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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mephista" data-source="post: 9013759" data-attributes="member: 6786252">One thing I've noticed from reading a lot of the actual play reports and the like.  There seems to be two main camps when it comes to playing a warlock.  I'm sure there are others, but...  People that played warlock as a pseudo-full-caster with lots of short rests are one style.  Big booms (or other big magics) followed by tinking with EB.  The other seems to be treating the warlock as a kind of dark paladin/arcane archer gish type, which is more sustainable no matter the rests.The actual play reports I've heard of people focusing on the latter playstyle have reported positive things about the class.  It feels more flexible with spells without that constant worry about when you'll recharge.  Blade pact seems to be especially well recieved in play, even if there's some grumbling about what to take for feats.  Chain pact seems to be seen as too fragile, especially when you're supposed to get them in fights.  This style of play is taking what was loved about this playstyle from the 2014 warlock and making it easier to run for both player and DM.The reports of people trying to recreate a pseudo-full caster are, of course, rather negative, as apparenlty that's not something that the warlock can really do anymore.  Which, no surprise it can't given its new casting status, and trying to force it is leading to frustration and anxiety. This option seems to have been "ripped out."</blockquote>

Verification