Optimize a single class warlock

[Fenris-77]

Optimized? Well, Darkness + Devil's sight is the obvious place to start. Soooo much advantage. Mask of Many Faces (with or without Actor) is really cool in most games if you're going to be creative with it, and super-mega awesome in urban campaigns. I'd normally MC rogue to build an infilitrator, but it's very doable (and fun) with straight warlock). For out of combat utility I'd go either tomelock for the rituals or chainlock for the buffed familiar, depending on what I thought I'd get more use out of in that particular campaign.

 

[FrogReaver]

Optimized? Well, Darkness + Devil's sight is the obvious place to start. Soooo much advantage.

Your spell slots and concentration slot is most always better used to control enemies from level 5+. Darkness isn't even worth mentioning IMO.

Mask of Many Faces (with or without Actor) is really cool in most games if you're going to be creative with it, and super-mega awesome in urban campaigns.

Agreed, that's the one out of combat ability combo that I'm impressed with.

I'd normally MC rogue to build an infilitrator, but it's very doable (and fun) with straight warlock). For out of combat utility I'd go either tomelock for the rituals or chainlock for the buffed familiar, depending on what I thought I'd get more use out of in that particular campaign.

In general I think the tomelock has better utility. You still can get a familiar albeit not a super-familiar and you get other useful rituals as well.

 

[Fenris-77]

Darkness and Devil's Sight is goofy good, but only when you have the combat chops to make it worthwhile. There's no arguing about the silly level of utility involved when you have those chops. Otherwise I'd counsel going straight control right out of the gate.

 

[FrogReaver]

Darkness and Devil's Sight is goofy good, but only when you have the combat chops to make it worthwhile. There's no arguing about the silly level of utility involved when you have those chops. Otherwise I'd counsel going straight control right out of the gate.

Even then, your slot is better used for control than for enhancing your damage and that's without even taking into consideration the drawbacks of using the darkness spell:

1. It takes an action - meaning you do no damage on turn 1 unless you can prebuff
2. It's very bad for your allies. They all get disadvantage to hit the enemy you are attacking and any other enemies around you. There are also a number of spells that require you see the target. This excludes casters from using those on the target.

IMO, If you want all out damage be a fighter or paladin or even rogue.

 

[Esker]

... even rogue.

:-O

 

[Esker]

2. It's very bad for your allies. They all get disadvantage to hit the enemy you are attacking and any other enemies around you.

I know many people play it that way, but RAW, wouldn't they also get advantage since the enemy can't see them, and therefore have a normal attack (even if they would normally have had disadvantage from another source, though also if they would have had advantage from another source)? Or are you assuming everyone can see outside the darkness?

In any case, the spell targeting part is true.

I agree though that as a single classed warlock I wouldn't want to use slots and concentration for darkness even if it didn't negatively affect allies. A sorlock built for damage though, that's potentially a different story.

 

[FrogReaver]

I know many people play it that way, but RAW, wouldn't they also get advantage since the enemy can't see them, and therefore have a normal attack (even if they would normally have had disadvantage from another source, though also if they would have had advantage from another source)? Or are you assuming everyone can see outside the darkness?

Never thought much about it. I guess I'd go with the later as that's typically how non-magical darkness works in my games. If the enemies camp is lit up and my camp is lit up and it's a dark night then I'd give normal rolls to attack enemies in the camp and vice versa, but any enemies in the dark area would be attacked at disadvantage since you couldn't see them but they could see you.

I notice that the spell doesn't say anything about not being able to see out of the magical darkness if you are in it. Just that darkvision is ineffective against it.

In any case, the spell targeting part is true.

yea

I agree though that as a single classed warlock I wouldn't want to use slots and concentration for darkness even if it didn't negatively affect allies. A sorlock built for damage though, that's potentially a different story.

Yea. I mean I know trying to make a hexblade warlock work in melee with GWM and PAM is a thing. But that takes nearly all your class resources and in the end you've basically just made something that is clearly inferior to fighters, paladins or barbarians.

 

[Esker]

Never thought much about it. I guess I'd go with the later as that's typically how non-magical darkness works in my games. If the enemies camp is lit up and my camp is lit up and it's a dark night then I'd give normal rolls to attack enemies in the camp and vice versa, but any enemies in the dark area would be attacked at disadvantage since you couldn't see them but they could see you.

I notice that the spell doesn't say anything about not being able to see out of the magical darkness if you are in it. Just that darkvision is ineffective against it.

Yeah, I think that's a reasonable interpretation. It also means they could use ranged attacks out of the darkness with advantage. I usually see people talking about zones of magical darkness as being like a movable fog cloud though, blocking vision through it. But darkness is a more useful spell without devil's sight if you can see out, since then if you can cast it on yourself and situate yourself somewhere far away you can make ranged attacks out of it with advantage. Devil's sight then only really helps you at close range.

Having gone back and looked at the RAW on vision and light, it says that "A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. A creature in a heavily obscured area effectively suffers from the blinded condition". So that sounds like, RAW, even non-magical darkness prevents being able to see out of it if you don't have darkvision, and so magical darkness would prevent seeing out of it if you don't have devil's sight.

Still, I think I prefer your interpretation, even if it does amount to a house rule.

 

[Fenris-77]

Well, sorry for the slight bump in the road lads, I wasn't aiming for a derail there. I don't actually care for the combo much myself as it's generally, as you mention, pretty selfish as far as who benefits. That does not stop it from being a perennial contender in the optimized Warlock voting, which is why I mentioned it.

I would much rather talk about optimizing for control. For urban and intrigue based campaigns the infiltrator/control build is almost too nice to pass on, but that might be my personal tastes peeping through.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yeah, I think that's a reasonable interpretation. It also means they could use ranged attacks out of the darkness with advantage. I usually see people talking about zones of magical darkness as being like a movable fog cloud though, blocking vision through it. But darkness is a more useful spell without devil's sight if you can see out, since then if you can cast it on yourself and situate yourself somewhere far away you can make ranged attacks out of it with advantage. Devil's sight then only really helps you at close range.

Having gone back and looked at the RAW on vision and light, it says that "A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. A creature in a heavily obscured area effectively suffers from the blinded condition". So that sounds like, RAW, even non-magical darkness prevents being able to see out of it if you don't have darkvision, and so magical darkness would prevent seeing out of it if you don't have devil's sight.

Still, I think I prefer your interpretation, even if it does amount to a house rule.

Wow. I hadn't realized they had messed up so badly on the lighting rules. Or rather, dumbed them down to such an extent that non-magical light and non-magical darkness don't behave nearly at all like they do in the real world.