end up on enworld starting "warlock sucks!" threads.

 

[Ancalagon]

And those threads are a dime a dozen

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well, yes. But (wait for it) it's theoretically possible for a person who doesn't know what they are doing to build a less-than-desireable caster with any of the caster classes.

Shocking, but true. Then again, recovering from that is different when you're re-training (assuming you even can) a poor spells known selection at 1/level, vs prepping a brand new slate after the next long rest.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Tony Vargas]

If someone makes the reasonable point that they believe that having many classes rely on long rest, and some classes rely on short rest, is a poor design decision, then I can understand that (even if I disagree).

"Crystal. Clear. Guidance." It's hardly poor game design to tell everyone how you're going to design the game, promise to tell them how to cope with that design, design it the way you said you were going to, and then carry through with that promise.

What I don't get is singling out the Warlock- I don't see tons of threads complaining about how the Open Hand Monk (and other Monks) are terrible and complicated because their ki regeneration assumes short rests.

So does the BM's CS dice, and all fighter's Action Surge & Second Wind. Maybe Warlocks are seeing more play than Monks, or Warlock players feel more entitled than those who play fighters? There could be all kinds of possible little sickological reasons for why people complain about one issue with one class but are fine with another class having a similar issues, I'm sure.