D&D 3E/3.5 Are 3.5 Warlocks unbalancing?

[ExaltedWarlock]

Hi - I have always wanted to run a Warlock in a 3.5 campaign,
but now the 2nd GM in a row has denied the class, even though
they allow all kinds of other powerful kits/combinations/etc;
does anyone else out there feel that Warlocks are unbalancing (and this is for
a 1st level game)?

I of course am not challenging the GM - it's his game, and he's a kick ass GM with a killer way of playing - but I am hugely disappointed, as eveyrone else is getting to run exactly what they want,
but I do not. (I've GMed for years, and always had warlocks among the party, never found they were unbalancing - have always wanted to PLAY one, but no dice yet - pun intended).

thoughts? thank you

 

[Venator]

I dont feel the Warlock is broken by any means. Infact im hoping that Complete Mage gives them a bit of love.

They make subpar fighters with Hideous Blow being a standard action, and sure Eldrich Blast is pretty cool, but by no means is it overpowered.

The other stuff they get is pretty cool and kind of nice for the party to havem but i just dont see where the overpowering aspect is at all. I dont think the Warlock can fufill any of the "big 4" roles (Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard) and I think they bring less to the table than a lot of the other "5th or 6th man" base classes.

Do you have any idea what his problems with the class are?

 

[brehobit]

At lower level they can be difficult. The ability to blast and (say) spiderclimb _forever_ can be diffiult to deal with when the adventure didn't anticipate it. They change things more than yo might think at lower levels (<5).

That said, I think they are quite reasonable, maybe a bit underpowered. Just really handy in the right situation (like warforged can be).

Mark

 

[Thanee]

I can only assume, that your DM's negative stance towards the Warlock comes from some sort of misperception.

It's quite easy to think that a class with unlimited firepower is broken. Like an archer, for example. Oh wait... those are fine!

At lower levels, Warlocks are quite good for sure. The ranged touch attack allows them to hit a lot easier than most fighters, but they are far from being broken or overpowered.

Maybe you can ask the DM why he does not allow the Warlock...

Bye
Thanee

 

[frankthedm]

It's quite easy to think that a class with unlimited firepower is broken. Like an archer, for example. Oh wait... those are fine!

Those magic arrows are supposed to be costly or the enchant is in an easy to sunder bow.

At lower levels, Warlocks are quite good for sure. The ranged touch attack allows them to hit a lot easier than most fighters, but they are far from being broken or overpowered.

Might not be the 'too strong' issue. Thier capabilities are counter to the idea of magic being precious.

Plus they work like casters who won't buff anyone else, something casters need to do if a game has less than standard magicitem levels. Other 'casters' can make up for the tanks being a touch low on gear by buffing the tanks. Warlocks can't without UMD and again, lower resourses crimp that.

And thier alignment requirement, which is very true to what magic is supposed to be and flavorful, makes them less than ideal for a party. Are the other characters mostly lawful? If so the warlock is a bad idea. And if the campaign is hardcore on alignment, warlocks are better off extict to a lot of folks.

 

[Drowbane]

balanced

Warlocks remain the best Non-PHB base class that WotC has put out. As with everything else, Warlocks in the right circumstances can be "broken"... but you already have 11 examples of that in your PHBs.

 

[ValhallaGH]

The Warlock is one of the best balanced classes in D&D that breaks from the normal types. It's fast, fun, useful, effective and plays well as a fifth party member. It's a lousy primary caster, since it's abilities are selfish, but it allows for some fun and powerful support.

And thier alignment requirement, which is very true to what magic is supposed to be and flavorful, makes them less than ideal for a party. Are the other characters mostly lawful? If so the warlock is a bad idea. And if the campaign is hardcore on alignment, warlocks are better off extict to a lot of folks.

How is Chaotic a problem? Do what you want, hang with people because those are your friends and you have license to shrug off anything and everything. Lawful characters have to take offense to certain actions and insults, and then they should follow the established responses. Chaotic characters don't have that limitation, allowing them to gloss over, or make a big deal out of, anything the player deams appropriate. This makes them unpredictable but allows them to be the one that keeps the peace by stepping around the problem.
Of course, if the player is an easily offended jerk then the character will be as well. But that's true no matter what alignment the character has.

*Remembers watching the honorable samurai throw trees at the party's sleeping shugenja. Because.*

 

[Nalfeshnee]

I think at low-level play, particularly dungeons and lng stretches of combats without time to rest between encounters, the Warlock is a ery good character. whereas a wizard/sorcerer would (more likely than not) have to rely on a crossbow to help out the party, the warlock can blast enemies ad nauseum (with touch attacks to boot). add to that the other special abilities,and i think they are very good at 1-4 level, though as they get higher level, i think they become comparatively less good, especially if an evocationist/sorcerer is in the party: at low levels the warlock can pump out more offensive 'spells' than other spellcasters, though once spellcasters gain access to 3rd level spells (and consequently more spell slots and variation in spells/day) the warlock seems to get 'boring' i ncomparison.

on the whole i think the warlock is an interesting class, different enough to any other class to warrant ebing a true class rather than a prestige class, which is more than i can say for some other classes...

And in a party of mature gamers with a good eye for roleplaying certain situations, i think the alignment restricion to be a source of interesting roleplaying possibilitis.

 

[iceifur]

Also remember: until the warlock gains access to the Vitriolic Blast invocation, their eldritch blast does bupkiss against golems. Spell Resistance is a major pain in the arse for a warlock, and their PrC options are few and far between.

Overall, I've found that the warlock is a fun class to play ... early on in their progression. As the levels mount, though, the "one-trick pony"ness of the class begins to grate.

The warlock starts off a little ahead of the power curve, but quickly slips to a bit below; overpowering, it ain't. YMMV, though.

 

[Crothian]

Overall, I've found that the warlock is a fun class to play ... early on in their progression. As the levels mount, though, the "one-trick pony"ness of the class begins to grate.

The warlock starts off a little ahead of the power curve, but quickly slips to a bit below; overpowering, it ain't. YMMV, though.

This was my experience as well. Mechancially, they get old fast.