Dungeons & Dragons: Warlock Video Game Announced by Invoke Studios

The game will be released in 2027.
1765506117255.png


Invoke Studios, a subsidiary of Wizards of the Coast, has announced Dungeons & Dragons: Warlock, a new video game due out for 2027. The game features a new character named Kaati, played by Tricia Helfer, and will be a third-person action-adventure game. Players will use spellcraft to "solve challenges and take down monsters" with players having some freedom in how they solve problems.

"We're not trying to simulate the tabletop RPG experience, so there is no dice-rolling in the game — we're trying to really deliver a video-game experience first," said Dominic Guay, studio lead at Invoke Studios, in an interview with IGN. "If you are not familiar with Dungeons and Dragons, you are not going to feel friction, like in that you're missing details of the world. But if you are a fan of the universe, you are going to be really excited about what we are doing with the lore of the series for Warlock."

Invoke Studios was previously called Tuque Games, and made the much-derided Dark Alliance game in 2021.

Gameplay will be revealed in 2026, with a planned release for 2027.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer

I don't know any of the other rules, but rule 34 was ubiquitous in places like Fark.com and RPG.net. Not so much here because of Eric's Grandma.
It’s so odd to me that anyone would hear about rule 34 and not try to find out what the other 33 rules are (though there are actually like 80-90 ish)
 

log in or register to remove this ad



DA2 is way better than it gets credit for, but you really need to buy into the story it wants to tell. The first time I tried to play it I hated it because I was trying to roleplay an original character, and Hawke would not cooperate with me on that. I had to take a step back and realize that Hawke was a specific character whose choices I could influence, not a blank slate to craft into a character of my own invention. And once I embraced that, the whole game suddenly clicked, and it’s now one of my favorite video games of all time.

Inquisition is a single-player MMO. If you enjoy MMO style gameplay, you’ll probably love Inquisition. If you don’t, you’ll probably struggle with it. Fortunately, the story and characters are excellent, and most of the MMO-y fetch quest stuff is optional, and if you just want to ignore all of it in favor of focusing on the main quest and companion quests, it’s pretty easy to do that. Unfortunately, doing that goes against all of my instincts when it comes to CRPGs. Feels wrong not to do all available optional content before advancing the main story.

I would agree with all of this. There were a few things I struggled with when I first played DA2. The first combat I entered watching the animations, felt like I was watching an old Chinese Kung Fu flick on fast forward. The art direction threw me off as well. In the first game, your Qun companion look like a large somewhat oddly shaped man. In DA2 they became huge bull men and I couldn't help but think, "Where did this come from?". Flemeth looked like harmless old lady in DA - that was kind of the point. In DA2 she looked like the human form of a demon queen. It wasn't that any of it looked bad, but it was a pretty big disconnect for me. Also, I couldn't see any reason for it.

The character of Hawke was okay, but I was a little bummed that we didn't get the customization options that the first game had. The scope of the game was smaller. If you're going to zoom in on single location (City of Kirkwall), then make me care about that location - the game never did. I felt like the entire Qun arc could have been skipped and little would changed. The Red Lyrium was interesting, but I found everything else completely forgettable.

I liked the story of Inquisition, but I wish it leaned more into the Inquisition itself. It gets talked about a lot, but the gameplay didn't go there enough. I liked having to pick various options about things from your advisors, and I wished it had gone there more often. Thematically, it seemed to want to address weighty matters like the ancient elves and their gods and the attitudes of the entire human religion, but too often the gameplay was, "Here's your D&D party, go and kill some orcs".
 

I would agree with all of this. There were a few things I struggled with when I first played DA2. The first combat I entered watching the animations, felt like I was watching an old Chinese Kung Fu flick on fast forward.
I mean, the combat animations are a massive improvement from Origins IMO, but I can certainly see why it might have been surprising.
The art direction threw me off as well. In the first game, your Qun companion look like a large somewhat oddly shaped man. In DA2 they became huge bull men and I couldn't help but think, "Where did this come from?".
You may be surprised to learn, where it came from was the original concept art. Qunari were always intended to be large bull men, but they couldn’t get the head models to work with helmets in Origins.
Flemeth looked like harmless old lady in DA - that was kind of the point. In DA2 she looked like the human form of a demon queen.
Yeah, that was an odd change, but I loved it. She also had very little involvement in DA2.
It wasn't that any of it looked bad, but it was a pretty big disconnect for me. Also, I couldn't see any reason for it.
I think the fairly obvious reason is to establish a recognizable visual identity for the series. Origins’ visual style was incredibly generic, indistinguishable from any medieval-esque European fantasy. Which I understand a lot of people liked about it, but I also understand why, when it became clear that the IP had legs as a series, they would want to make more visually distinctive. They may have gone a little too far with the elves, though personally I really liked how alien they looked.
The character of Hawke was okay, but I was a little bummed that we didn't get the customization options that the first game had.
Yeah, I struggled hard with that at first, but once I understood what the game was trying to do and resolved to meet it on its own terms, I fell in love with the character. Particularly “purple” female Hawke, although my preference now is to gradually shift from “blue” to “red” over the course of the three acts.
The scope of the game was smaller. If you're going to zoom in on single location (City of Kirkwall), then make me care about that location - the game never did.
The smaller scope and personal stakes are my favorite thing about the game, and I adore Kirkwall.
I felt like the entire Qun arc could have been skipped and little would changed. The Red Lyrium was interesting, but I found everything else completely forgettable.
Act 2 is kind of a weird tangent that doesn’t really connect well to Acts 1 and 3. Product of the incredibly rushed dev cycle. But, it did at least flesh out the Qunari and their relationship with Thedas and Magic.
I liked the story of Inquisition, but I wish it leaned more into the Inquisition itself. It gets talked about a lot, but the gameplay didn't go there enough. I liked having to pick various options about things from your advisors, and I wished it had gone there more often. Thematically, it seemed to want to address weighty matters like the ancient elves and their gods and the attitudes of the entire human religion, but too often the gameplay was, "Here's your D&D party, go and kill some orcs".
Yeah, the whole commanding a military aspect was something the devs really wanted to make happen, but never quite manifested. Which is too bad, since it sounded like it would have been really cool, had they managed to execute on the concept better.
 

This is a Ship of Theseus type thing. Personally, I would use the ruleset to describe the game, qualified by the setting if it's non standard: "next week we will be playing Traveller, set on Discworld".
I mean if I run a Spelljammer game but use a system with better space mechanics, maybe even a sci-fi game, but I really use they setting and lore, I feel I'm running Spelljammer, which is in turn D&D.
 

This would best work as action RPG similar to witcher3.
where you would pick all abilities that you want and focus on what you want;
more spells, more martial, more skill/face/stealth or just mix of everything.
 

This would best work as action RPG similar to witcher3.
I believe they also have a game like Witcher 3 in development (and a game like Diablo, and a game like Tomb Raider). This one is supposed to be what we used to call an "Arcade Game". Grandson of Golden Axe if you like.
where you would pick all abilities that you want and focus on what you want;
more spells, more martial, more skill/face/stealth or just mix of everything.
These days even arcade games tend to have skill trees.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top