D&D 5E (2014) Warlocks seem pointless

[77IM]

This thread illustrates my problem with the warlock: fewer spells and slots implies it's the "simplified" caster for newbies (which was its explicit design goal when originally introduced in 3.5) but the quirky mechanics and plethora of class choices makes building an effective warlock very tricky.

For example, eldritch blast with agonizing blast is such a potent combo and defining feature that they should just give it to all warlocks as a class ability. Ditto for hex. Pact of the blade is almost a trap; without better armor proficiency you're basically building a suicide warlock.

Stuff like that is not very noob-friendly. Which sucks because in play it's fantastic for new or casual players: "Blast away, until you see a good spell opportunity. Plus, you have an awesome backstory!"

 

[TrippyHippy]

I think you’ll be surprised just how quickly newbie players gobble up rules and enjoy finding different combinations of abilities. Moreover, isn’t there fun to be had just finding out the nuances of the Class?

I don’t think Eldritch Blast and Hex should be automatic abilities. They work fine within the parameters of Cantrips and Spells respectively, and what if a player doesn’t want them? What if the character was built more as a fey/social manipulator rather than a combatant? Why take away their capacity to build the characters that they want to play - rather than forcing the ‘optimum’ tactical build on them all the time?

 

[MoutonRustique]

How much does it hurt the blade-lock to have to spend invocations to get multiple attacks?

Making the extra attacks come with the pact seems so intuitive for me, I feel I may missing something...

Note: I'm asking those with play experience.

 

[Pauper]

I don't really see the warlock as being a 'newbie' class, but rather having a specific design sensibility -- what if you had a magic-using class with very low or no restrictions on how frequently it could use its abilities? How powerful could those abilities be and still be balanced against the other classes?

As for the guy who seems to think that you can make a hand crossbow into a pact weapon, review the text: "You can choose the form that *this melee weapon* takes each time you create it...You can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon by performing a special ritual...it appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter."

The ability doesn't say you can choose a melee weapon form; it says that the pact weapon is a melee weapon and you can choose its form. This doesn't mean you can bond a ranged weapon as a pact weapon, because the pact weapon is a melee weapon, and the comment on binding a magic weapon doesn't change that. Note, though, that you can bond (or create) a melee weapon with the Thrown quality and use that as a ranged weapon, as long as you are willing to spend your action every other round to get the pact weapon back after you throw it.

 

[jgsugden]

All classes are suitable for newbies in 5E.

Warlocks have excellent role playing potential. They've bound themselves to powerful beings. As they rise in power, the powerful beings take on a greater role in their lives, resulting in lots of opportunities to build stories around these PCs.

The mechanics are pretty vanilla - but so are all of the classes, really. A lot of the people feeling that Warlocks are vanilla are feeling the change from 4E to 5E more than they are feeling that Warlocks are more Vanilla than other classes.

 

[Pauper]

There's only one invocation that grants extra attacks (Thirsting Blade), and when you qualify for it, you've just gained an extra invocation 'slot', so it feels pretty natural to take it.

I haven't gotten to high levels with my 'lock yet, but I suspect that I'll feel less 'fighter with spells' and more 'fighter-ish with magical tricks' once the actual fighter gets to make three attacks with one Attack action. (Though it should be noted that only the fighter ever gets to make more than two attacks with one Attack action via Extra Attack-like cheese, so in comparison to a barbarian or ranger, you should be fine.)

 

[Pickles JG]

Examples?

Proficiency in all 3 CHA skills plus disguise self at will plus Comprehend Languages/Tongues = spy

Super Dark vision plus invisibility in shadows = sneak (devils sight plus one with shadows) (or use your invisible familiar)

All the Eldritch Blast boosting invocations plus Hex plus Spell Sniper feat = very solid long ranged (600') at will damage with a bit of control.

Armour of Agathys plus blade ward = "pain" tanking.

Warlocks are a lot like ranged rangers - they will spam at will attacks for solid damage. They have a short rest refresh cycle for their other abilities while rangers have daily spells. Plus of course the flavour is hugely different.
I do think the ranger is slightly more potent due to Sharpshooter > Spell Sniper and the accuracy of archery being better than the bigger damage dice of Eldritch blast (or the same if you have the Xbow feat). Plus his 3rd level hunter ability is a damage boost.

I think the warlock is more varied out of combat though and can hit with big damage spells if he is inclined that way. A bit if your DM likes short rests.

 

[Zaruthustran]

I agree with the sentiment that Warlock is a terrific class for new players. It's simple on the face of it (Eldritch Blast is a perfectly effective default tactic), while the Pact, Patron, Invocation, and Spell choices are both limited (only a very few number of decisions) but significant (meaning its hard to make a poor choice). Yes the class really shines when you combo effectively, but as another person said, finding those combos is fun and rewarding--and with so few choices, the combos pretty much reveal themselves.

It encourages the player to really dive into the PHB. The *whole* PHB: race, class, equipment, melee, spells, actions. It's the perfect gateway class for new players generally, and might inspire a few to become optimizers.

 

[AmerginLiath]

This thread illustrates my problem with the warlock: fewer spells and slots implies it's the "simplified" caster for newbies (which was its explicit design goal when originally introduced in 3.5) but the quirky mechanics and plethora of class choices makes building an effective warlock very tricky.

For example, eldritch blast with agonizing blast is such a potent combo and defining feature that they should just give it to all warlocks as a class ability. Ditto for hex. Pact of the blade is almost a trap; without better armor proficiency you're basically building a suicide warlock.

Stuff like that is not very noob-friendly. Which sucks because in play it's fantastic for new or casual players: "Blast away, until you see a good spell opportunity. Plus, you have an awesome backstory!"

It was never about "new" players, it was always about those players who preferred different sorts of resource management. The problem with magic-users from Day One in D&D has been that they've always required a large amount of paperwork in playing. Spontaneous casting with a shorter spell list in 3.x helped somewhat, but the Warlock as introduced in Complete Arcane was fascinating in being a new take entirely on the D&D magic ethos. It was clearly a first draft of sorts (with 4th edition's being a second draft standardized for the AEDU style and 5th edition being a nice synthesis of the two), but it worked as a great breath of fresh air for those of us who were busy with swathes of overtime and family responsibilities, yet were still juggling huge spell lists come game time because we wanted to play spellcasters.

As for the Eldritch Blast issue, I'm glad that it's an option rather than a feature. Frankly, especially for a spellcaster, not everyone wants to be a blaster/striker. I'm reminded of that beautiful moment during the playtest when a single version of the documents had Sneak Attack as an option for the Rogue (that could be chosen or substituted for other things). For a brief shining moment, my mind flooded with images of rogues that I could play – until the next iteration hardwired Sneak Attack as the core of the class again and I gave up on ever playing a rogue. Some of us don't want to be main-combat characters unless we're playing fighter-types. I once took pride in a 3.5 bard whose utility as a buffer was such that it took him 14 levels to even draw a weapon (and then only to flank/aid another). Eldritch Blast is fine if you NEED to be doing damage, but that's taking away from actually-interesting abilities and any actions you spend doing damage is opportunity cost in time & action lost from doing actions of things that are actually cool...

 

[Joe Liker]

Hex is certainly not a spell every warlock should expect to have on all the time. There are enough extremely powerful concentration spells on the warlock list that it can be a perfectly reasonable choice to forgo a bit of damage when control is what's needed.