Your thoughts on warlocks

[Ravenknight]

Hi all..!

Starting a new FR campaign from lvl 1 this weekend and one of the players want to use the warlock coreclass from Complete Arcane. I´ve only read through the class briefly and I´m not sure if it´s overpowered or not.
Anyone had any experience You wish to share?

 

[Arbiter of Wyrms]

EDIT: Welcome to the boards, RavenKnight!
The class is wonderful.

There was a fair amount of discussion around here when Complete Arcan was first published as to whether or not warlocks were overpowered, but I think you'll find that while getting at-will spell-like abilities is cool, none of the ones available to the warlock are really broken. There are very real limits to a warlock's power, and I don't think I'm entirely alone when I say that I think that the class is reasonably well balanced.

That said, I would be very reticent to let the player suggest new invocations or to make them up myself. Stick to those in the book.

Also, the biggest limit to letting a player run a warlock may be the alignment restrictions. If you still use alignment in your game, be aware that warlocks are supposed to be disruptive and wicked and that may end up causing some consternation.

Let your player run run a warlock but warn him or her that you won't hesitate to kill off the PC if it gets out of hand.

 

[FireLance]

I mostly agree with what Arbiter of Wyrms has said, apart from the following:

Also, the biggest limit to letting a player run a warlock may be the alignment restrictions. If you still use alignment in your game, be aware that warlocks are supposed to be disruptive and wicked and that may end up causing some consternation.

Warlocks can be chaotic good, and a chaotic good warlock should not cause more problems than any other chaotic good character.

A word of caution to you as a DM: if you're the kind that will add up the maximum amount of damage that a character can potentially do in a room packed full of people and turn pale at the thought that a warlock can keep it up all day (as was the case in a recent Whirlwind Attack thread), do yourself a favor and don't allow one in your campaign.

If you do decide to allow warlocks, pay attention to the invocations the warlock selects. Some can be used in very inventive ways to bypass traditionally tough encounters. Baleful Utterance, for example, can practically nullify some opponents by destroying their weapons or armor.

 

[farscapesg1]

Well, I don't see the class as being overpowered. In fact, I'm kinda dissappointed that they can only use their eldritch blast once per round. Yes, I realize that the damage increases, but IMO it limits them pretty severely.

However, I will say that I am contemplating a rogue/warlock for my next character. My biggest issue is trying to find a prestige class that will give me at least some "+1 spellcaster level" advancement and also increase the sneak attack damage. Arcane trickster is the perfect fit, but the warlock can't qualify for it because of the "Mage Hand" and "one arcane spell of 3rd level or higher" requirements.

Personally, I don't feel that they balanced out the warlock with the idea of entering prestige classes. In reality, they loose so much by entering a prestige class (fiendish resilience, Energy resistance, and damage reduction) I'm thinking that you probably wouldn't want to enter a prestige class. IMO, this makes them pretty balanced, unlike many other classes (cleric, wizard, sorcerer, etc.).

 

[Felon]

Starting a new FR campaign from lvl 1 this weekend and one of the players want to use the warlock coreclass from Complete Arcane. I´ve only read through the class briefly and I´m not sure if it´s overpowered or not.
Anyone had any experience You wish to share?

Yes, it's a great idea--but with lousy execution! You'll hear lots of raves for this class as the hands-down successor to the sorcerer. But realize that many people swoon for a superficially cool concept and don't bother to scratch farther beneath the surface.

If you've ever played collectable card games, you may be familiar with the term "degenerate deck". If not, a degenerate deck is a deck built around a single strategy to the exclusion of all others. The actual deck may consist of 100 cards, but most of them will likely be dozens of duplicates of the same card. Players who build these inbred monstrosities think they're nigh-unstoppable, but that's arguable since they trade off strength for flexibility. Degenerate decks are widely detested and discouraged not because they're too powerful, but because they make a game less fun due to their repetitiveness--inflexiblity isn't just a weakness, it's a boring weakness.

A warlock is the D&D equivalent of a walking degenerate deck. It has such a limited pool of abilities to call upon, but it call upon them at will. If a player gets access to a new level of invocation, and he picks one that can easily be abused, the player almost can't help but abuse it. After all, it's his best trick.

Here are a few of the most egregious examples of abusive invocations. If you allow these invocations, remember they're potentially always in use. Consider what you're letting yourself in for:

See the Unseen--See invisible creatures. Available at 1st level.

Charm--Use charm monster at will, with the restriction that only one creature can be charmed at a time. Available at 6th level. Note that wizards can't even cast charm monster until 7th level (and a sorcerer 8th), so this one's really over-the-top. Think not just about combat abuses, but abuses in dealing with NPC's, performing negotiations, going shopping in town, etc.

Fell Flight--Can fly at your land speed. Available at 6th. Not as bad as some of these others, but it can certainly spoil a lot of challenges a DM might set before PC's of that level.

Chilling Tentacles--Create Evard's black tentacles that deal 2d6 cold damage in addition to their normal effects. Available at 11th level. Now, EBT is a broken spell in its own right, and a wiz or sorc casting it just once a day can piss most DM"s off (seriously, if you don't know what it does, loook it up). I can't imagine a DM being content to allow every battlefield of every session to transform into a quagmire of tentacles. Some designers really deserve to have their peepee smacked for this one.

Now not all invocations are this bad, but that just creates a proclivity towards picking one of the bad ones. And don't fall into the trap of thinking iit's just the "powergamers" or "munchkins" you have to worry about--most people try to make the most of their available options. That's just natural.

Good locks make for good neighbors. Vigilant DM's make for honest players.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I have a warlock in my Scarred Lands game. At 4th-level, he's moderately effective, if a little one-dimensional. Unlike what the early doom-sayers were predicting, the eldritch blast ability is perfectly well balanced ... the warlock in my game has a decent Dex and WF with his blast, and still misses pretty much as often as probability says he should. (Every time he rolls a 4 or whatever and misses, he makes a snide remark about the "EN World people whose warlocks only roll 20s.")

 

[Krelios]

Yes, it's a great idea--but with lousy execution! You'll hear lots of raves for this class as the hands-down successor to the sorcerer. But realize that many people swoon for a superficially cool concept and don't bother to scratch farther beneath the surface.

If you've ever played collectable card games, you may be familiar with the term "degenerate deck". If not, a degenerate deck is a deck built around a single strategy to the exclusion of all others. The actual deck may consist of 100 cards, but most of them will likely be dozens of duplicates of the same card. Players who build these inbred monstrosities think they're nigh-unstoppable, but that's arguable since they trade off strength for flexibility. Degenerate decks are widely detested and discouraged not because they're too powerful, but because they make a game less fun due to their repetitiveness--inflexiblity isn't just a weakness, it's a boring weakness.

A warlock is the D&D equivalent of a walking degenerate deck. It has such a limited pool of abilities to call upon, but it call upon them at will. If a player gets access to a new level of invocation, and he picks one that can easily be abused, the player almost can't help but abuse it. After all, it's his best trick.

Here are a few of the most egregious examples of abusive invocations. If you allow these invocations, remember they're potentially always in use. Consider what you're letting yourself in for:

See the Unseen--See invisible creatures. Available at 1st level.

Charm--Use charm monster at will, with the restriction that only one creature can be charmed at a time. Available at 6th level. Note that wizards can't even cast charm monster until 7th level (and a sorcerer 8th), so this one's really over-the-top. Think not just about combat abuses, but abuses in dealing with NPC's, performing negotiations, going shopping in town, etc.

Fell Flight--Can fly at your land speed. Available at 6th. Not as bad as some of these others, but it can certainly spoil a lot of challenges a DM might set before PC's of that level.

Chilling Tentacles--Create Evard's black tentacles that deal 2d6 cold damage in addition to their normal effects. Available at 11th level. Now, EBT is a broken spell in its own right, and a wiz or sorc casting it just once a day can piss most DM"s off (seriously, if you don't know what it does, loook it up). I can't imagine a DM being content to allow every battlefield of every session to transform into a quagmire of tentacles. Some designers really deserve to have their peepee smacked for this one.

Now not all invocations are this bad, but that just creates a proclivity towards picking one of the bad ones. And don't fall into the trap of thinking iit's just the "powergamers" or "munchkins" you have to worry about--most people try to make the most of their available options. That's just natural.

Good locks make for good neighbors. Vigilant DM's make for honest players.

I'll agree with you about the "Degenerate Decks" in collectible card games, but I don't see a problem with any of the invocations you mentioned unless the DM is totally unprepared/inexperienced. That sounds like a fun and flavorful class that uses non-traditional solutions to the typical problems adventurers encounter--what's the issue?

 

[Felon]

I'll agree with you about the "Degenerate Decks" in collectible card games, but I don't see a problem with any of the invocations you mentioned unless the DM is totally unprepared/inexperienced. That sounds like a fun and flavorful class that uses non-traditional solutions to the typical problems adventurers encounter--what's the issue?

The issue is that since the abilities are usable at will, a DM is not going to be prepared for every instance where the warlock is going to use (or abuse) the ability regardless of his experience. An experienced DM is not someone who lets players do everything that sounds fun and flavorful and simply assumes that he'll just whip a solution for every situation on a case-by-case basis. Rather, it's someone who knows you close the barn doors before the cows get out.

I also have to question the notion that abilities which for the most part just mimic wizard spells can be considered non-traditional solutions.

 

[Ravenknight]

Hi All..

The main problem for me isn´t how I will scale the adventure but if the other characters will feel threatened and deminished by the Warlock´s power. I took a second look on the class today and as Felon wrote - there are some Invocations that could spoil the fun but that are concerns I have whenever someone plays a high lvl caster anyway.


Oh..

EDIT: Welcome to the boards, RavenKnight!
Thanks...

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Weclome to the boards as well.

You'll hear lots of raves for this class as the hands-down successor to the sorcerer.

I say that's the war mage.

See the Unseen--See invisible creatures. Available at 1st level.

Not such a big problem I'd say: At first level, they aren't that many invisible creatures about, anyway. At level 3, a wizard or sorcerer could get see invisible, which means they can ignore invisibility once or even several times. I dare to claim that usually, this is all you need. So this invocation will only be a real advantage over the core classes when most encounters contain invisible enemies. If they are rare, you will actually have something that is near useless, and unlike your wizard companion, you cannot switch that one out.

Think not just about combat abuses, but abuses in dealing with NPC's, performing negotiations, going shopping in town, etc.

No big difference between the charm monster effect and a normal charm person, since most NPC's are humanoid.

And again, a sorcerer could easily pack charm person and charm monster and be able to charm most or even all important NPC's.

Having it at will will only mean that you will use it too often, on trivial things, and risk someone making their save and calling down the Hells upon you.

Fell Flight--Can fly at your land speed. Available at 6th. Not as bad as some of these others, but it can certainly spoil a lot of challenges a DM might set before PC's of that level.

Once again, the difference between that and being able to cast fly as the spell is not that great unless you want to keep challenging them with jump, climb and balance checks all day.


So it really only seems to be a problem if they have to use something over and over again. A DM that varies the challenges the players have to face will find that the at will part will be little better than a sorcerers high number of spell slots.