D&D 5E The warlock is a "better" wizard than a wizard

[Pauln6]

Quite true. Though we need to respect that Invocations are few and precious, your right that if your truly going for the "warlock as wizard" this is a way to do it.

I think Tome Warlock needs some invocations to slightly expand spells known, maybe like Bard magical secrets or possibly an expanded patron related list e.g. you learn three additional spells which you may choose from your Patron list or the following spells.... Or maybe give them a choice of two spells for their mystic arcana.

 

[Krachek]

Warlock is a wonderful class for Sword and Sorcery style.
You can remove all other full caster and keep only the Warlock that can emulate a twisted Wizard, priest, even Druid, or twisted fighter with the hexblade.

 

[Steampunkette]

Personally... I'd like to see a massive new list of cantrips created that cover a gamut of functions. Not just the occasional small illusion or "This person becomes my friend for one round" but stuff like Leomund's secret pocket to store small things in, limited area denial of movement or battlefield control, and things of that nature.

Make Warlock cantrips more flexible than a wizard or cleric or druid or bard's and give them a bunch that become the class's unique flavor of bread and butter.

Lots of little effects, a few big ones per short rest, plus invocations? They'd be pretty cool.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Personally... I'd like to see a massive new list of cantrips created that cover a gamut of functions. Not just the occasional small illusion or "This person becomes my friend for one round" but stuff like Leomund's secret pocket to store small things in, limited area denial of movement or battlefield control, and things of that nature.

Make Warlock cantrips more flexible than a wizard or cleric or druid or bard's and give them a bunch that become the class's unique flavor of bread and butter.

Lots of little effects, a few big ones per short rest, plus invocations? They'd be pretty cool.

I could see it. A bag of tricks, rather than magic artillery. You have a few powerful tricks, but you mostly use your ol' reliables.

 

[AtomicPope]

I played a Warlock to 20th level, Pact of the Chain, in an infernal campaign and it was a lot of fun. This was way before any of the new books were released too, so I was limited to the PHB for spells and invocations. I chose invocation spells I could cast at will or repeatedly, and lots of Save or Suck spells. It was like being a Wizard, which was kindof my plan: to be a summoner. We had to change my Patron Spell List a little bit but it worked great. I'd cast Wizard spells, summon creatures, and be a general nuisance. With the new supplements you can easily emulate a Wizard.

 

[Ancalagon]

Cantrips are certainly ok, and better than firing a crossbow but at 5th level if I’m falling back on a cantrip as my most common spells once you get past 4th level then I think the class can’t really call itself anything more than wizard-like.

If your warlock is casting a spell before combat then they are down to 1 spell. If they want to keep something in the bag like an escape spell they’re down to 1 spell. Worse if a short rest can happen once every 2 fights or so.

There are plenty of easy ways of getting cantrips. I’m not sure why you’d stay longer than 3rd level in the warlock class. It reminds me of the old Birthright magician which was a kind of poor mans wizard intended more as an NPC.

It feels like this thread is an attack on wizards for being “no flavor” @EzekielRaiden which seems like a very nebulous dig. Not to mention something I think a lot of people would disagree with. A wizard is researching continuously, they are a Int based caster with a book of spells and they write more out as they get more experienced.

Rather than saying how great a warlock is, most of the arguments seem to be that wizards are too powerful, Warlocks are less effective which is better… followed up with lots of suggestions for how a warlock could be made more powerful.

About casting spells and the limited number of slots:

1: It certainly makes using those slots more of an interesting choice. As a wizard (... or any full spell caster really) the only slots you really worry about are your highest level ones. Do I cast fly? I might need dispel magic later... buuut the same wizard won't really worry about casting a 2nd level spell if it's needed. As a warlock, you have this tension all the time. So you will resort to guile and "tricks" if you can.

2: This limit not only makes it more interesting (although it could be more frustrating) but it also reflects how mages in several fantasy settings preserve their magic carefully (look how rarely Gandalf used a powerful spell), and in a number of games too, where casting has a cost/risk. Apart from D&D, what other tabletop fantasy RPG have you played?

About: "Not sure why to stay in the warlock class for more than 3 levels"

Well if the path of wizardry is not available (more on that), it makes a lot of sense - how are you going to get those high level slots otherwise?
Why would the path of wizardry not be available? Well, 2 reasons. 1: you could be in a game where the GM liked my thread so much that the class isn't available. 2: If your character could take another path to magical power, why on earth would they have made a pact with some entity?

I agree with you that wizards do have flavor, and I also agree that making warlocks more powerful isn't the goal.

 

[loverdrive]

What fantasy characters are you comparing him to? The most famous would be Merlin or Gandalf I suppose. I don't see the Warlock as stacking up next to them.

I don't really remember Gandalf casting spells that much.

 

[Mistwell]

Hello

Now before we start, I should state that I don't mean that the warlock is better at being a wizard than the wizard. At the very birth of D&D there were only 2 classes - the fighting man and the magic user. As more and more magic using classes appeared, even today the wizard remains the best D&D magic user, no doubt about it.

However, I'm starting to feel that from a narrative and balance, the warlock - specifically the tome warlock - is a better depiction of a generic "fantasy mage" (which is not the same as a D&D wizard!).

I came to this realization watching the Dungeon Dudes 's game on youtube. In their current campaign, their party mage is a warlock (GOO, tome). This warlock is from a family of wizards, he joined the academy etc and... sucked. He just didn't have the talent, at all. So his parents made some arrangements for him to find a certain ancient text and ... voila, he's now a "mage!". (this is background stuff, not in the actual campaign).

Because of this, the character is really trying his hardest to "be a wizard", but his toolset is limited. Only a few slots available at any given time. A lot of "shenanigans" to compensate. BUT he's still an effective mage, which some really clutch moments.

And I realized, watching him, that apart from the numerous reference to his patron (Bruce, who looks like a cat), a Tome Warlock is much more like a generic fantasy wizard, or how a wizard is in several other games. They can't fix every problem with a spell (because they don't know that many), the tome aspect makes them "bookish" a bit, they have to rely on wits, guile and luck to fix other problems etc... not at all like the swiss army knife, spell for any situation wizard. This makes them more balanced too! The only change you might need is changing the main stat from cha to int and perhaps tweak the skill selection a bit...

Am I on to something? does this make any sense?

I don't agree with your premise but I did want to mention that I've long thought the Warlock should be intelligence based rather than charisma based. There are far too many charisma casters in this game, and you know the folks clever enough to gain power from an otherworldly being are likely to be the smarties in the room but not necessarily the charmers.

 

[FrozenNorth]

All this to say, the best class that represents this idea is the Warlock. A Warlock could be the MCU version of the Scarlet Witch or Loki pretty easily if you take a step back in terms of abstraction.

I felt the Scarlet witch, especially in her own tv show, would be best represented by a sorcerer. Loads of power that she doesn’t fully understand, and a foil…

Spoiler

who has greater variety in magic and a greater knowledge of it, and therefore can get more out of the magic they do know.

It’s a shame that this distinction isn’t really reflected in the mechanics of the two classes.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Yes, there certainly are.

But the "better" wizard comment is not only about some fantasy archetypes, it's also about game balance. The wizards are astounding problem solvers as they go up in level, and this feature is not universal in all games. In multiple systems I've played in, the spellcasters don't have this wide array of magical tricks at their command. Either their magic is themed (fire magic - fire doesn't fix everything!) or simply limited - a "good" mage might know 5-6 spells.

To me, this is the problem with the wizard chassis. On the one hand, it is the best chassis for a focused spellcaster because its spell list is so broad and it could do everything (except heal) with only moderate refluffing.

On the other hand, the class itself draws its power from its versatility and its ability to cast more (and different) spells over the day than any other class. If you include rituals that are cast over a typical adventuring day, a 7th level wizard could easily cast 14 different spells in a day, which undermines the “focussed spellcaster” concept.