Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 9006476" data-attributes="member: 87792">There are reasons I, in practice, don't take Hex although your average warlock player does. But fly is very situational; when Fly is what you need it's what you need and when it's not it can stay on the bench.So what? What I asked was which of these spells was "the best". This doesn't answer the question. And the simple response to your critique is that if it's the party vs one foe that foe had better be legendary or it loses to the action economy, If it's legendary you probably shouldn't be trying to save or suck it anyway. And if it's not there will be a second target. And to repeat myself what I asked is which spell was "the best". You haven't been able to say that "in an appropriate situation one of the other spells does that spell's job better".Again so what?. The warlock does not work like other casters. It's slightly more complex at level up and significantly simpler and easier in play. The paladin is a caster - but if you try to play it like a wizard or vise-versa you are going to have a bad time.I'm not sure whether this is a serious complaint. I don't know if you noticed, but there is a grand total of one damaging spell on that list and zero single target damage spells. I'm trying to imagine the player who wouldn't realise that fireball did better damage with a better range and better area than Burning Hands or Hunger of Hadar didn't than Arms of Hadar.You aren't switching Arms of Hadar for Fireball. You're switching Burning Hands for Fireball. Both are from the Fiend Pact list. You're switching Arms of Hadar for Hunger of Hadar. And yes I expect your average player to notice that Hunger of Hadar has a range, a bigger area, and does more damage, and has a name that is clearly linked. Or to look at the Fiend Pact list where they took Burning Hands from. Do you expect the average wizard player to still be casting Burning Hands as a stock upcast spell in their level three slots? Because they need to make that decision every single time they cast the spell and need to make it under pressure. Or if you think that the wizard wouldn't because most people know it's better to not upcast spells most people know it's better to not upcast spellsThe warlock takes a little more work at  level up and significantly less work in play when you'd be slowing down everyone else. And they can be helped by email. Literally the only reason you think that the warlock is harder .On the other hand running out of slots is far less of a penalty for a warlock than it is for a sorcerer. A fifth level warlock who is using Eldritch Blast backed by Agonizing Blast does just under twice the damage of a sorcerer using Firebolt or almost as much damage as a sorcerer using Scorching Ray. And they should have two utility invocations that aren't bound by slots. Save or Suck is something you drop onto the right target. I'm not arguing that Blindness/Deafness isn't a situational spell for a warlock, but you pick it when its situation comes up.How is it a disconnect? The warlock is billed as its own thing with Pact Magic being its own thing and very clearly not an orthodox caster. If it was an orthodox caster it would use orthodox spellcasting, not pact magic.Far more than you. Because the reason you are playing warlocks badly is that you are trying to play them like wizards. Those decades of experience of all casters working roughly the same way rather than being able to look at the warlock with a fresh pair of eyes are the problem.And then they would be boring, cookie cutter casters that play like all other casters. Better for people with literal decades of experience playing D&D casters and who are either unable or unwilling to adapt to them being their own thing while being a whole lot less interesting and fun for people able to approach them on their own terms.</blockquote>

Verification