Warlocks not warlockey anymore

[Mal Malenkirk]

I am basing it on the 3.5 version that was released with Complete Arcane, not what general people feel a "Warlock" is.

Then you are confusing mechanics and flavours.

Even in 3rd edition, Warlocks had a very strong flavor that set them apart from other arcanists.

They still have that strong flavour, with an even stronger focus on the pact. But if you don't see that, it's because you meant that what set them apart were the mechanics of the class. You could have had a a 3e class with the same mechanics who is an idiot savant wizard. Same mechanics, different flavour.

Because mechanic wise, you'll have to come to term with it, nothing will differentiate them.

That's the whole point of streamlining, you no longer want half a dozen different power system. Vancian magic, Sorcerer spell casting, psionic power points, Warlock powers, Tome of 9 blade madness... 4e put a stop to that.

What differentiate spellcasting classes therefore is just flavour, party role and the type of powers that allow you do perform it.

So, a Warlock is one who 'breaks the faith'....

 

[hargert]

So what you are saying is each class does play the same and it is just the flavor that makes them stand apart. That sounds fairly boring to me if the only thing that makes makes a Warlock different from a ranger is that one has the flavor of magic and the other arrows but they play the same.

You are correct that I should have used the term mechanics and not flavor, I am all for streamlining but if this is the case to the degree of making everyone play the same I dont think I will be thrilled with the new system. I for one am hoping that is not the case, I do not want my wizards to play with the same mechanics as a wizard.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

The powers themselves are different and how they are used is different, especially when it comes to utility powers and class abilities.

It is just that the Warlock-shtick of 3e of having essentially at-will magical blast is no longer his mechanical-difference.

 

[small pumpkin man]

So what you are saying is each class does play the same and it is just the flavor that makes them stand apart. That sounds fairly boring to me if the only thing that makes makes a Warlock different from a ranger is that one has the flavor of magic and the other arrows but they play the same.

You are correct that I should have used the term mechanics and not flavor, I am all for streamlining but if this is the case to the degree of making everyone play the same I dont think I will be thrilled with the new system. I for one am hoping that is not the case, I do not want my wizards to play with the same mechanics as a wizard.

No, they are based off the same mechanics, in 3.x wizard has the same power mechanics as a Cleric, but they do not play the same, a SwordSage does not play the same as a Crusader, a Psion does not play the same as a Psychic Warrior.

The Warlock is different from the Wizard because they're are set up to be played in a different way. I have to say, I think the Warlock and the Ranger look to play the most similar than I've seen out of all of the base classes (both being ranged strikers in), but I've still seen following differences.

1)Different skill lists, Rangers seem to get more skills.
2)Warlocks get specific bonuses from killing enemies.
3)Rangers have more abilities that can be used in melee.
4)Warlocks get some controller like abilities.

No doubt there are more.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

So what you are saying is each class does play the same and it is just the flavor that makes them stand apart. That sounds fairly boring to me if the only thing that makes makes a Warlock different from a ranger is that one has the flavor of magic and the other arrows but they play the same.

You are correct that I should have used the term mechanics and not flavor, I am all for streamlining but if this is the case to the degree of making everyone play the same I dont think I will be thrilled with the new system. I for one am hoping that is not the case, I do not want my wizards to play with the same mechanics as a wizard.

It's that the mechanics aren't quite AS different as before.

Now, each class will have at will powers. However, (one of) the fighter's at will powers is the ability to cleave through enemies in melee. While the Warlock's at will is the ability to blast them win arcane energy.

Now, do they play the same? Depends on how you look at it. Both players are rolling d20s to hit then rolling for damage. However, one is firing at range after cursing the enemy for more damage. The other is doing damage to two different creatures in melee.

If you are concerned that the fighter isn't looking up the rules for basic melee attacks in the PHB while the warlock is looking up the "how to apply shapes to your eldrich blast" section from his class....then yes, they don't have different mechanics.

Still, I don't think we need a different system for every class in order to make them "feel" different. The role playing description of what you do along with the type of tactics that your powers encourage will differentiate the classes enough.

 

[baberg]

So what you are saying is each class does play the same and it is just the flavor that makes them stand apart. That sounds fairly boring to me if the only thing that makes makes a Warlock different from a ranger is that one has the flavor of magic and the other arrows but they play the same.

Looking at the only source we have for class abilities (DDXP character sheets) we see that the Ranger's abilities have large +bonuses to hit. They will likely stand at the back of the group and repeatedly plink away at the creatures in front of them, dealing steady damage. There are no "extra" effects on Ranger abilities, so he rolls his damage once and is done, on to the next foe.

The Warlock gets very small +bonuses to hit and the damage is slightly lower, but the Warlock gets all kinds of fun "toys" to mess around with after the damage is done. She can go invisible to that creature, move it around the room, give it the Slow effect, and set it on fire.

I don't see how these two can possibly play alike, unless the player using them is uncreative and simply spams Eldrich Blast every round.

 

[UltimaRatio]

I look forward greatly to playing a Warlock - for the first time I will be playing a character of alignment Chaotic with flavor and mechanics that support what I have in mind.

...Who has read Lords and Ladies?

 

[Iron Sky]

In a playtest we did, the player playing the warlock actually thought it was the most distinct class. Strikers all seem to be based on getting their damage in without taking too much themselves, but each does it in a different way.

The ENW rogue uses acrobatics to slip behind enemies and, doing double the striker bonus damage(2d6 base for sneak attack vs 1d6 base for curse and 1d6 base - upped to 1d8 with a feat on the pregens as far as we can tell) to drop the enemies before they can turn on him/her.

The DDXP ranger uses his range to stay out of the fight, with a bit of help from his teleport and shift-and-fire at-will power.

The DDXP warlock uses small on-kill teleports to reposition as well as eyebite and 3-step concealment to evade attackers' attention.

In the second playtest I ran with my group, the warlock targetted minions(or whatever the weakest opponent seemed to be) for easy kills, then used the teleports to get behind the fighter or up on ledges/walls where the enemies had a hard time getting to him. If a foe singled him out, he'd eyebite him(rendering the Warlock invisible to that foe) and simply move to a better position.

 

[DeusExMachina]

In the second playtest I ran with my group, the warlock targeted minions(or whatever the weakest opponent seemed to be) for easy kills, then used the teleports to get behind the fighter or up on ledges/walls where the enemies had a hard time getting to him. If a foe singled him out, he'd eyebite him(rendering the Warlock invisible to that foe) and simply move to a better position.

And that is just the brilliant stuff that makes me really like this version of the Warlock. Even just at level 1 he has these kind of tactical choices... Absolutely good stuff and way more interesting than the 3.5 version imo...

 

[jaer]

Just to note, the Tiefling Warlock on the Gnome and Teilfing interview says she has (and then she uses) an ability that allows her to hit multiple targets with her blast (similar Chain Blast from 3.5).

I would imagine that, if odd levels are attack powers and even levels are utilities, we'll see those blast-altering powers as well as those random spell-like effects mixed in with damaging powers.

I can't imagine that they would take away the "change damage to cold and have it add a slowing effect" eldritch blast modifier now that other cold damage has a slowing effect rider. Same with the acid damage doing damage over rounds until there was a save. These just fit so well with the new system, it would be odd to not see them.