Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 4789167" data-attributes="member: 8158">People focus on damage output because it's what strikers are supposed to bring to the table. It's their major contribution. And equally noteworthy, DPS is readily quantifiable. Defense? Nuking your opponent to heck and back is a great defense--beyond that, that's what defenders are for. Mobility? Not sure how the warlock excels at that more than any other striker, and in fact, it's likely less mobile than many others that trump its output--but again, it's hard to quantify.Neat little bonus effects are all good and well, but they don't give any particular class an edge because every class has a battery of rider effects on their powers, and for one class's powerset to indisputably trump every rider effect that's in another class's powerset is pretty unlikely.I thought it readily apparent that I was focusing purely on comparative effectiveness, but some replies seem to want to validate the warlock simply because it sounds cooler to them than the warlock. It is perfectly possible to play a mechanically weak class and still enjoy oneself. I continue to play my warlock because I like character I'm playing, because the DM seems invested in him, and I like the basic premise of the class, but I have no illusions that he's doing anything for the party that a sorcerer couldn't match or exceed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Felon, post: 4789167, member: 8158"] People focus on damage output because it's what strikers are supposed to bring to the table. It's their major contribution. And equally noteworthy, DPS is readily quantifiable. Defense? Nuking your opponent to heck and back is a great defense--beyond that, that's what defenders are for. Mobility? Not sure how the warlock excels at that more than any other striker, and in fact, it's likely less mobile than many others that trump its output--but again, it's hard to quantify. Neat little bonus effects are all good and well, but they don't give any particular class an edge because every class has a battery of rider effects on their powers, and for one class's powerset to indisputably trump every rider effect that's in another class's powerset is pretty unlikely. I thought it readily apparent that I was focusing purely on comparative effectiveness, but some replies seem to want to validate the warlock simply because it sounds cooler to them than the warlock. It is perfectly possible to play a mechanically weak class and still enjoy oneself. I continue to play my warlock because I like character I'm playing, because the DM seems invested in him, and I like the basic premise of the class, but I have no illusions that he's doing anything for the party that a sorcerer couldn't match or exceed. [/QUOTE]

Verification