The Grand Failure of the Warlock.

[Empath Negative]

The failure of the Warlock is in its name and its abilities.

The Warlock should've been given more generic names and invocations. Instead, they all tend to be themed around darkness and evil.


The Warlock should've been the Sorcerer, and the various other "mages " (see Beguiler, Warmage, Dread (True?) necromancer) should've been speciality wizards who could also cast from scrolls.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

I'll grant you that. I've played 2 warlocks, and neither of them were very dark, tortured or evil. I liked it for the mechanic, not the "atmosphere" the fluff tried to create.

However I only think that's a minor annoyance, easily ignored if you want to, easily refluffed while keeping the mechanic, and not a grand failure. The alignment restriction might be an issue, and both Warlocks I played were CG, but I'd be ok as a DM allowing a player to ignore that restriction.

 

[Empath Negative]

I'll grant you that. I've played 2 warlocks, and neither of them were very dark, tortured or evil. I liked it for the mechanic, not the "atmosphere" the fluff tried to create.

However I only think that's a minor annoyance, easily ignored if you want to, easily refluffed while keeping the mechanic, and not a grand failure. The alignment restriction might be an issue, and both Warlocks I played were CG, but I'd be ok as a DM allowing a player to ignore that restriction.

Problem being the Fluff invocations were something of a straight jacket for say... a more fey oriented character. Few if any of the Warlocks abilities seemed overtly chaotic instead of overtly evil.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

Problem being the Fluff invocations were something of a straight jacket for say... a more fey oriented character. Few if any of the Warlocks abilities seemed overtly chaotic instead of overtly evil.

True. I see what you're saying. I guess if I think "Unseelie Court" Fay it fits, but your thinking more modern and traditional D&D concepts of faeries and dryads and such, it's not a good fit. agreed.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Biggest failure of the warlock is that they should've gotten more invocations, IMO. With the few they get and so many of the "good" ones being buff effects like flight and invisibility, there really wasn't much room for more than a few offensive options, and spamming your EB and like 2 other offensive effects all day is just boring tedium.

The alignment thing is a bit annoying, but not that big an issue. Only warlock I played for a significant length of time was CG and intended to be a cheerful Cutey Honey / Sailor Moon magical girl that sought out winning through love, friendship, and diplomacy (and failing that, the charm invocation).

[sblock]DM surprised me with a dystopian hellscape setting with the entire rest of the party evil aligned (after specifically telling me to make my character good aligned) where there were no "good" choices, only lesser evils, and seemingly actively punished my character whenever she tried to take a 3rd option. It wasn't a fun game for me.[/sblock]

 

[Empath Negative]

True. I see what you're saying. I guess if I think "Unseelie Court" Fay it fits, but your thinking more modern and traditional D&D concepts of faeries and dryads and such, it's not a good fit. agreed.

Precisely... and the frustrating part is that it could've been everything the Sorcerer is and more.

Hell, just imagine how flufftastically awesome a mixture of Warlockery and Binders could be.


Rather than the ever useless "Magic of Incarnum" (Wtf?) they should've put out "The Book of Bound Spirits" that details the intricacies of Warlocks, Binders, and Spirit Shamans.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Warlocks along with the Binder: two of my least favorite classes in 3.5 due to their execution. So much wasted potential.

Warlocks: one of my favorite 4Ed classes.

 

[Samloyal23]

I liked the warlock and binder in 3E, with the right chain of origin related feats I think there is a lot of potential for them...

 

[Wyvernhand]

Rather than the ever useless "Magic of Incarnum" (Wtf?) they should've put out "The Book of Bound Spirits" that details the intricacies of Warlocks, Binders, and Spirit Shamans.

Hey, Magic of Incarnum is an awesome book! Incarnate and Totemist are both really neat, and being able to pick up melee with feats is pretty slick.

 

[emoplato]

Precisely... and the frustrating part is that it could've been everything the Sorcerer is and more.

Hell, just imagine how flufftastically awesome a mixture of Warlockery and Binders could be.


Rather than the ever useless "Magic of Incarnum" (Wtf?) they should've put out "The Book of Bound Spirits" that details the intricacies of Warlocks, Binders, and Spirit Shamans.

Magic of Incarnum is not a failed book, the fact is an enterprising player can make grand use out of mechanically. Name another base class out there that can have health of a barbarian, deal average damage of a full sneak attack rogue(without sneak attack), be able to use both psionic and magical devices, have spell-like abilities, and still have secondary passive buffs always on before items, feats, or race. Then if you go to the prestige classes you can have these abilities with both types of spell casting. Thematically it flopped as it couldn't decide what they wanted this other force to be and it did have a few turkeys(chaotic incarnate, soulborn, incarnum blade, and witchborn binder if practiced spell caster couldn't be used to offset a dip).