Your thoughts on warlocks

[Scion]

As such it seems only natural to me that invocations should be weaker than the spellcasting ability of an equal-caster-level wizard, particularly since they can be used at will, and for the most part, this is the case. Yet here is one which is quite significantly stronger, and is available with only one level.

With such an incredibly limited selection I dont feel that it is out of place. After all, if he chooses that one as his one and only ability then he has nothing else to use.

The wizard is more about versitility over everything else, whereas the warlock is completely about narrowness.

But then, I also dislike the short duration of many spells, so take that as you will

 

[apesamongus]

As such it seems only natural to me that invocations should be weaker than the spellcasting ability of an equal-caster-level wizard, particularly since they can be used at will, and for the most part, this is the case. Yet here is one which is quite significantly stronger, and is available with only one level.

I think it is very telling that without going back and reading your past posts, I don't know which invocation you are talking about.

 

[Bauglir]

I think it is very telling that without going back and reading your past posts, I don't know which invocation you are talking about.

That either means you think it's nicely balanced, or it's horrifically powerful, and all the invocations are overpowered

 

[ARandomGod]

I have never seen a warlock in play, but given what I read on these boards, those who have are quite sure it is balanced enough.

I've seen it in play a few times, and I think it's overpowered in the way I meantioned above. A way which, interestingly enough, seems to have been overlooked... or at least not commented on one way or the other here!

Now if you ignore or take away that one issue I think the balance of the warlock is fine. And as long as players never use that option (which it seems odd noone does or noone has meantioned, it was really over the top), there's no issue that I can see/think of.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Right but in order to consistently get sneak attack the rogue needs to use a move action to make the opponent lose his dex. So he's usually limited to one ranged attack from 30'.
The rogue is pretty invested in throwing and it kind of sucks to have some other class outshines you when you've worked hard to be able to consistently do ranged sneak attack damage.

Well that's just a silly dedication to sneak attack. He'd be equally trumped by a fighter archer who's making three times as many attacks at a better BAB, more range, and cheaper.

Rogue throwers, and there's one IMC, need to use *tactics*. Throwing is a way to do damage while staying out of immediate danger, preferrably while using that range to maneuver into a flanking position once the fighter has captured someone's attention. The rogue can make ranged attacks while approaching followed by full-attacks getting several sneak attacks. If the ranged attacks skip off without making a dent, he can refocus and find someone he can hurt, letting him get away with a lower AC.

The invisible/flying warlock may be *safer* than the fighter archer but he'll generally be doing less damage, especially since flight comes about the time elemental energy bows are affordable. And the archer can get items that replicate most of the other invocations.

 

[Thanee]

I've seen it in play a few times, and I think it's overpowered in the way I meantioned above. A way which, interestingly enough, seems to have been overlooked... or at least not commented on one way or the other here!

Do you mean the essences?

I think pretty much everyone will use those.

Bye
Thanee

 

[kigmatzomat]

I've seen it in play a few times, and I think it's overpowered in the way I meantioned above. A way which, interestingly enough, seems to have been overlooked... or at least not commented on one way or the other here!

If you mean the attack/invis sequence, feh, no biggie. Rings of invisibility aren't impossible to acquire and getting one attack every other round pretty much nerfs the high one-shot damage the warlock has.

 

[Nail]

I've seen it in play a few times, and I think it's overpowered in the way I meantioned above.

Could you spell this out?...connect the dots for us!

 

[Seeten]

Warlocks are so not overpowered. Really. After reading the whole thread, I have no idea what the posters who are saying they are even mean, which invocations they think are so great, or anything. The abilities appear very carefully selected so you only get 12, and at any point, you cant do enough different things to break the game. Once you can, you are high level enough, that so can everyone else.

 

[Endur]

I've seen it in play a few times, and I think it's overpowered in the way I meantioned above. A way which, interestingly enough, seems to have been overlooked... or at least not commented on one way or the other here!

I didn't comment on the Eldritch Blast essences combination because I didn't really see a problem with it. The Damage on the Eldritch Blast is low enough and the Essence powers weak enough that the combination doesn't seem unbalanced to me. Especially since your warlock will have so few invocations that even a high level Warlock is unlikely to have more than two essence invocations and one shape invocation.

Remember that many creatures will be immune to the only Essence power that your Warlock has.

The confusion/fear/etc powers will be useless against Undead, Automatons, etc. Yet the Warlock probably won't have a second essence power for most of his career. You might actually see a Warlock using fire essence against a Red Dragon. etc.

I've been seeing this with Thanee's Warlock, who has the "fear" essence power. Many of Thanee's foes either were immune to fear (undead) or highly resistant (high will save priests).