How exactly are casters flying all day, when Fly is 1min/level? I agree wrt See Invisibility; Wizards can cover this pretty easily, especially once they can get Permanency.
Ken
Overland Flight, and blowing all your 4th lvl spell slots, apparently. Or a 5th lvl one, if you have the metamagic. Or a use from a metamagic rod.
All of which is pretty silly, IMO. But, just like the Warlock blowing one of his precious 12 invocations on it, the Wiz is free to do so if they think it will help.
Pretty silly? Being able to fly all day is amazing and something every wizard should do.
Also, thanks for all the help so far, but I think we're getting a wee bit off topic.
Had a player run one for a relatively extended campaign and it was fine.
Flying is amazing ... right up to the point where the dragon swoops on you.
Seriously though, back on subject the warlock isn't broken - somewhat different, his damage is light but steady, he has few abilities but he can use them a lot, he's not a great team player. He's OK as a 5th wheel in a party but you couldn't replace a full caster with him.
As a blaster, I prefer a wilder myself.
|
First to start, I admit to being a Power Gamer. I love the warlock but just straight warlock without prestige classes and especially limited to just the Complete Arcane invocations and pre-epic is not overpowered in my book. Seeing invisibility and Detect Magic all the time is great but not overpowered, see Permanency. (Some of my favorite things to do with a wizard was make permanent Arcane Sight and See Invisibility.) Flying all the time can be powerful at lower levels but they are still able to be pincushioned by archer mooks. Mid to High level DMs should be already used to Sorcerer's or Wizards having Overland Flight going and thus all day flight is almost the norm. Invisibility looses its appeal at mid to high levels when you are facing off against things like Dragons, Outsiders, or classed villians with quaffed potions of See Invisibility. When I played one I was a multiclass Sorcerer/Warlock/(Complete Mage Prestige Class that combined Warlock and Sorcerer and I can't remember the name of it right now...) and it wasn't until I reached epic level that my DM declared my character annoying and broken. 1 Epic level feat was all it took for that. (Wizards site had epic level Warlock feats and at 21st level I had the prerequisites to take the Elemental Master-type feat. It allowed me to cast Summon Monster I - IX at will (Air, Earth, Fire or Water subtype only), Dominate Monster at will (Air, Earth, Fire or Water subtype only)gave me resistance to Acid, Cold, Electricity, Fire and Sonic like 10 or 20 I think, and all creatures of the Air, Earth, Fire or Water subtype treated me friendlier (2 categories higher on the diplomacy chart. So instead of Hostile they would only be Indifferent to me.)) I wouldn't adjust anything from the base Warlock for a Pathfinder game myself. Especially if the player is having fun playing it as is. If you are really worried about the crafting abilities of the class just calculate the spellcraft DC higher for not having the spells per the rules in the Pathfinder Core book.
Um, casters are pretty much flying all day, too, if they're worth their salt. And seeing invisibility is pretty much what wizards do. And detect magic whenever they want? Yeah, wizards got that.
Warlocks can do a few things wizards can do, just not as well.
Warlocks are in permanent Invi/Fly as soon as level 6, when the druid can fly a few hours per day and wizards only a few minutes. At which level must other spellcasters wait to do such things ??
I'm on par with Guy Humual : Warlocks are really a selfish class, they bring little to the group, but are rarely threatened by monsters or other challenges and still want their share of loot and XPs.
Um, casters are pretty much flying all day, too, if they're worth their salt. And seeing invisibility is pretty much what wizards do. And detect magic whenever they want? Yeah, wizards got that.
Warlocks can do a few things wizards can do, just not as well.
Warlocks are in permanent Invi/Fly as soon as level 6, when the druid can fly a few hours per day and wizards only a few minutes. At which level must other spellcasters wait to do such things ??
I'm on par with Guy Humual : Warlocks are really a selfish class, they bring little to the group, but are rarely threatened by monsters or other challenges and still want their share of loot and XPs.
Wizards can fly all day at 9th level if they invest in a metamagic rod of extend (one of the first things I'd buy as a wizard). Also, at 6th level a druid can fly 12 hours of the day with 2 wild shapes each lasting 6 hours. Remember that the adventuring day is not 24 hours. With rest and breaks you really only need to fill in 12-16 hours for something to be effectively all day long.
The warlock brings damage. That's it.
Oh, so wrong. Anyone playing a straight Warlock as a damage-dealer is going to suck. Warlocks (baseline, remember; there's tricks you can do to improve it, like Hellfire Warlock + Paragon, etc) suck at damage dealing.
What they're great at is battlefield control. They aren't a prototype 4E Striker, they're a prototype 4E controller. Wall of force at will. Black tentacles at will. Multitarget blindness at will. Multitarget nausea at will. Wall of fire at will. Etc.
Play a Warlock as a controller and you'll see the real power of the class. No other class is as good at denying enemies terrain or actions, and in that respect they're extremely party-friendly.
Warlocks are in permanent Invi/Fly as soon as level 6, when the druid can fly a few hours per day and wizards only a few minutes. At which level must other spellcasters wait to do such things ??
Let me answer this with another question: for how long do you need to fly in a day? The concept is that although the warlock may be able to fly whenever he needs to, the wizard (for example) can do the same because you rarely need to fly for more than a few minutes in the average adventuring day.
I'm on par with Guy Humual : Warlocks are really a selfish class, they bring little to the group, but are rarely threatened by monsters or other challenges and still want their share of loot and XPs.
Warlocks can contribute too, by harassing the enemy. If you had an archer in the party, they would contribute in the same way - stay at range, pepper the foe. It's what any ranged-attack based character should be doing. I've been in a couple of games with warlocks in them, and they haven't contributed less than other characters.
Quick note about overland flight: it has average mobility in 3.5
In Pathfinder we use the fly skill but in 3.5 overland flight was not equal to flight (which had a good rating)
What's the difference? With overland flight you needed to keep moving. A warlock could fly with good maneuverability which meant he could hover. Someone using overland flight would need to land to cast a full round spell like summon monster.
Overland flight was also slower but that's neither here nor there as the warlock flew at the same speed he walked.
Fair enough, but in PF it's all just done with fly checks, which Overland Flight gives you a bonus to and is a class skill for Wizards. By the time you get the spell, assuming you had invested at least 2-3 points in it and had a decent (14+)dex means automaking your check.
And as for the 24 hour fly and whatnot, the balance is they are far more limited then normal casters. Sure they are always flying or spiderclimbing but they arent throwing down black tentacles too or bestowing benefits on other characters.
Having both played a Warlock in a 3.5 game and had one in one of the 3.5 games I GM'd, I have to respectfully disagree with this. In each case, the Warlock took Scribe Scroll at 12th level, and even before that had been acquiring as many scrolls and wands as possible while focusing on getting Use Magic Device to the highest possible modifier, via Magical Aptitude, Skill Focus, a Circlet of Persuasion, etc.
Prior to 12th level, both Warlocks made extensive use of Invisibility to provide buffs, backup healing, summoning (to provide flanking), the conjuration of Black Tentacles, and other scroll- or wand-based effects. Once they hit 12th level... Well, assuming maximum ranks (15 in 3.5, remember) in UMD plus Magical Aptitude plus Skill Focus, that's a +20 modifier before the Charisma modifier and any other applicable magical stuff.
The Warlock I played started (luckily) with 18 Charisma, bumped it at every opportunity and had managed to obtain a Cloak of Charisma +2 by 12th level, giving him a 23 Cha for a +6 modifier. On top of that, he did also have a Circlet of Persuasion, so his total *bonus* to UMD was +29 (the two feats give un-typed bonuses, so the stacking is legit). Since the character could take 10 using UMD (via the 4th level Warlock ability which failed both in the original printing and in the Errata to specify conditional situations or purposes for the Warlock to take 10, implying that the ability, regardless of the fluff that preceded it, applied to all UMD checks including those for crafting) for a 39 result, that allowed him to trivially replicate 9th level spells onto scrolls (DC to replicate arcane spells was/is 15 + spell level, or max 24; DC for divine spells 25 + spell level, or max 34.)
The DM ruled that the caster level of the scroll was capped my Warlock level (which makes perfect sense, since allowing the character to craft scrolls at a caster level in excess of his own level seems crazy), but did not feel right (as I did not feel right when I was subsequently DMing with a Warlock in the party) in adding any special curtailment or additional restrictions to the ability. While my character was required to provide any costly material components associated with the spells he was scribing, in addition to allowing the Wizard in the party ridiculous spell access, since the DC to activate a scroll via UMD is 20 + Caster Level, the DC to activate the scrolls he made was 32 and he could take 10 in combat for 39. (Assuming the character always invested a rank in UMD, he would never be at risk for failure-to-activate, since both figures would advance at the same linear rate.)
I was, of course, restricted by the costs of scribing, but when a 9th level scroll costs 2700 gp base (9*12*25), 1350 gp (half of 2700) is not that hard to come up with. Scrolls of Time Stop, scrolls of Greater Shadow Conjuration, Scrolls of Greater Teleport... None of these took more than three days to craft, but all of them presented access to powers and abilities in excess of what could be expected from a 12th level party. Granted, the Warlock took XP penalties as a result of crafting, but not excessive ones for scrolls: a 9th level spell at 12th caster level represents an XP loss of 108. (Resurrection? Nah, we don't need a temple, just a really good diamantaire and 3 days for me to write up the scroll - what, we have 10,000 gp of diamonds? I'll start writing.)
When I was GMing, I did impose the interpretation that the Warlock needed to be of an appropriate level to be able to replicate spell levels (17th level before creating scrolls of 9th level spells for instance), citing my own experience as justification. That restricted the character to 6th level Wizard/Cleric/Druid spells, 4th level Bard spells, and 3rd level Paladin and Ranger spells. This was less costly to the player while remaining rather extensive, granting access to such spells as Teleport, Disintegrate, Tenser's Transformation (really useful with the invocation that infuses a weapon with the eldritch blast), Undead to Death, Contingency, Antimagic Field, and Shadow Evocation (always a popular scroll for options) from the arcane list, Banishment, Heal, Find the Path (one of the best Divinations around), Wind Walk, Word of Recall (great getaway spell), Disrupting Weapon, Plane Shift, Planar Ally, and Righteous Might from the cleric list, and Summon Nature's Ally (which had Unicorns on the list, which are able to cast healing spells -- great party-heal button) and Liveoak (a great spell in an outdoor setting) from the Druid list.
I will also say that having a Warlock character in the party was frustrating for me as a GM both as a result of the player constantly asking about magical auras and invisible creatures and ceiling height and also because a fair number of my "mook" monsters that were intended to slow the party down would not reasonably have access to see invisibility or other similar magic, which enabled the Warlock to maneuver into a good position and use a scroll of, say, Prismatic Spray to rather deadly effect (after level 13). Another tactic that he enjoyed using was scribing a scroll of Greater Invisibility, casting it on himself, and shattering any ranged weapons he could see. Generally, he'd manage to get most of them, and then would stand off and blast at range while his opponents had no recourse. His ability to blast at will allowed the rest of the party to expend fewer resources to overcome "easy" encounters, which is good tactics, but also allows the rest of the party more potential to be stocked-up enough at a Boss fight to "go nova" and trivialize the encounter.
My point is that beyond 4th level, once a Warlock has the ability to take 10 on UMD at any time, regardless of stress, distraction, etc., the ability of the class to make a GM's life a lot more challenging is limited only by the magical items the character has access to. Past 12th level, once the Warlock can make his own scrolls (especially in Pathfinder where there is no XP cost), the only limitations to his ability to be a major nuisance is how much downtime the GM allows, and how much money the PC has, unless the GM wants to fiddle with the rules.
In terms of innate power, I agree that the class is somewhat weak compared to the Pathfinder core classes, but in terms of potential power, the ability to craft things like scrolls or wands without access to the prerequisite spells seems to go against the grain of the Pathfinder creation system. Also, the DCs described in the class writeup seem in need of tweaking to ensure an absence of auto-success.
Don't get me wrong, I like the class and I think it has a lot of flavor; the Warlock presented in the Tome of Secrets by Adamant Entertainment is also an intersting read, though I've never played with one. Apologies for my verbose post :P
I've seen 3 warlocks in play over extended campaigns. One was overpowered. One is strictly OK. The other tried to be some kind of Sorcerer/Warlock super blaster but failed at everything and is now best remembered for being raped to death by monkey demons (those bar-lguras in Savage Tide were nasty!)
Here are some thoughts:
- Warlocks seem to get some powers a little early. Always on flight comes to mind, but Druids can get usually on flight around the same level, so it doesn't seem over the top to me.
- Eldritch Blast isn't a big deal. I gave a warlock in my game access to the Hellfire Warlock PrC, which doubles her eldritch blast damage, and she's still not a standout damage dealer. Mages can throw at least as much damage around by mid to high levels.
- Eldritch Glaive might be a bit overpowered. At the very least it certainly rubs some DMs the wrong way. The book it comes from (Dragon Magic) is full of questionable stuff though, so it is easy to "just say no"
- One of the few things more annoying than Black Tentacles is Black Tentacles at will. With all the spells per day Sorcerers get it isn't like the Warlock is the only caster in this boat though. The Warlock's +2d6 damage is probably a good thing since waiting for BT to slowly (very slowly) squeeze the monsters to death is not much fun in my experience.
Having both played a Warlock in a 3.5 game and had one in one of the 3.5 games I GM'd, I have to respectfully disagree with this. In each case, the Warlock took Scribe Scroll at 12th level, and even before that had been acquiring as many scrolls and wands as possible while focusing on getting Use Magic Device to the highest possible modifier, via Magical Aptitude, Skill Focus, a Circlet of Persuasion, etc.
Prior to 12th level, both Warlocks made extensive use of Invisibility to provide buffs, backup healing, summoning (to provide flanking), the conjuration of Black Tentacles, and other scroll- or wand-based effects. Once they hit 12th level... Well, assuming maximum ranks (15 in 3.5, remember) in UMD plus Magical Aptitude plus Skill Focus, that's a +20 modifier before the Charisma modifier and any other applicable magical stuff.
The Warlock I played started (luckily) with 18 Charisma, bumped it at every opportunity and had managed to obtain a Cloak of Charisma +2 by 12th level, giving him a 23 Cha for a +6 modifier. On top of that, he did also have a Circlet of Persuasion, so his total *bonus* to UMD was +29 (the two feats give un-typed bonuses, so the stacking is legit). Since the character could take 10 using UMD (via the 4th level Warlock ability which failed both in the original printing and in the Errata to specify conditional situations or purposes for the Warlock to take 10, implying that the ability, regardless of the fluff that preceded it, applied to all UMD checks including those for crafting) for a 39 result, that allowed him to trivially replicate 9th level spells onto scrolls (DC to replicate arcane spells was/is 15 + spell level, or max 24; DC for divine spells 25 + spell level, or max 34.)
The DM ruled that the caster level of the scroll was capped my Warlock level (which makes perfect sense, since allowing the character to craft scrolls at a caster level in excess of his own level seems crazy), but did not feel right (as I did not feel right when I was subsequently DMing with a Warlock in the party) in adding any special curtailment or additional restrictions to the ability. While my character was required to provide any costly material components associated with the spells he was scribing, in addition to allowing the Wizard in the party ridiculous spell access, since the DC to activate a scroll via UMD is 20 + Caster Level, the DC to activate the scrolls he made was 32 and he could take 10 in combat for 39. (Assuming the character always invested a rank in UMD, he would never be at risk for failure-to-activate, since both figures would advance at the same linear rate.)
I was, of course, restricted by the costs of scribing, but when a 9th level scroll costs 2700 gp base (9*12*25), 1350 gp (half of 2700) is not that hard to come up with. Scrolls of Time Stop, scrolls of Greater Shadow Conjuration, Scrolls of Greater Teleport... None of these took more than three days to craft, but all of them presented access to powers and abilities in excess of what could be expected from a 12th level party. Granted, the Warlock took XP penalties as a result of crafting, but not excessive ones for scrolls: a 9th level spell at 12th caster level represents an XP loss of 108. (Resurrection? Nah, we don't need a temple, just a really good diamantaire and 3 days for me to write up the scroll - what, we have 10,000 gp of diamonds? I'll start writing.)
When I was GMing, I did impose the interpretation that the Warlock needed to be of an appropriate level to be able to replicate spell levels (17th level before creating scrolls of 9th level spells for instance), citing my own experience as justification. That restricted the character to 6th level Wizard/Cleric/Druid spells, 4th level Bard spells, and 3rd level Paladin and Ranger spells. This was less costly to the player while remaining rather extensive, granting access to such spells as Teleport, Disintegrate, Tenser's Transformation (really useful with the invocation that infuses a weapon with the eldritch blast), Undead to Death, Contingency, Antimagic Field, and Shadow Evocation (always a popular scroll for options) from the arcane list, Banishment, Heal, Find the Path (one of the best Divinations around), Wind Walk, Word of Recall (great getaway spell), Disrupting Weapon, Plane Shift, Planar Ally, and Righteous Might from the cleric list, and Summon Nature's Ally (which had Unicorns on the list, which are able to cast healing spells -- great party-heal button) and Liveoak (a great spell in an outdoor setting) from the Druid list.
I admit no one who played a warlock in my group tried any of this nonsense. And I do consider it that. I wouldnt have allowed the warlock to craft scrolls or wands of spells they didnt know. And at least in pathfinder umd only lets you emulate a spell or class ability to activate an item, not to create one. So that at least is not an issue in pathfinder.
I will also say that having a Warlock character in the party was frustrating for me as a GM both as a result of the player constantly asking about magical auras and invisible creatures and ceiling height and also because a fair number of my "mook" monsters that were intended to slow the party down would not reasonably have access to see invisibility or other similar magic, which enabled the Warlock to maneuver into a good position and use a scroll of, say, Prismatic Spray to rather deadly effect (after level 13). Another tactic that he enjoyed using was scribing a scroll of Greater Invisibility, casting it on himself, and shattering any ranged weapons he could see. Generally, he'd manage to get most of them, and then would stand off and blast at range while his opponents had no recourse. His ability to blast at will allowed the rest of the party to expend fewer resources to overcome "easy" encounters, which is good tactics, but also allows the rest of the party more potential to be stocked-up enough at a Boss fight to "go nova" and trivialize the encounter.
Part of this is the crafting nonsense, but yes a warlock can be extremely mobile. But I think this is part of tailoring encounters to your players abilities. If you know your player is going to use invisibility alot, or especially greater invisibility its time to start using means to deal with it. Potions of see invis, or creatures/enemies with blindfighting or blindsense. Big bads adapt to their enemy, and scry is a wonderful thing. There is no reason the big bad cant start equiping his mooks with useful things even if there isnt a caster in the fight.
My point is that beyond 4th level, once a Warlock has the ability to take 10 on UMD at any time, regardless of stress, distraction, etc., the ability of the class to make a GM's life a lot more challenging is limited only by the magical items the character has access to. Past 12th level, once the Warlock can make his own scrolls (especially in Pathfinder where there is no XP cost), the only limitations to his ability to be a major nuisance is how much downtime the GM allows, and how much money the PC has, unless the GM wants to fiddle with the rules.
again in pathfinder you have to expend the spell to craft a scroll, so he is only crafting scrolls of the invocations he knows. Even that is questionable since the spell has to be expended when you craft it. Since a warlock cant expend spells, its questionable whether he can craft scrolls at all. In fact i really dont think umd in 3.5 allowed you to scribe scrolls you didnt know the spells for either. But certainly in pathfinder this isnt possible. I really think this whole problem stems from an incorrect interpretation of the UMD rules. Maybe I am wrong, but i dont think he actually should have been able to do this.
In terms of innate power, I agree that the class is somewhat weak compared to the Pathfinder core classes, but in terms of potential power, the ability to craft things like scrolls or wands without access to the prerequisite spells seems to go against the grain of the Pathfinder creation system. Also, the DCs described in the class writeup seem in need of tweaking to ensure an absence of auto-success.
Don't get me wrong, I like the class and I think it has a lot of flavor; the Warlock presented in the Tome of Secrets by Adamant Entertainment is also an intersting read, though I've never played with one. Apologies for my verbose post :P
I think the warlock class in and off itself is fine, just like all the things in 3.5 that are broken, its when you combine and stretch rules that there is an actual problem. A quick check of the 3.5 srd doesnt show me anything that says umd should have been able to allow him to craft these scrolls in the first place.
As at has been previously mentioned, there isn't much that the Warlock can do that other classes cannot do either, but IMO, the Warlock can do them earlier and more easily.
Both as a player and as a DM, I prefer when the PCs need each other in order to survive/fulfill their mission. The Warlock appears like he doesn't rely on other party members as much and could do it all by himself he wanted to.
Granted, high level wizards, cleric and druids have the same issue (that's why they make so beautiful villains, they can be cocky like that), but it seems like the Warlock can do that from mid-levels on.
'findel
good stuffBasically, this is what I was too lasy to say last page. This is as close as it comes to broken for the Warlock, and that is limited by downtime and ready cash, both things the DM can control. However, it certainly IS possible for a Warlock taking this route to start destroying encounters.
I just remembered an aspect of the Pathfinder crafting rules that makes a crafting Warlock (especially one crafting scrolls) a good deal harder to control, effectively restricting the Warlock only by cash (or available crafting components, but this requires more work, more on this later):
"The creator also needs a fairly quiet, comfortable, and well-lit place in which to work. Any place suitable for preparing spells is suitable for making items. Creating an item requires 8 hours of work per 1,000 gp in the item's base price (or fraction thereof), with a minimum of at least 8 hours. Potions and scrolls are an exception to this rule; they can take as little as 2 hours to create (if their base price is 250 gp or less). Scrolls and potions whose base price is more than 250 gp, but less than 1,000 gp, take 8 hours to create, just like any other magic item. The character must spend the gold at the beginning of the construction process. Regardless of the time needed for construction, a caster can create no more than one magic item per day. This process can be accelerated to 4 hours of work per 1,000 gp in the item's base price (or fraction thereof) by increasing the DC to create the item by +5.
The caster can work for up to 8 hours each day. He cannot rush the process by working longer each day, but the days need not be consecutive, and the caster can use the rest of his time as he sees fit. If the caster is out adventuring, he can devote 4 hours each day to item creation, although he nets only 2 hours' worth of work. This time is not spent in one continuous period, but rather during lunch, morning preparation, and during watches at night. If time is dedicated to creation, it must be spent in uninterrupted 4-hour blocks. This work is generally done in a controlled environment, where distractions are at a minimum, such as a laboratory or shrine. Work that is performed in a distracting or dangerous environment nets only half the amount of progress (just as with the adventuring caster)."
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/magic-items#TOC-Magic-Item-Creati on
Admittedly, it makes the process of producing the scrolls a longer one by a factor of 4 (since usually it takes 8 hours (1 day) per 1000 gp, whereas the adventuring creator nets 2 hours per day and will therefore take 4 days to net 8 hours of production), but it removes the necessity for downtime. In theory, at the cost of a +5 bump to the DC, the Warlock could attempt to accelerate the process of creation (as detailed at the end of the first paragraph) while traveling. I can see the justice in the application of this combination, but at the same time I can also see GMs ruling against it since the combination is not directly supported in the text.
Regardless, it allows the Warlock to create items on the go, which drastically mitigates the control over downtime available to the GM.
A creative GM might insist that, rather than the abstraction of representing the crafting reagents in terms of gp value that exists in the core rules, specific crafting components were necessary for different intended items (Cockatrice blood for ink for a Scroll of Flesh to Stone, but Unicorn's tears for ink for a Scroll of Greater Restoration, for example). This solves the solution of the Warlock (or anyone for that matter) grabbing several thousand gp worth of "crafting materials" in town and being able to make anything on the road, but it also introduces the problematic potential for intrepid and thrifty adventurers to acquire the various specific components themselves as opposed to paying for them.
A tricky situation, all in all.
~Doskious
And I do consider it that. I wouldnt have allowed the warlock to craft scrolls or wands of spells they didnt know. And at least in pathfinder umd only lets you emulate a spell or class ability to activate an item, not to create one. So that at least is not an issue in pathfinder.
The class ability at 12th level grants this ability explicitly to the Warlock particularly, it's not a standard UMD feature, and is a potential issue in a direct import of the Warlock class for use in Pathfinder. It exists because the Warlock knows no spells at all, and therefore in 3.5 cannot create any magical items without the ability to emulate the spells somehow.
Imbue Item (Su): A warlock of 12th level or higher can use his supernatural power to create magic items, even if he does not know the spells required to make an item (although he must know the appropriate item creation feat). He can substitute a Use Magic Device check (DC 15 + spell level for arcane spells or 25 + spell level for divine spells) in place of a required spell he doesn’t know or can’t cast.
If the check succeeds, the warlock can create the item as if he had cast the required spell. If it fails, he cannot complete the item. He does not expend the XP or gp costs for making the item; his progress is simply arrested. He cannot retry this Use Magic Device check for that spell until he gains a new level.
If a GM wanted to alter the class ability to restrict the Warlock from crafting items whose requirements for spells cannot be bypassed in Pathfinder, that would address the issue, but it would also be a substantial change to the class. Admittedly that is the subject of the thread, but it seemed to me that your statement seemed to speak to the unmodified abilities of the class and what you would allow them to do, as opposed to a remark suggesting a significant alteration to an existing class feature.
And I do consider it that. I wouldnt have allowed the warlock to craft scrolls or wands of spells they didnt know. And at least in pathfinder umd only lets you emulate a spell or class ability to activate an item, not to create one. So that at least is not an issue in pathfinder.The class ability at 12th level grants this ability explicitly to the Warlock particularly, it's not a standard UMD feature, and is a potential issue in a direct import of the Warlock class for use in Pathfinder. It exists because the Warlock knows no spells at all, and therefore in 3.5 cannot create any magical items without the ability to emulate the spells somehow.
If a GM wanted to alter the class ability to restrict the Warlock from crafting items whose requirements for spells cannot be bypassed in Pathfinder, that would address the issue, but it would also be a substantial change to the class. Admittedly that is the subject of the thread, but it seemed to me that your statement seemed to speak to the unmodified abilities of the class and what you would allow them to do, as opposed to a remark suggesting a significant alteration to an existing class feature.Imbue Item (Su): A warlock of 12th level or higher can use his supernatural power to create magic items, even if he does not know the spells required to make an item (although he must know the appropriate item creation feat). He can substitute a Use Magic Device check (DC 15 + spell level for arcane spells or 25 + spell level for divine spells) in place of a required spell he doesn’t know or can’t cast.
If the check succeeds, the warlock can create the item as if he had cast the required spell. If it fails, he cannot complete the item. He does not expend the XP or gp costs for making the item; his progress is simply arrested. He cannot retry this Use Magic Device check for that spell until he gains a new level.
Thats exactly what i was looking for. I guess it just never came up in my group (we never did alot of crafting to begin with in 3.5 games and we rarely went over level 14). And I had just forgotten about it. I would probably change that as part of converting it to pathfinder.
Thats exactly what i was looking for. I guess it just never came up in my group (we never did alot of crafting to begin with in 3.5 games and we rarely went over level 14). And I had just forgotten about it. I would probably change that as part of converting it to pathfinder.
Would you restrict crafting, as I suggested, to items that can have their spell prerequisites bypassed? If so, the Warlock is surpassed by 7th level Experts with Master Craftsman, which seems like a significant blow to the ability.
Allowing Warlocks to be able to Craft items with Warlock level as Caster Level at a lower level is a solution to this problem, but also expands the void in ability that the Warlock experiences at 12th level and beyond, in my opinion.
I was, of course, restricted by the costs of scribingAnd if you didn't have this class ability you would have had to pay full cost rather than half price for these scrolls.
If its going to be an issue, it's just a matter of frequency. A warlock can do it twice as often.
I'm sorry but that doesn't go from 'normal' to 'broken' for me.
I wasn't attempting to argue in favor of the "broken" aspects of the ability, the closest thing to "broken" is the 4th level ability they get to take 10 on UMD whenever they want, and even that has utility limited by wealth as James observed. I was observing a feature that gives the class some of its high-level utility in a manner that is often frustrating to GMs. (In truth, most high-level abilities frustrate GMs in one way or another, that's one of the fun aspects of high-level play, no?) I'm not advocating for a fix, I think the class is balanced-to-underpowered for play in Pathfinder, but I'm also interested in keeping an open mind in the interests of fully exploring the question at hand.
Thats exactly what i was looking for. I guess it just never came up in my group (we never did alot of crafting to begin with in 3.5 games and we rarely went over level 14). And I had just forgotten about it. I would probably change that as part of converting it to pathfinder.Would you restrict crafting, as I suggested, to items that can have their spell prerequisites bypassed? If so, the Warlock is surpassed by 7th level Experts with Master Craftsman, which seems like a significant blow to the ability.
Allowing Warlocks to be able to Craft items with Warlock level as Caster Level at a lower level is a solution to this problem, but also expands the void in ability that the Warlock experiences at 12th level and beyond, in my opinion.
I think if someone in my group wanted to play a warlock i would have to give this ability as well as alot of its dead levels a long hard look. I am not certain how i would deal with it, but i definately think it should get some attention. And to be honest its work i wouldnt do unless someone actually wanted to play a warlock in my group.
Fair enough, but in PF it's all just done with fly checks, which Overland Flight gives you a bonus to and is a class skill for Wizards. By the time you get the spell, assuming you had invested at least 2-3 points in it and had a decent (14+)dex means automaking your check.Quick note about overland flight: it has average mobility in 3.5
In Pathfinder we use the fly skill but in 3.5 overland flight was not equal to flight (which had a good rating)
What's the difference? With overland flight you needed to keep moving. A warlock could fly with good maneuverability which meant he could hover. Someone using overland flight would need to land to cast a full round spell like summon monster.
Overland flight was also slower but that's neither here nor there as the warlock flew at the same speed he walked.
In case you didn't know, you can't invest any points in it until you can do it, some way or another.
You cannot take this skill without a natural means of flight or a reliable means of flying every day (either through a spell or other magical manner, such as a druid’s wild shape ability).
Depending on how strict your DM views going up levels, you might not be able to put any skill points into Fly until the level after you acquire the spell.
Theoretically, it's not like you shoot your magic missile at the ogre and as it falls dead, you hear a little "Ding!" in your head and you instantly gain HP, BAB, Saves, Skills, etc. Theoretically, your increase in these things represents all the training and learning and hard work you put into gaining ALL your XP up to this point. So, theoretically, if we're talking about reaching 5th level so you can learn the Fly spell, all of your training up to this point has not included flying.
So DMs who prefer this model of character advancement won't allow you to put any of your skill points from 1st to 5th level into Fly. And, he might even make you cast the spell frequently (no ranks) during 5th level if you want to be able to use your 6th level skill points on the skill.
Fair enough, but in PF it's all just done with fly checks, which Overland Flight gives you a bonus to and is a class skill for Wizards. By the time you get the spell, assuming you had invested at least 2-3 points in it and had a decent (14+)dex means automaking your check.Quick note about overland flight: it has average mobility in 3.5
In Pathfinder we use the fly skill but in 3.5 overland flight was not equal to flight (which had a good rating)
What's the difference? With overland flight you needed to keep moving. A warlock could fly with good maneuverability which meant he could hover. Someone using overland flight would need to land to cast a full round spell like summon monster.
Overland flight was also slower but that's neither here nor there as the warlock flew at the same speed he walked.
In case you didn't know, you can't invest any points in it until you can do it, some way or another.
You cannot take this skill without a natural means of flight or a reliable means of flying every day (either through a spell or other magical manner, such as a druid’s wild shape ability).Depending on how strict your DM views going up levels, you might not be able to put any skill points into Fly until the level after you acquire the spell.
Theoretically, it's not like you shoot your magic missile at the ogre and as it falls dead, you hear a little "Ding!" in your head and you instantly gain HP, BAB, Saves, Skills, etc. Theoretically, your increase in these things represents all the training and learning and hard work you put into gaining ALL your XP up to this point. So, theoretically, if we're talking about reaching 5th level so you can learn the Fly spell, all of your training up to this point has not included flying.
So DMs who prefer this model of character advancement won't allow you to put any of your skill points from 1st to 5th level into Fly. And, he might even make you...
Notice that I was talking about overland flight. By the time you get that (9th level) you will have already had Fly at your disposal (5th level). Furthermore Druids can absolutely realistically have the opportunity to fly on a daily basis.
So, what have we learned?
Let's summarize:
1. Warlocks suck
2. Lots of players have played warlocks multiple times, even though they suck
3. Warlocks are good soloists, even though they suck
4. Warlocks are selfish
5. Warlocks frustrate DMs by trivializing most/many encounters, even though they suck
6. Warlocks deal weak damage but can fix that with the right class abilities
7. Warlocks deal unlimited damage, even though they suck
8. Warlocks are flying, mobile, invisible all the time, even though they suck
9. Warlocks are very hard to kill, even though they suck
10. Warlocks are great battlefield-control specialists, even though they suck
11. Warlocks break the item creation rules, even though they suck
12. Warlocks are like archers
Did I miss anything?
I think that covers why I banned em Blake, they are not overpowered but they are a broken mess of a class as has already been talked about in great detail.
Meatrace I think this tread has given you enough info to spot the problem area's and hopefully your game will go well.
So, what have we learned?
Let's summarize:
1. Warlocks suck
2. Lots of players have played warlocks multiple times, even though they suck
3. Warlocks are good soloists, even though they suck
4. Warlocks are selfish
5. Warlocks frustrate DMs by trivializing most/many encounters, even though they suck
6. Warlocks deal weak damage but can fix that with the right class abilities
7. Warlocks deal unlimited damage, even though they suck
8. Warlocks are flying, mobile, invisible all the time, even though they suck
9. Warlocks are very hard to kill, even though they suck
10. Warlocks are great battlefield-control specialists, even though they suck
11. Warlocks break the item creation rules, even though they suck
12. Warlocks are like archersDid I miss anything?
Basically they 'suck' because they dont really do any single thing better then any other class. Wizards are better with magic, archers do better damage at range, they arent particulary versatile, good with skills, they cant take hits. So unless the player is creative they are subpar. When the player DOES get creative is where it becomes a problem. The class does things in a way other classes dont. Prewritten material or generic encounters wont be prepared for it. Many dms dont take that into account, and realize there are ways to deal with them, but instead call them all broken.
I think if you found a way to manage that crafting ability alot of the problems with the class would be marginalized. But dms have a knee jerk reaction, and get this impression of the class being 'broken' much the same way things go in many groups for psionics, or tome of battle.
Meh. Suck? No. Warlocks are pretty reasonable, but certainly not broken.
The EB is just another style of doing ranged damage. Bow users with a couple feats and composite bows end up doing the same per-round damage. Sure, it's a touch attack, but unless you take Precise Shot there's a good chance you're looking at -8 to your attacks due to cover presented by friendlies. It's reasonably balanced. And reliable.
An at-will do-something-useful is hugely attractive to players.
The flying and invisibility is pretty much a non-issue. Why? Because even if you have four encounters per day, you're looking at an average of sixteen rounds per day. So yes, a sorcerer can keep up. Yes they'd blow most of their slots to pull it off, but the sorcerer has the advantage that they've got plenty more to do option-wise.
What I've found with Warlocks is that they're a very good "dip" class. They give you an always available attack, and potentially a huge bump to some useful skills, such as social skills (great for a rogue or bard) or movement skills (also a huge benefit for a rogue or maybe a fighter).
As a full fledged class, they're not terrible, but they take some work. A dash of binder and levels of Hellfire Warlock, and they'll be doing a fair bit of damage and are also really nice at social stuff (ah, taking 10 on Diplomacy checks without a penalty for rushing... Nothing says "friendly Balor" like a decent range Warlock with Naberius bound to him). They're still pretty one-trick ponies, but they're not terribly bad with supplemental material.
For Pathfinder, I decided that they needed a little something, but nothing at the early levels. What I've given the class for my games is an extra Blast Shape or Eldritch Essence Invocation whenever they get access to a new "tier" of Invocations. It gives them some extra stuff to do with their Eldritch Blasts, and I tend to see Warlocks pick up other Invocations more than blast shapes and essences at the earliest. It's not much, but it's a little bit more fun. Also, obviously the d8 hit die increase to match their BAB.
Let me see if I can add one thing to this conversation.
Generally, controversies in DND stem from one class either being super-dominant, or super-bad.
But problems happen when a class is designed which is EITHER super-awesome or super-bad, depending on how the GM designs the fight.
A class which either auto-wins fights or auto-loses them is imbalanced, even if, on average, it does as well as a class which unconvincingly wins fights all th time.
The warlock sucks when it's fighting enemies that can deal with invis, flight, etc. Then it just does poor damage, consistently. Cue the "Warlock Sucks!" crowd.
The warlock dominates when it's fighting enemies that can't see invis or hit flying targets. Then, it's untouchable. Cue the "Warlock is overpowered!" crowd.
When, in the end, the Warlock is just badly designed. Not overpowered, not weak...just badly designed.
-Cross
This seems to be basically it. Some things it has are very weak, some are very strong, but not much fits right.
Everyone talks about the flying, invisible warlock, but that doesn't even come into action until about 8th level - at 6th, only one of those tricks is available, and they don't have either before then. So for the first 5 levels, they're alright as reliable hitting archers with a couple of toys, but they're not the be-all and end-all. After 8th level, they may be flying and invisible all the time, but it's not impossible to deal with it at that level either. *shrug* They're useful, sure, but they're not even doing what everyone's talking about them doing for almost half their career.
So, what have we learned?
Let's summarize:
1. Warlocks suck
2. Lots of players have played warlocks multiple times, even though they suck
3. Warlocks are good soloists, even though they suck
4. Warlocks are selfish
5. Warlocks frustrate DMs by trivializing most/many encounters, even though they suck
6. Warlocks deal weak damage but can fix that with the right class abilities
7. Warlocks deal unlimited damage, even though they suck
8. Warlocks are flying, mobile, invisible all the time, even though they suck
9. Warlocks are very hard to kill, even though they suck
10. Warlocks are great battlefield-control specialists, even though they suck
11. Warlocks break the item creation rules, even though they suck
12. Warlocks are like archersDid I miss anything?
I don't think I or anyone else here said "they sucked", I think they're poorly designed, selfish, and contrary to typical D&D play. The question was "are they overpowered" and I think the census is that they are not. I assume that you enjoy the class, that's fine, but please don't put words in people's mouths. I think some might be annoyed with your somewhat flippant reply.
Now if the question were would you allow warlocks in your game my answer would be "not as written".
You're right, nobody said "they suck". Someone did say they suck at damage-dealing. And a few people referenced them being weak compared to other classes, which I took to mean "they suck" even though that wasn't explicitly stated.
You're wrong, I don't enjoy the warlock. I have never played one nor seen it played through several different gaming groups since that class was released in 3.5. Nor do I dislike the warlock. I really have little to say about the worlock, hence my decision to recap the thread without imparting any additional wisdom.
You're right, my reply might have seemed somewhat flippant, but not because of any feelings about the class. I did find it comical that after 60 or 70 replies, nearly everyone had different takes on the class. A few were worried that it was too strong. Some said it was weak. Others argued that they have at will abilities that are problems for DMs, while others argued that those abilities are not problems at all. Etc.
My seemingly flippant recap was my way of showing that this thread was all over the place. Everyone seemed to have an opinion, and very few of those opinions were in sync with anyone else's opinion. Which I found funny, and IMO deservant of a goofy recap that I thought was satirical, but you thought was flippant.
Each to their own.
And if you're right that my intended satire annoyed anyone, which other than you, remains to be seen, well, I can deal with it. I have thick skin. Really, really thick armored skin. I think I'll be OK.
(by the way, that was sarcastic wit, not flippancy, in case the tone doesn't convey well)
Warlocks don't suck. They aren't broken.
They're just sorta mediocre.
They get a small number of abilities that other classes can do. They can use their toys unlimited times a day, kinda well, while the other classes either can use them also unlimited times a day but better (damage dealers) or fewer times a day, but so much better the limitations don't matter (spellcasting).
I mean, if you want to be a warlock, that's fine. You aren't going to shake the foundations of the world. But you'll still look better then the schmuck with the greatsword.
Then again, people around here DID like that 3.5 schmuck fighter, despite it flat out being one of the most hilariously terrible classes there was, so there's that. I suppose in that comparison warlocks - and the rest of the universe - seems overpowered.
The dispel-magic-all-the-time invocation is really annoying as a DM. The warlock can essentially take 20 on a dispel magic check for any out-of-combat encounters. So there goes any chance of useful barriers.
Also they get fly-at-will at very low levels compared to everyone else.
The damage is reasonably OK unless they go into various prestige/min-max combinations. (Maximize Spell-like Ability, in particular).
They're not bad, but they can be very annoying. I don't really like use-all-day abilities as it means the DM can't run the players out of something.
|
I do not like the idea, fluff or mechanics of the warlock.
It feels to me like yet another subsystem contrary to the spirit of the main rules. Much like the binders and the two other thingies in the same book. I don't know about the balance : I don't like the idea in the first place.
Doing my best to erase them from my mind.
I do not like the idea, fluff or mechanics of the warlock.
It feels to me like yet another subsystem contrary to the spirit of the main rules. Much like the binders and the two other thingies in the same book. I don't know about the balance : I don't like the idea in the first place.
Doing my best to erase them from my mind.
The Warlock, Binder, Shadowcaster, and Truenamer, as well as the Incarnate, the Soulborn, and the Totemist from Magic of Incarnum, are all examples of interesting character concepts that are not easily describable via the standard Vancian Casting progressions and/or mundane skill progressions exhibited by most of the core classes. I, for one, prefer not to espouse a standpoint of exclusion about what classes/abilities are suitable for my fantasy game, and I feel that the "spirit" of the game is one of possibilities that welcomes diversity, alternate perspectives, and the expansion of options.
None of that, however, is germane to the question of the balance of the class in a Pathfinder ruleset.
For Pathfinder, I decided that they needed a little something, but nothing at the early levels. What I've given the class for my games is an extra Blast Shape or Eldritch Essence Invocation whenever they get access to a new "tier" of Invocations. It gives them some extra stuff to do with their Eldritch Blasts, and I tend to see Warlocks pick up other Invocations more than blast shapes and essences at the earliest. It's not much, but it's a little bit more fun. Also, obviously the d8 hit die increase to match their BAB.
This strikes me as exactly the right kind of alteration to the class to provide a smidgen more versatility, and I will implement this change for any Pathfinder Warlocks I GM for. One other thing that I was thinking about adding to the class for a little bit more flavor was removing Detect Magic as a concrete feature and instead allowing access to a small selection of cantrips from the Sorc/Wiz list.
Another suggestion that addresses the point of unlimited Invocation use (Fly, Shatter, etc.) is to assign each invocation a limited number of uses per day (something based on Warlock level and/or Charisma modifier) while at the same time slightly increasing the number of available Invocations the Warlock has access to on a daily basis. The trouble with this is that it begins to stray perilously close to the Sorcerer class concept.
Another potential fix to "spamable" abilities is to add a cooldown function, much like a dragon's Breath Weapon, during which (perhaps) the Warlock could try to use the invocation again, but would have to take a full-round action to do so. The cooldown period could be based on the level of the invocation, with lower level invocations taking less time to "cool" than higher level ones.
The crafting everything isn't a problem imo. Afterall, they can became the team magic item maker and if you look at the prequencies, the caster level still applies I believe so when they gain the ability at 12th he can't craft something as powerful as, say Well of Many Worlds or Orb of Storms something like that.
What the guy in your group doesn't realise is that the warlock needs the feats which in 3.5 means he would use feats for item creation and yet have no room for feats to help himself, however Pathfinder make feats more often yet still, the warlock cannot create items without the feats, not to mention he doesn't have access to spells that a wizard or other spellcaster does to craft certain items unless he wanted to make something out of a warlock item, say a coaker of Beguiling Influence, giving the wearer a +6 to Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate.
I'm going to see if I can make a conversion of the warlock as it seems quite a few people like it, however since it isn't a OGL class I would have to rename just about everything. Lot of work there.
When I played one I was a multiclass Sorcerer/Warlock/(Complete Mage Prestige Class that combined Warlock and Sorcerer and I can't remember the name of it right now...) and it wasn't until I reached epic level that my DM declared my character annoying and broken.
I'm DMing an Eldritch Theurge at the moment, and it certainly doesn't seem broken so far. I'd say it's only just catching up with the single-classed characters at around 11th level.
|
|
Warlocks are fine in general. One of the other PC's in a game I am playing in is a warlock. Sure he can fly, use spiderclimb, is invisible and can blast from range but that's all he does and it's easy enough to shutdown if the DM wishes (and at times he has. Oh look this creature has spell resistance, immune to acid, blindsense and can fly. Have fun!).
The warlock is strong at what it does, it is a decent single big hit class but usually needs another arcane caster to pick up all the area effect stuff.
The crafting everything isn't a problem imo. Afterall, they can became the team magic item maker and if you look at the prequencies, the caster level still applies I believe so when they gain the ability at 12th he can't craft something as powerful as, say Well of Many Worlds or Orb of Storms something like that.
What the guy in your group doesn't realise is that the warlock needs the feats which in 3.5 means he would use feats for item creation and yet have no room for feats to help himself, however Pathfinder make feats more often yet still, the warlock cannot create items without the feats, not to mention he doesn't have access to spells that a wizard or other spellcaster does to craft certain items unless he wanted to make something out of a warlock item, say a coaker of Beguiling Influence, giving the wearer a +6 to Bluff, Diplomacy and Intimidate.
I'm going to see if I can make a conversion of the warlock as it seems quite a few people like it, however since it isn't a OGL class I would have to rename just about everything. Lot of work there.
Just as an FYI, the Warlock class as presented in Complete Arcane under the 3.5 rules does, in fact, have the ability to craft items without spell access - the class ability he gets at 12th level specifically allows for this with a Use Magic Device check to replicate each spell necessary to the crafting of the item. This ability, among other things, allowed Warlocks to make scrolls for their wizard buddies to scribe into spellbooks. The class ability clearly indicates that the Warlock can use this feature in conjunction with any item creation feat. There are no caveats other than the requirement to pass a UMD check to emulate the spells.
The warlock is strong at what it does, it is a decent single big hit class but usually needs another arcane caster to pick up all the area effect stuff.
If the warlock crafts scrolls, much of the utility of the other arcane caster you call for can be picked up by the warlock himself in the form of scrolls and wands.
This ability, among other things, allowed Warlocks to make scrolls for their wizard buddies to scribe into spellbooks.
Actually, that's not true. Any scroll created by a Warlock was neither arcane nor divine in origin and could not be used by anyone for the purpose of learning a spell. Every such scroll would also need a UMD check to use, regardless of whether the spell was on the user's class spell list.
This ability, among other things, allowed Warlocks to make scrolls for their wizard buddies to scribe into spellbooks.Actually, that's not true. Any scroll created by a Warlock was neither arcane nor divine in origin and could not be used by anyone for the purpose of learning a spell. Every such scroll would also need a UMD check to use, regardless of whether the spell was on the user's class spell list.
This makes either the second or third time you've reminded me of that errata. Sorry, Zurai!