Warpiglet
Adventurer
Yes either this or one more invocation for all warlocks. I find I am frustrated at low levels with the lack of them. I get a their dad and it is already accounted for...
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D 5E Blade Pact Warlocks and Conventional Wisdom
- Thread starter Warpiglet
- Start date
The Grassy Gnoll
Explorer
Every game is played in isolation. Your PC is not entering into a Miss Multiverse competition with anybody else's PC.
More importantly, s/he is not going up against the other PCs at your table either.
It's a collaborative game.
It's also a fantasy game.
Most of all, it's a game.
Not a contest.
Of more relevance is making sure (a) you get to play a character that you enjoy playing and feel is a fun way to spend your precious leisure time; and (b) that your character fits with the rest of the party.
You and your fellow players (including the DM) are going to make up a story together. A good DM will make sure that the story fits the party as much as possible (e.g. If all the PCs are melee types, provide both melee opponents [time to shine], and ranged or spellcasting opponents [challenge]).
What anyone else thinks is irrelevant beyond that. Not forgetting that most of the min/max theorycrafting goes up to level 20. Now, I don't know about you, but we've been playing our campaign for 2 years and the players, meeting once a week for I'd say 40 weeks of the year, have just turned level 7. I don't think this is unusual. And if it is, well, this is our game reality. Comparing it to someone on the internet (SOTI) and their experience or theory is not really productive. Has SOTI played the same adventures as you? With the same party mix as you? The same player personalities as you?
Nope.
Play the character the way you want to. It may not be 'optimal', whatever that means, but so what? If you want to play a bladelock with Armour prof feats, fill your boots. If you wanted to play a Paladin who only fights with a quarterstaff and leather armour, and because of your player concept takes Ritual Caster (Druid), go for it. Who cares! Hell, if you want to go old school and MC as a Fighter/Wizard/Thief while the rest of the party go level 3 in one class each, cool. So long as you're bringing something to the table for you and your friends, it's all good.
FWIW, I briefly played a MC monklock and wish I'd picked straight warlock.
Sent from my iPhone using EN World
More importantly, s/he is not going up against the other PCs at your table either.
It's a collaborative game.
It's also a fantasy game.
Most of all, it's a game.
Not a contest.
Of more relevance is making sure (a) you get to play a character that you enjoy playing and feel is a fun way to spend your precious leisure time; and (b) that your character fits with the rest of the party.
You and your fellow players (including the DM) are going to make up a story together. A good DM will make sure that the story fits the party as much as possible (e.g. If all the PCs are melee types, provide both melee opponents [time to shine], and ranged or spellcasting opponents [challenge]).
What anyone else thinks is irrelevant beyond that. Not forgetting that most of the min/max theorycrafting goes up to level 20. Now, I don't know about you, but we've been playing our campaign for 2 years and the players, meeting once a week for I'd say 40 weeks of the year, have just turned level 7. I don't think this is unusual. And if it is, well, this is our game reality. Comparing it to someone on the internet (SOTI) and their experience or theory is not really productive. Has SOTI played the same adventures as you? With the same party mix as you? The same player personalities as you?
Nope.
Play the character the way you want to. It may not be 'optimal', whatever that means, but so what? If you want to play a bladelock with Armour prof feats, fill your boots. If you wanted to play a Paladin who only fights with a quarterstaff and leather armour, and because of your player concept takes Ritual Caster (Druid), go for it. Who cares! Hell, if you want to go old school and MC as a Fighter/Wizard/Thief while the rest of the party go level 3 in one class each, cool. So long as you're bringing something to the table for you and your friends, it's all good.
FWIW, I briefly played a MC monklock and wish I'd picked straight warlock.
Sent from my iPhone using EN World
Ah, if only this were universally true.
I agree that is the way it is supposed to be, but humans inherently have a desire to compare themselves against others. And in an Organized Play environment like Adventure League (or the Pathfinder Society, RPGA, etc.) people have a way of measuring their characters and their decisions up against total strangers, because everything is standardized.
You all have the same character options and stat options, you all play through the same adventures, and you can go to a Convention play with a total stranger who's character plays the same role as yours in the party. Or you can read about their characters or their build online. Comparisons are inevitable, even if they shouldn't mean anything. The goal is to have fun, but feeling that your character doesn't measure up can diminish your sense of fun, if you are at all competitive.
Otterscrubber
First Post
To the OP: I think folks who say that are missing the point of a Warlock. They want to make the ultimate fighter, without playing a Fighter. If Warlocks were as good in melee as a fighter, who would play a fighter? Can they be good in melee, hell yeah!! As good as a fully optimized Fighter? Depends on the situation. D&D is an RPG, it's more than just stats. It's about style, creativity and how you want to play.
I'm playing a lvl 14 Fiend Patron Pact blade warlock and it is one of the most enjoyable characters I've ever played in D&D, any edition. He can hold his own in melee, but against a truly tough foe he's got to think it out. Close quarters? Darkness, which i can see through and most other melee classes can't, I win. Not close quarter? Charm the fighter into getting somehwhere I can use that combo. Or just make him my monkey for the duration. Invisibility, check. Ranged attack if needed, check. Disguise self to sneak into somewhere, check. He's got a lot more options out of combat, and plenty in combat to help him get advantages when needed. All else fails, dimension door to get out of a bad situation and strike again when terms are more to my liking or that of my group. Plus there are some strong arguments for making a class that only helps the others in your party. There is a poster here, Treantmonk, who has a great guide for wizards who are all support. Not even magic missile is in their repertoire. Completely changed every encounter their group had. Could just as easily be a Warlock, Bard, Cleric as well.
Unplayable without multi-classing? Nothing could be further from the truth. If you want to min/max, have fun and do it, but there are a number of advantages to getting all the way to 20 with just one class. And not just due to style. I will say this, though, some of the lvl 20 abilities are a bit soft and that is the main reason to multi-class if all you want is on paper bennies. Most lvl 1-3 abilities of other classes will outstrip the usual daily ability of a 20th lvl character. I think they should fix that a bit. Getting to 20 should be a solid goal for a class, with a reward that outshines the benefits of dipping into another class. Again, it's a style thing. Might be slightly more advantageous to multi-class, but unplayable? C'mon, enough with the hyperbole.
I'm playing a lvl 14 Fiend Patron Pact blade warlock and it is one of the most enjoyable characters I've ever played in D&D, any edition. He can hold his own in melee, but against a truly tough foe he's got to think it out. Close quarters? Darkness, which i can see through and most other melee classes can't, I win. Not close quarter? Charm the fighter into getting somehwhere I can use that combo. Or just make him my monkey for the duration. Invisibility, check. Ranged attack if needed, check. Disguise self to sneak into somewhere, check. He's got a lot more options out of combat, and plenty in combat to help him get advantages when needed. All else fails, dimension door to get out of a bad situation and strike again when terms are more to my liking or that of my group. Plus there are some strong arguments for making a class that only helps the others in your party. There is a poster here, Treantmonk, who has a great guide for wizards who are all support. Not even magic missile is in their repertoire. Completely changed every encounter their group had. Could just as easily be a Warlock, Bard, Cleric as well.
Unplayable without multi-classing? Nothing could be further from the truth. If you want to min/max, have fun and do it, but there are a number of advantages to getting all the way to 20 with just one class. And not just due to style. I will say this, though, some of the lvl 20 abilities are a bit soft and that is the main reason to multi-class if all you want is on paper bennies. Most lvl 1-3 abilities of other classes will outstrip the usual daily ability of a 20th lvl character. I think they should fix that a bit. Getting to 20 should be a solid goal for a class, with a reward that outshines the benefits of dipping into another class. Again, it's a style thing. Might be slightly more advantageous to multi-class, but unplayable? C'mon, enough with the hyperbole.
Otterscrubber
First Post
Personally, I think vampiric touch is for suckers...just about any other 3rd lvl spell is more useful. Doesn't even grant temp HP. So you're ideal candidate is an already wounded spellcaster in melee. Doing 3d6 to a single target rather than say.....8d6 to a group of enemies....all for a lousy 5hp average in healing? If you hit. Oh yeah....it's concentration too.....Vampiric Touch is the Boba Fett of spells, super overrated..let the hate begin
Other than that, love your build and your view on being a pure warlock. Personally one of my favorite ways to go, tons of versatility.
Like Medium Armor Master with a 16 Dex?
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Armor of agathys keeps you alive and enemies that attack you dead. Even with terribly low AC... especially with low AC.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
Well he's trying to avoid MAD. I think even Medium Armor with a 12 Dex is probably worth it too. 2 AC is not meaningless of course, but the feat probably will come up more (like ever single attack he makes) than that 2 AC.
Warpiglet
Adventurer
I did not respond to your earlier point about heavy armor and will do so now. My rationale for heavy armor was that since we did not roll this time, point buy implies some hard choices. I was going with 15 str, 10 dex, 14 con, 10 int, 10 wis, and 16 chr after moderately armored.
I really want some offensive punch such as great weapon master or even polearm master but felt I needed some armor to do this.
So if I rearrange things, I could go for a better dex and being satisfied with moderately armored (and hence have a melee feat at level 4). I will have to tinker a bit and see what I get.
However, for fun purposes, I am committed to two handed weapons from 3rd level onward.
Warpiglet
Adventurer
Ah, if only this were universally true.
I agree that is the way it is supposed to be, but humans inherently have a desire to compare themselves against others. And in an Organized Play environment like Adventure League (or the Pathfinder Society, RPGA, etc.) people have a way of measuring their characters and their decisions up against total strangers, because everything is standardized.
You all have the same character options and stat options, you all play through the same adventures, and you can go to a Convention play with a total stranger who's character plays the same role as yours in the party. Or you can read about their characters or their build online. Comparisons are inevitable, even if they shouldn't mean anything. The goal is to have fun, but feeling that your character doesn't measure up can diminish your sense of fun, if you are at all competitive.
You are correct. And perhaps my starting this thread was me taking a step to say screw it, its good enough. I know it can be "better" but I want to let that go.
In the old days we played thieves with a THACO of 19 at 5th level and clerics who could not hit the broad side of a barn because of their coolness and flavor. The dudes with 18 Str and weapon specialization were too damn common but it didn't stop us then...I gues I am trying to keep it from stopping me now.
Similar Threads
