D&D 5E Warlock as the arcane caster of the group?

[Herobizkit]

Warlocks are fantastic (har). Yes, they're not the "drop fireball / lighting bolt / ice storm" kill-all-the muthas-in-the-room fantastic, but for pure flavour and (as the OP pointed out) ritual magic, plus all-day-every-day Eldritch Blast, you're no slouch.

Without the DMG, we still don't 100% know how most magic items will work. There might be an option to be a wand-user down the road that allows you to stuff 50(?) charges of your most useful spells (like, say, Fireball lol) and fling them ad nauseum.

I'd strongly suggest taking Spell Slinger as your first feat, grab Eldritch Blast _for free_ (via feat) and now you can zap folks behind most cover and concealment without penalty. Oh, also it _doubles_ the range of EB. Many lolz.

If you want a blaster, play a Sorcerer. If you want a Batman, play a wizard. If you want a specialist in a particular field, take Warlock.

Or take Bard and win twice. :3

 

[sunrisekid]

OP makes a point of the Pact of the Tome, which allows choosing 3 cantrips from any class list (not to mention rituals). First level, that's 5 cantrips available at-will, which improves the warlock's versatility. If also a High Elf that's 6 cantrips at first level. That's a lot of versatility. You don't even "need" to go the eldritch blast route (personally, I've felt thats a pretty one-trick-pony character build).

That said, I have to agree with earlier points about the warlock not quite filling in for a wizards ability to dish out AoE spells. But that's what character options are all about. Personally, I like the bookish warlock trope much more than the wizard - but that's just personal preference.

 

[Andor]

I'm inclined to say no. 5e wizards are pretty awesome.

However as a warlock you have more hp, better armour, better weapons (Ha!)

But You pay for it with fewer spells known, fewer spells per day, fewer cantrips.

Warlocks can do a few things better than anyone else. Book pact does ritual magic better than anyone. Chainpack has the beat pets in the game. Does that equal out to a Wizard? No. Does it let you fill the Arcane Caster slot? That depends on what you think that means. The Warlock can do some good tricks and does have some real advantages. All his slots are at his highest level so he gets good milage from spells that scale well, like witchbolt. Can he AoE blast like an Evoker? No.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Don’t worry about the ‘role’ in the group, just play someone you think is cool. The group dynamics will look after themselves.

 

[Eleclipse]

First af all thanks to all for the answers!

Just to clarify one thing, for the arcane caster role i intended the utility magic-for-all-situation role of the arcane spells, i think that for blasting thing around the sorcerer is king a the moment so i would have gone with that in that case ( it' not ), my fear was that since this campaign (Hoard of the dragon queen by the way) is supposed to last till higher level, and the party lack a wizard, we will have problema later lacking all the versatility of the wizard.

On the other side i really like the warlock concept!

 

[Herobizkit]

IMO if you're making a "module-buster", you'd still be better off making a Bard over a pure Wizard. Modules tend to call for skill checks everywhere and (arguably) none do them better than the 5e Bard.

Also, since Lorebards can add extra spells from ANY spell list as they advance, you can be AoE'ing stuff in no time. :3

I'm a devout hater of Vancian-style magic but I really like the compromises 5e made as compared to earlier editions.

Also, I'm Bardcore. \m/

But Warlocks. Do that. You'll love them.

 

[Uchawi]

I believe you need at least one "skill monkey" or "spell monkey" in the game to be able to adjust to whatever the DM throws at you. Just like you need a good healer not only to heal, but to remove conditions like curses, or raise dead. And from that perspective the warlock should be fine for lower levels, but you will notice the difference at higher levels.

 

[Eleclipse]

IMO if you're making a "module-buster", you'd still be better off making a Bard over a pure Wizard. Modules tend to call for skill checks everywhere and (arguably) none do them better than the 5e Bard.

Also, since Lorebards can add extra spells from ANY spell list as they advance, you can be AoE'ing stuff in no time. :3

I'm a devout hater of Vancian-style magic but I really like the compromises 5e made as compared to earlier editions.

Also, I'm Bardcore. \m/

But Warlocks. Do that. You'll love them.

I not particularry interest in doing a module buster, i just want to do a pc that i enjoy while still don't deprive the party of something essential o close to it (aka utility arcane spell).

The bard is really cool and i like it but for some reason i see him as a lot less "badass" (flavour-wise) thann a warlock or a sorcer

I believe you need at least one "skill monkey" or "spell monkey" in the game to be able to adjust to whatever the DM throws at you. Just like you need a good healer not only to heal, but to remove conditions like curses, or raise dead. And from that perspective the warlock should be fine for lower levels, but you will notice the difference at higher levels.

That's exactly what i'm worried about

 

[ranger69]

As both a DM and a player I tend to agree with Trippy Hippy. Don't get caught up so much in having to have particular roles in a group. Play what you enjoy playing. If there is a particular role missing in a group then it just means that other solutions to the problem have to be found.
I remember one group I DM'd for pressured a player into having a healing cleric, despite her unwillingness. She did not join in, and did very little with the character. In effect the other players were running the character for her, and she was just rolling the dice. So after a discussion with the player her character was deemed to have been promoted within the characters church, and transferred to a far away city to take up a new post. The player then created a replacement character that she wanted to play, and participated a lot more after that. The party without a cleric had to find other ways of dealing with undead, and healing.

 

[Sadrik]

I think the warlock is the weakest class. It is too dependent on the short rest. If you rest after every fight it might pull its weight. But the DM or other players will likely want to forge on - making your class selection sub-optimal. It has a lot of theme though so I think this will be a popular character in 5e just not a very powerful one.