Design & Development: The Warlock

[kerbarian]

"Our understanding of the party roles indicates that the sorcerer and the wizard might very well be standing on each other's toes and pointy hats."

To me, this says that the wizard and sorcerer would both be controllers. No surprise there. However, since the article is talking about how warlocks fit in well, it implies that the warlock will not be a controller (i.e. won't step on the wizard's toes).

 

[Gloombunny]

True, but it would be nice to have some light-flavored options in there, such as an entity similar to the Silver Flame in Eberron, to empower Lawful or Good warlocks. Some gamers (like me, for example) do like playing (for lack of a better term) unambiguously "good guy" characters.

Perhaps the warlock class isn't for you, then? I don't mean to sound exclusionary, but this is just making me think of someone who likes playing honorable chivalrous characters complaining about the rogue class not having enough flavor options, or something.

 

[Xyl]

To me, this says that the wizard and sorcerer would both be controllers. No surprise there. However, since the article is talking about how warlocks fit in well, it implies that the warlock will not be a controller (i.e. won't step on the wizard's toes).

It sounds like the warlock has various damage and movement powers, with a bonus for concentrating attacks on a single opponent - definitely a striker.

 

[SPECTRE666]

4E Warlock= 3.5 Warlock/Binder/Hexblade!!! I know what my first 4E character is going to be! WotC can do no wrong for right now. Give me a week, they will make me mad about something. Right now cloud 9!!!

 

[FireLance]

Perhaps the warlock class isn't for you, then? I don't mean to sound exclusionary, but this is just making me think of someone who likes playing honorable chivalrous characters complaining about the rogue class not having enough flavor options, or something.

Well, nothing about the rogue class precludes having a Lawful and/or Good alignment, or requires the association with Chaotic and/or Evil entities. A rogue could be a Lawful Good government secret agent or city watch detective just as easily as he could be a Chaotic Evil crime lord or killer for hire.

I'll admit that the core warlock seems to be more dark-flavored than I would like, which is a pity since the core mechanics of the warlock (that we've seen so far) could easily be adapted have a light flavor. A Lawful Good warlock's eldritch blast could be silver holy fire, his "curses" (alternate word needed) could expose an opponent to the pure flame of judgement, his conjurations could summon a host of celestial hounds, and movement powers are alignment-neutral.

Like I said, it should be easy enough for me to change if I wanted to. I just think it's a pity that the dark flavor of the warlock seems to be unnecessarily retained when paladins were made more generic.

 

[fuindordm]

I just think it's a pity that the dark flavor of the warlock seems to be unnecessarily retained when paladins were made more generic.

I guess it's tied to the cosmology. It makes perfect sense to have a warlock making pacts with LG deities instead of demons--except that the LG deities apparently prefer to create clerics.

I agree, however, that it is a shame the darkness in the PH isn't being balanced with light. If we have the Warlock, it would be nice to retain the paladin's saintly flavor. If we have tieflings, it would be nice to toss aasimar into the mix as well.

What can I say? When both sides of the coin are presented, the game feels more human to me.

 

[fuindordm]

"...send enemy directly to hell for a round, then bring them back in more pieces"

I need to go roll up Broodwich the Warlock.

 

[Greg K]

Well, unlike everyone else, I didn't like the preview on the warlock. Upon first reading that that it would curses and make pacts, I thought it might be cool. However, then reading about the class sending an opponent to hell for a round and other abilities, the class just sounds lame (to keep it polite) to me, but this has been my general opinion of WOTC designed non-core 3.x classes in general.

 

[Tharen the Damned]

Ok, after a chain of meh and OMG articles this one Wowed me.
I like the Warlock, I like the fluff and what I saw of the mechanics.
I think there will be a way for a warlock to create a pact with named entity like ORCUS. There must be a way! And if there is none, I will create a way myself. ORCUS must be obeyed.
The Warlock seems very dark flavored, but I bet a few month after the PHB is released we have some EN Worlders who create a "white" Warlock conterpart, who have pacts with celestial enteties. And there is always the Dragon or the coming up PHBs 2+ to address this issue.


But, me being always a critic, I do not llike the Tiefling picture. The Horns are ok, but the Tail is ridiculous. Can you imagine a Fighter in the heaviest Plate with a Tail poppong out on the backside? Maybe it will be an armored Tail? Baah!
I already see the "Horns or Tail" and "thats a long tail" jokes.

Then, once we saw the concept art Bill O'Connor provided for tieflings, we knew that we had to commit to including tieflings as a PC race, rather than just hopeful it would work out (more on that in a future Design & Development column).

That made me think too. Di dthey include the Tiefling because the art was cool? Without consulting the players out there if they want him? I hope not.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think it's quite good. But I wanted the Druid in the first PHB...