Your thoughts on warlocks

[Thanee]

Multiclassing is often an issue, because 1-level-dibs in many cases grant more than they should.

The warlock is, of course, a prime example here with the huge durations, which do not depend on caster level.

Just disallow multiclassing, when it's clear, that the class is not taken for conceptual reasons, but rather for ability-accumulation.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Li Shenron]

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.

OTOH I feel no interest at all in playing one, it just seems too limited to me. If I want a caster-type, I think I would not want someone less flexible than a Sorcerer (in fact, I have no interest either for the Warmage or the Battle Sorcerer). Otherwise if I only wanted to blast foes every round from afar, I'd probably play an archer-type.

The second thing that bothers me a little is that a warlock has absolutely no difference in concept with the sorcerer ("people with inborn magical ability"). The difference is how the concept is "implemented". Then why so many players say it's "cool" while the sorcerer "sucks", if not because it's more powerful?

 

[apesamongus]

The difference is how the concept is "implemented". Then why so many players say it's "cool" while the sorcerer "sucks", if not because it's more powerful?

"At will" is a very cool thing. A wizard or sorcerer can level castles. A warlock dimension doors to the bathroom during commercials while vegging out watching shows on his crystal ball. The warlock is the only class introduced so far for whom magic use would be casual and ordinary. Even a high level sorcerer has a small question of whether to "waste" a magic missle on some minor foe. The warlock has no such question. A similar thing is true for the 24 hour duration powers. You aren't just someone who can turn invisible, you're basically "invisible guy". Plus, they're all goth, which a lot of people like.

 

[Thanee]

The difference is how the concept is "implemented". Then why so many players say it's "cool" while the sorcerer "sucks", if not because it's more powerful?

I like both.

Most people like it better, because of the built-in flavor, it seems.

The warlock is probably more powerful at low levels, but the sorcerer is more powerful at mid to high levels.

With item creation, the warlock can also have some nice flexibility without the help from others later on.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Plus, they're all goth, which a lot of people like.

My warlock isn't goth at all.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Li Shenron]

"At will" is a very cool thing. A wizard or sorcerer can level castles. A warlock dimension doors to the bathroom during commercials while vegging out watching shows on his crystal ball. The warlock is the only class introduced so far for whom magic use would be casual and ordinary. Even a high level sorcerer has a small question of whether to "waste" a magic missle on some minor foe. The warlock has no such question. A similar thing is true for the 24 hour duration powers. You aren't just someone who can turn invisible, you're basically "invisible guy". Plus, they're all goth, which a lot of people like.

Ok, then it's a matter of my own taste. "At will" is less cool for me, as is "24 hours", it's more boring... Now I won't say that it isn't useful, and I have played wizards with Persistent Spell (when it used to be !_strong_!) and applied it to 2-3 protections at a time. But it wasn't cool, it was powerful and easy.

 

[JamesDJarvis]

I myself don't have much of an issue with the Edritch blasts but some of the incantations cast over and over again are going to be a bit much . The incantations that cover an area are going to be real annoying when many a combat area ends up full of black tentacles for example. There is nothing keeping the warlock from filling every battlefield with such area effects. It isn't like having a wand becasue a wand is a two stage limited resource (the two limits being obtaining the wand and explelling charges from the wand) after 50th use of a wand there is goign to be no more use of that wand, after the 50th use of an incantation there is the 51st use of the incantation.

I might employ a slight limiting factor to reign this stuff in a little without blunting the class too much; Maybe a concentration check when any incantaion of duration is ongoing to use another such incantation, Maybe 1 point of Non-lethal damage as fatigue, sure that isn't much after the first couple of levels but it still reigns it in a bit. I wouldn't do both.

 

[JamesDJarvis]

I do think the Warlock might be a good choice for unorganized players who want to take a stab at playing a magic-user because there isn't very much to keep track of. I've known plenty of players who can't seem to recall or keep track of more then five or six spells and fall back on them again and again, so the Warlock with limited choices but still plenty of sizzle might do the trick in this regard to a very useful degree.

 

[Scion]

Well for a caster I certainly wouldn't waste my time, but for a fighter the tradeoff is only 2 hp, 1 BAB and half a feat. Even less for a rogue.

For a fighter it delays iterative attack progression and it delays gaining fighter only feats, but then multiclassing with a fighter is a given. He'll likely want to pick up a couple levels of ranger and a couple levels of rogue and a couple levels of barb and a couple levels of warlock. All to enhance and round out the character. I dont see warlock being a big bad edition to that pile of multiclassing

Also, the rogue gives up sneak attack progression and a pile of skill points. It is still a viable option, but it isnt like they arent giving up anything. All it gives them is an effective ray of frost at will (double damage but not cold type) when they could have something similar by just grabbing a wand and 1 ability that could last for 24 hours (or modify their blast). I dont think see invis or darkvision are exactly obscene, the first is limited and the second many characters have, also refer to my other post about darkvision..lol.. Personally, if I was going to dip as a rogue, I would go for beguiling influence or entropic warding. Of course, I'd probably be better off picking up a level of Marshal instead.

Still though, missing out on 6 skill points, half of a sneak attack die, and about a BAB point, along with delaying the higher level cool special abilities.. Definately not getting this stuff for free!

And the wizard is supposed to be the more focussed spellcaster!

More focused than a guy who gets 12 invocations over his 20 levels? the wizard has more spell choices than that at level 1. Now who is more focused?


I havent had any issues with the class yet except that it seems a little weak in some ways and always very narrow. I had players pick up see the unseen at level 1 and they definately felt like they should have picked something else. One player didnt have darkvision while the rest of the party did = either leaving that guy behind or carrying torches. Their see invis hasnt come in handy more than once yet at level 6, although it could have by now depending on the game. But, at level 1 if you are walking around with no BAB, one good save, 2 skill points, a d6 blast, d6 hd, and you spent your class ability to see in the dark you start feeling pretty weak next to the guy with 1 BAB, 6 skill points, d8 hd, two good saves, bonus feats, and more random combat ability. Such is the life of a caster though I guess

 

[Bauglir]

More focused than a guy who gets 12 invocations over his 20 levels? the wizard has more spell choices than that at level 1. Now who is more focused?

I meant it slightly differently - the wizard has the smallest hit dice, and the slowest BAB progression. With the exception of a small amount of bonus feats, the wizard IS his spellcasting. Even the familiar is derived from a spell.

The warlock on the other hand has a larger base hit die, average BAB, and some quite potent special abilities such as DR, or elemental resistance. The character concept is less dependant on the invocations than the wizard on spells.

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.

It just seems wrong