D&D 5E Warlock Spells - PHB page 106 - slot level maxes at 5th; pg 210 lists spells to 9th level

[Aldarc]

Warlocks aren't full casters, but they are frighteningly good in combat - they're a very popular class around our tables, and acquit themselves really well.

They do require a certain level of rules mastery to build correctly, however. However, once you have the right feats and evocations working together? It's scary!

Cheers!

But wasn't there also the thread that talked about how utterly ineffective warlocks are against certain monsters, such as Tiamat, due to their over-reliance on cantrips and a handful of level 1-5 spells?

 

[MerricB]

But wasn't there also the thread that talked about how utterly ineffective warlocks are against certain monsters, such as Tiamat, due to their over-reliance on cantrips and a handful of level 1-5 spells?

D&D is full of situations where one character or another isn't as effective as they are at other times.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Oh, I didn't mean to imply it was RAW. Quite the contrary; the rules are clear, warlocks don't get to swap out their Mystic Arcanum picks.

I was just saying I would house-rule it to allow a swap (maybe require some kind of minor quest or sacrifice).

Yeah. There are a lot of DMs, including me, who would likewise allow you to swap out even things like languages (that you've never used, or used only once to little effect), despite that clearly being against RAW. And if we were playing Monopoly, and you had forgotten to collect $200, I'd let you do that even if your turn was over.

I'd feel differently about a spell or a feat that you'd used extensively though, since your past history would have to be extensively retconned in order to make you have had a different feat all along.

 

[MostlyDm]

Yeah. There are a lot of DMs, including me, who would likewise allow you to swap out even things like languages (that you've never used, or used only once to little effect), despite that clearly being against RAW. And if we were playing Monopoly, and you had forgotten to collect $200, I'd let you do that even if your turn was over.

I'd feel differently about a spell or a feat that you'd used extensively though, since your past history would have to be extensively retconned in order to make you have had a different feat all along.

Yeah, I feel the exact same way. It's generally not a problem to me, though I've had players try to abuse my leniency in the past... it's trivially easy to spot the difference.

Heck, I have a new player in a game and I've already let her know that if she wants to change her skill proficiencies or expertise choice at 3rd level, I have no problem with it. She's still trying to figure out the feel of her character, and I suspect she will regret expertise in Sleight of Hand down the road. She probably won't take me up on it, because she's stubborn and prefers to live with the consequences of her decisions. But the option is on the table regardless.

 

[Eric V]

And yes, it's only a single 6th level spell, a single 7th level spell, a single 8th level spell, and a single 9th level spell.

And remember, no slots. (Meaning you can't cast your 6th level arcanum twice a day by using both your sixth level slot and your seventh level slot. A Wizard could, because she has slots. You have no "Arcanum slots")

And yes, the are no provision for switching out your Arcanums. The sixth level spell you choose at level 11 follows you to your grave, so choose wisely.

You know, when you put it that way... :/

 

[Mephista]

But wasn't there also the thread that talked about how utterly ineffective warlocks are against certain monsters, such as Tiamat, due to their over-reliance on cantrips and a handful of level 1-5 spells?

Warlocks do have a number of issues associated with them. Especially the Blade and Chain Pact Forms. But that doesn't mean that they can't be scarily good at what they do when made well.

Honestly, there are a lot of problems that do hurt playing the 'lock. I truly feel that this class is the one that should be looked at strongly, like we've got all that attention on the Ranger. Things need fixing.

 

[MindxKiller]

I truly feel that this class is the one that should be looked at strongly, like we've got all that attention on the Ranger. Things need fixing.

I'd rather they looked at beastmasters, berserkers and way of the elements before they even thought about any other classes.

 

[Falling Icicle]

But wasn't there also the thread that talked about how utterly ineffective warlocks are against certain monsters, such as Tiamat, due to their over-reliance on cantrips and a handful of level 1-5 spells?

There are, by my count, three creatures in the entire game that are immune to eldrtich blast: helmed horrors (which are immune to force damage), and Rakshasas and Tiamat (which are immune to all low level spells). I don't think warlocks have to worry about being ineffective very often.

[Edit] I almost forgot about the Tarrasque, which reflects eldritch blasts with its shell. So there are four creatures that are immune to it, two of which are CR 30.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Thanks everyone; it makes Warlocks fractionally less bad than I thought (our Warlock died at 8th, never got this ability), but still nothing like a full caster.

I'd say that anyone that gets 9th level spells qualifies as a "full caster." You don't see paladins or rangers casting spells like true polymorph.

Warlocks are different from traditional spellcasters, but they're no less powerful overall. The main edge normal spellcasters have over warlocks is flexibility. They are better at casting lower level spells and have more flexibility with their spell slots, especially their 6th-9th level slots. But warlocks have significant advantages of their own. While other spellcasters get 2-3 5th level spell slots per day, a warlock gets 2-4 per short rest. Warlocks also have the best attack cantrip in the game, and their invocations can give them some really cool spells at-will (disguise self, silent image, arcane eye, etc). They can also get a summonable magic weapon, an invisible familiar, or a tome that gives them any 3 cantrips they want and the potential to learn every ritual spell in the entire game.

 

[Mephista]

I'd rather they looked at beastmasters, berserkers and way of the elements before they even thought about any other classes.

The fun thing about Beastmaster is that if they fix it? It can be used to fix Chain warlock, since it suffers from similar problems. Way of elements does need to be fixed, admittedly, but there's nothign wrong with berzerker other than arguably Frenzy, which is not the whole of the subclass, and fixable without help. I don't think a single power justifies leaving off fixing half an entire class myself.