Not really. High Touch ACs, miss chances, and the natural 1 are still threats.
LOL. It's a ranged touch attack. Yeah, for all intents and purposes it really is "auto".
I will cede to the natural 1 in this case. The others, not so much. I have encountered them far, far more often in PF than I have in 3.x.
Sometimes i wonder if we all play the same game. I dont know, i havent seen that many warlocks back in 3.5. And i am glad there is none at Pathfinder, i really dislike the fluff of the class. It looks like something that came out of a bad japanese manga.
The warlocks that i have seen wore the most overpowered characters i have ever played with (agaisnt to be more specific). I use to play with a DM who love them, every adventure we would fight a bunch of them. The boss of his campaign pretty much tpk us alone at lvl 6 and he was (occording to the dm) just warlock class. I guess it depends who is the player behind the toon.
Hmm... As I said, I threw some warlocks at my players. I was stoked because at first glance this looked like a good villain type that could hit hard quick with something spell-like that didn't take a lot of memorization. But in practice they just did not hold up. They got trounced.
I am no slouch at all at optimizing. I try to limit it, but the simple fact is that I have been GMing so long I almost can't help it on the rare instances I get to be a player. Around the same time I was throwing warlocks at my players, I was dominating another game as a PC with a fighter/warmage, even though I was trying hard to nerf myself so as not to take over.
I'm having a hard time believing a DM could have kicked too much butt with warlock NPCs without some relaxed (or misinterpreted) rules. They looked fast and furious. They turned out to have glass jaws. They seemed utilitarian, but it was all redundant.
Seriously, the best use for them was as axe-fodder artillery for a better bad guy. That was my experience, anyway.
|
Anyone else getting tired of threads like these. Posters start them and once they get proven wrong or the majority of the posts do not support their viewpoint run off as fast as they can. what do they expect to agree with them fully all the time. I'm all fo debate yet imo threads like this just pollute the forum.
There are certain levels that the warlock can be a bit of a challenge as they do get some things a bit sooner than other spell casters do, but I am playing in a game with one now, and, honestly, he really isn't that bad. I could see how in a prewritten module or AP them being a bit overwhelming, but it really isn't that hard to deal with most of their abilities. Sure, they can be mobile and detect things easily and be able to hold their own for a while, but their abilities are going to be limited as much by the capabilities of the other party members as it is by anything the DM comes up with for environment or opponents. Most levels, the other spell casters are going to be more a challenge, since they can potentially do everything the warlock does and more. People get so panicked at the whole "at-will" thing, and I must say I don't understand why. The powers they get are certainly useful, especially for long periods of time, but most of the things their powers bypass tend to be problematic for a DM to enforce beyond level 5 even without the warlock. Levels 3-4 are really the only levels that they can truly outshine the rest of the party.
Seriously, the best use for them was as axe-fodder artillery for a better bad guy. That was my experience, anyway.
I am inclined to agree based on what I have seen. As the main bad guy in a combat, they are not going to do all that well, as their tricks are going to be limited and worked around after the first couple rounds, but they can make nasty support characters capable of wearing their opponents down so that others can finish the job, especially if there is more than one.
|
Anyone else getting tired of threads like these. Posters start them and once they get proven wrong or the majority of the posts do not support their viewpoint run off as fast as they can. what do they expect to agree with them fully all the time. I'm all fo debate yet imo threads like this just pollute the forum.
I hear you. I'm trying to follow Evil Lincoln's advice.
If you're not willing to have your opinion changed, do not post.
Simple, and to the point.
Anyone else getting tired of threads like these. Posters start them and once they get proven wrong or the majority of the posts do not support their viewpoint run off as fast as they can. what do they expect to agree with them fully all the time. I'm all fo debate yet imo threads like this just pollute the forum.
Then I'd suggest coming up with ways to make the warlock better, from builds to homebrew changes. For my groups game that I DM, I allow the warlock a feat that boosts his EB to d8's and at least 1 more invocation per-day specifically for blast shames. Other changes or ideas?
|
|
As I said I have nothing against soneone posting a topic or thread. It makes the forums interesting. too often though a poster comes on makes a blanket ststement that imo 90% of the time is wrong and its like "ANYONE ELSE WITH ME?....cue the rolling tumbleweed and crickets chirping off in the distance... "uh anyone?" and then get verbally smacked off the side of the head and leave.
Then I'd suggest coming up with ways to make the warlock better, from builds to homebrew changes. For my groups game that I DM, I allow the warlock a feat that boosts his EB to d8's and at least 1 more invocation per-day specifically for blast shames. Other changes or ideas?
It's not so much not wanting to improve the Warlock so much as having enough classes. I like classes but I'm just no longer willing for the mooemnt to convert over 3.5 ones to Pathfinder.
Meh.
Lasers pew,pew by any other name still makes a power gaming munchkin....even if you call it a Warlock class.
Meh.
Lasers pew,pew by any other name still makes a power gaming munchkin....even if you call it a Warlock class.
What does this even mean
Successful Troll believes the Professor should already know.
|
Archers are little better, really.
You know what else is geared towards munchkins? Monks. They don't even need weapons? AND they can make more melee attacks than anyone else?
Clearly overpowered.
Anyone else getting tired of threads like these. Posters start them and once they get proven wrong or the majority of the posts do not support their viewpoint run off as fast as they can. what do they expect to agree with them fully all the time. I'm all fo debate yet imo threads like this just pollute the forum.
The internet has needed an enema for a long time now. :(
but monks do need 'weapons.'
Either a pair of brass knuckles
or a certain overpiced amulet
unarmed enhancement bonuses are hard to get.
Then I'd suggest coming up with ways to make the warlock better, from builds to homebrew changes. For my groups game that I DM, I allow the warlock a feat that boosts his EB to d8's and at least 1 more invocation per-day specifically for blast shames. Other changes or ideas?Anyone else getting tired of threads like these. Posters start them and once they get proven wrong or the majority of the posts do not support their viewpoint run off as fast as they can. what do they expect to agree with them fully all the time. I'm all fo debate yet imo threads like this just pollute the forum.
Search the homebrew forum, I'm pretty sure SmiloDan has done his own take on the class already, his stuff is usually pretty good.
Archers are little better, really.
You know what else is geared towards munchkins? Monks. They don't even need weapons? AND they can make more melee attacks than anyone else?
Clearly overpowered.
Really? Monks.....? I've tried my hand at a few builds with this class and I'm sorry to say I've found them very lack-luster when it comes to DPR output. In 3.5, they need A LOT of magical aid to be fairly decent combatants including magical amulets Shuriken Nekogami mentioned (which I'm guessing meant Amulet of Mighty Fists). Even if a DM is gracious enough to allow a Necklace of Natural Weapons they still need some benefits outside that threshold IMO. This is where people who go with Vow of Poverty make a big mistake. Sure, that feat provides great beneftis but they're up Sh!t creek without a paddle in situations where magic is essential.
So I guess it depends on what the actual role of the Monk is in the party, as they can be great scouts and with the proper feats, some good isolation-combatants.
What experience do you have that would make you believe Monks are overpowered BTW?
Search the homebrew forum, I'm pretty sure SmiloDan has done his own take on the class already, his stuff is usually pretty good.
Thanks! I think i'll do that :).
The internet has needed an enema for a long time now. :(
And here I thought the monk comment would drive home that the archer comment was purely sarcastic.
*doh* sarcasm is often hard to detect over messageboards, lol.
I hated the warlock class...it was rediculusly overpowered compared to other classes, and it was a game breaker...whenever i allowed a player to play a warlock in my games (three times), he broke my game, in the end i had to ask a player in one to bear with me, and had to outright kill other two, because the players refused to actualy help me tell a good story and not try to break the game. I knew the class really well, so, i didn't just kill them out of ingorance.
I am thankful that Paizo hasn't considered to put the warlock in their rules. It is a bad class, that should have never existed in 3.5 rules.
Hama:
I happen to like the World of Warcraft version of the Warlock. I've got the WoW RPG, More Magic and Mayhem, and Even more Magic and Mayhem, along with the Horde Guide. The World of Warcraft version is much more flavorful than the What-see version. I'd rather use the WoW version over any other version any day.
I realized that I never wrote anything in this thread on how to be effective as a warlock. Basically, you maximize their utility as a mobile scout and secondary combatant.
I tended to get the best results from warlock 8 (5+3)/rogue 2 (1+1)/daggerspell mage 10. Note that because the entrance requirement is "Arcane caster level 5," the warlock can qualify per the Warlocks and Prestige Classes section on page 18 of Complete Arcane. With Entropic Warding (leaves no trail, cannot be tracked by scent) and good Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, the character makes a master infiltrator even when not using Fell Flight and Walk Unseen. The character only loses two invocations and +1d6 from Eldritch Blast, but gains +4d6 Sneak Attack, Evasion, and more skill points. Some of the class abilities (Daggercast and Double Daggercast) don't provide a lot of benefit, but others (Invocation of the Knife, Arcane Infusion, Arcane Throw, and Daggerspell Flurry) are easy to adapt to the warlock: Invocation of the Knife works as is (half the damage from an Eldritch Blast is magic slashing damage instead of energy damage), Arcane Infusion can be free use of the Hideous Blow invocation (instead of +1d6 damage over a number of rounds) with a dagger, Arcane Throw allows use of Hideous Blow with a thrown dagger (and the dagger returns if the attack misses; no "holding the charge," however), Daggerspell Flurry allows a full attack with a Quickened invocation.
They would be flying around using their invisibility to good advantage, and attacking from areas the fighter can't reach easily.
Which would accomplish... what? Equal combat effectiveness to any other standard player class? It doesn't matter where the warlock gets himself off to. His damage isn't ever going to wow anyone. It may not be as laughable as some people make it out to be, but it certainly isn't amazing. Yes, he can last much, much longer than other arcanists (if the warlock even properly belongs in that category), but in my experience as a DM with warlocks over a variety of levels (player and NPC), that advantage of endurance seemed to come to the following points.
First, it could be a life-saver, and a game saver. If the rest of the party is knocked out in some fashion or simply depleted of resources so much that the group is facing a TPK, then the warlock's inexhaustible abilities come in handy. In this case, the players are glad for it, and so are friendly DMs (I like to consider myself one such). However, serving as the party's last ditch effort against total and complete failure hardly means you are regularly a star performer. It's not a flattering roll. "Yeah, if everything else fails or we all botch things massively, I guess you could have an impact then."
Otherwise, that advantage is... irrelevant. Sure, you don't have to run off to rest and refresh after fights and thus help break the party of the 15-minute adventuring day cycle. Except you don't, because everyone else with daily abilities in the party still conforms to that cycle. You're welcome to go on adventuring without them while they rest up, but I don't think anyone will sincerely claim that's a good standard operating procedure. You may make a conservative party last somewhat longer. Good for you. Not amazing.
Alternately, the party does what it does, and you participate, and the combats still last their usual 3-5 rounds, and the party still has their normal rest cycle and encounter cycle, in which case your ability to outlast everyone is, again... irrelevant.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the warlock is a wimp class that should be shunned and run out of the party, rocks whipping past its head as it goes. The warlock contributes. However, not as much as other party members. You can char-op a warlock, of course, but you can char-op any class, and often to much greater effect and with more options. In my experience, the warlock has to use that superior mobility and hard-to-hit-ness just to keep up with everyone else. Which, when done right, they can. But only if the rest aren't powergamers. If you keep in mind the warlock's non-combat roles, then yes, they are even more useful. But they will never make a wizard or sorcerer green with envy. Which is the reaction people are looking for when deeming a class overpowered or not.
EDIT: I missed the last page of this discussion in which everyone has moved past countering perceptions of the warlock as overpowered and moved on into the more productive terrain of actually suggesting how to modify or run them well. In which case, please interpret my post as advocating, along with other already, the warlock's ability to be an effective member of the party if they focus on their mobility, scouting potential, and aforementioned "hard-to-hit-ness." If the player focuses on upping the warlock's AC (which isn't a bad idea, since there's not a lot to buy with all that gold to actually improve their eldritch blast), they can make all-right tanks, to support a more traditional and dedicated tank, or if the party otherwise lacks someone filling that roll. I've seen it done. The can't stand still and take it like a fighter or a paladin (high AC only goes so far to compensate for a d6 Hit Die), but if they dance around the front lines (hideous blow helps here) and keep the enemies moving after them, the rest of the party can build their tactics around that central play and turn a fight to their advantage fairly well.
What does this even meanMeh.
Lasers pew,pew by any other name still makes a power gaming munchkin....even if you call it a Warlock class.
Don't play coy Professor...I think you know.
I am with ToZ on this one.
I was wondering that myself but I think the post deserves this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_AWhat does this even meanMeh.
Lasers pew,pew by any other name still makes a power gaming munchkin....even if you call it a Warlock class.
Seriously, why create a class that has no flavor, just a damage mechanic for the game... "Eldritch Blast" indeed. Sounds like a flavor of gum.
Why not call it "Arcane power bolt","Mega zap power", "Super blasty beam" or "Pew, Pew Lasers"?
Its still just a ranged attack with an unexplained xD6 per hit.
It is just a mechanic so that muchkins can play a Marvel Super Hero character in a fantasy campaign.
Just because they put sprinkles on it, does not make it any less of a turd.
I challenge you to find any fantasy,historical equivalent to the Warlock class.
I was wondering that myself but I think the post deserves this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_AWhat does this even meanMeh.
Lasers pew,pew by any other name still makes a power gaming munchkin....even if you call it a Warlock class.
Seriously, why create a class that has no flavor, just a damage mechanic for the game... "Eldritch Blast" indeed. Sounds like a flavor of gum.
Why not call it "Arcane power bolt","Mega zap power", "Super blasty beam" or "Pew, Pew Lasers"?
Its still just a ranged attack with an unexplained xD6 per hit.
It is just a mechanic so that muchkins can play a Marvel Super Hero character in a fantasy campaign.
Just because they put sprinkles on it, does not make it any less of a turd.I challenge you to find any fantasy,historical equivalent to the Warlock class.
Munchkins normally at least want something that works well. I would suggest replacing the word munchkin or describe how the class is munchkin-like without resorting to high level CO builds. Any class can be really decent at worst if you want to go with a CO build.
|
|
I challenge you to find any fantasy,historical equivalent to the Warlock class.
What exactly are you looking for? You want us to find a historical reference to a demon/fey bound master of eldritch energies? That must be harmed by cold iron and have multiple dark powers? All of that together, or it's 'just a mechanic for munchkins'?
By your reasoning, I could claim the paladin class is for powergaming munchkins.
It is just a mechanic so that mu[n]chkins can play a Marvel Super Hero character in a fantasy campaign.
Maybe it's just me -- I hear "munchkin" and the word carries strong implications of people who want too-effective abilities for their PCs at no cost. The warlock class, on the other hand, gives you barely-noticeable abilities at the cost of not being a member of a real class. Yeah, it's uninteresting, but it's in no way overpowered (indeed, I gave all the warlock's abilities to the Pathfinder sorcerer, and the resulting class is still not overpowered compared to a core wizard).
Near as I can tell, the problem most of the people who posted here have with it is they don't like the class. Which is fine, but not something I can take seriously.
Well, yeah, there's not much to it -- I certainly wouldn't want to play one in a 3.5 game, but I wouldn't begrudge the choice to someone else. But I'm at a total loss as to how "boring" = "overpowered." The two don't seem like equivalents to me.
whatever shall I do?
The usual: drink some beer, throw some dice, have some fun (just as soon as you get back, anyway!). There are things that I find broken enough to interfere with the fun, but the warlock ain't one of 'em.
I challenge you to find any fantasy,historical equivalent to the Warlock class.What exactly are you looking for? You want us to find a historical reference to a demon/fey bound master of eldritch energies? That must be harmed by cold iron and have multiple dark powers? All of that together, or it's 'just a mechanic for munchkins'?
By your reasoning, I could claim the paladin class is for powergaming munchkins.
While not just for powergaming munchkins, one must admit that the paladin class is very often the choice of muchkins who want to ignore the alignment restrictions and just play a fighter with heal and smite powers. The Chain fighter came in a close second on the munchkin class of choice.
The warlock seems to fit in the mold of poorly designed stuff that was dumped out for 3.5 splat books just to sell books. No cosideration to game balance and continuity. There was a lot of that with 2.0 and 3x started doing it at the end too.
As far as historical or literary references, you can find examples for all other classes (Merlin for wizards, Conan for Barbarians, Lancelot for Paladins, etc) Warlocks can be found in name only (a male witch).
There is no referance to a fantasy figure or literary figure that just goes about doing minor magic and firing blasty bolts around.
You might as well have given the class laser beam eyes. It would, for all intensive purposes have been just as lame.
I challenge you to find any fantasy,historical equivalent to the Warlock class.What exactly are you looking for? You want us to find a historical reference to a demon/fey bound master of eldritch energies? That must be harmed by cold iron and have multiple dark powers? All of that together, or it's 'just a mechanic for munchkins'?
By your reasoning, I could claim the paladin class is for powergaming munchkins.
While not just for powergaming munchkins, one must admit that the paladin class is very often the choice of muchkins who want to ignore the alignment restrictions and just play a fighter with heal and smite powers. The Chain fighter came in a close second on the munchkin class of choice.
The warlock seems to fit in the mold of poorly designed stuff that was dumped out for 3.5 splat books just to sell books. No cosideration to game balance and continuity. There was a lot of that with 2.0 and 3x started doing it at the end too.
As far as historical or literary references, you can find examples for all other classes (Merlin for wizards, Conan for Barbarians, Lancelot for Paladins, etc) Warlocks can be found in name only (a male witch).
There is no referance to a fantasy figure or literary figure that just goes about doing minor magic and firing blasty bolts around.
You might as well have given the class laser beam eyes. It would, for all intensive purposes have been just as lame.
Any class can be ran by powergaming munchkins for a variety of reasons. You still have not said how the warlock class was made for munchkins. Do you not have reason?
Lancelot for Paladins
I would have gone with Gawain, personally, or perhaps Galahad. I've always thought of Lancelot as a philandering @$$.
Maybe some are of the opinion that the warlock might seems a bit too "videogamey" to them due to that "all-day-at-will-no-downtime" arcane blast. Personally, I don't agree with such a viewpoint but it does seem to exist.
Agreed. I'm not sure if that sentiment occurs in this thread, but it does occur repeatedly in general across the boards. I don't understand the condescension that runs so often from the D&D community toward video games. What high ground to we claim to stand on that lets us look down our noses? Video games have become, along with novels, one of (I would say, co-equal with novels, THE) primary venues through which modern fantasy is created, sustained, and culturally disseminated. And good fantasy, at that, or at least as good as 90% of said novels (I'm thinking BioWare here, which is often even better than many of the novels I've looked at). D&D isn't so inherently perfect that it is blasphemous to take game design advice or ideas from its electronic cousins/nephews.
Beside, the "all-day-at-will-no-downtime" seems more consistent with folkloric and literary precedent to me than the Vancian system. When did Merlin say, "Damn! I'm out of fireballs for today!" Or did Gandalf ever say, "Fly, you fools, and rest for 8 hours before continuing on!" Traditionally, if a wizard knows a spell, he can cast it, unless it's unbelievably powerful (I would conjecture something like Merlin moving Stonehenge from Ireland to England), in which case the exhaustion is usually rendered as physical rather than mental.
All of which only amounts to me saying, D&D already breaks from a lot of tradition about fantastic events, creatures, and people, so doing a little more doesn't hurt anything; and what does it matter if video games and D&D influence each other?
|
|
All of which only amounts to me saying, D&D already breaks from a lot of tradition about fantastic events, creatures, and people, so doing a little more doesn't hurt anything; and what does it matter if video games and D&D influence each other?
There's a strong group of D&D player-base who consider any non-traditional fantasy influences (be it video games, anime/manga or steampunk) as an anathema.
Any class can be ran by powergaming munchkins for a variety of reasons. You still have not said how the warlock class was made for munchkins. Do you not have reason?
I challenge you to find any fantasy,historical equivalent to the Warlock class.What exactly are you looking for? You want us to find a historical reference to a demon/fey bound master of eldritch energies? That must be harmed by cold iron and have multiple dark powers? All of that together, or it's 'just a mechanic for munchkins'?
By your reasoning, I could claim the paladin class is for powergaming munchkins.
While not just for powergaming munchkins, one must admit that the paladin class is very often the choice of muchkins who want to ignore the alignment restrictions and just play a fighter with heal and smite powers. The Chain fighter came in a close second on the munchkin class of choice.
The warlock seems to fit in the mold of poorly designed stuff that was dumped out for 3.5 splat books just to sell books. No cosideration to game balance and continuity. There was a lot of that with 2.0 and 3x started doing it at the end too.
As far as historical or literary references, you can find examples for all other classes (Merlin for wizards, Conan for Barbarians, Lancelot for Paladins, etc) Warlocks can be found in name only (a male witch).
There is no referance to a fantasy figure or literary figure that just goes about doing minor magic and firing blasty bolts around.
You might as well have given the class laser beam eyes. It would, for all intensive purposes have been just as lame.
That was supposed to read "Do you not have a reason?".
|
You might as well have given the class laser beam eyes. It would, for all intensive purposes have been just as lame.I'm looking at Eldritch Blast right now, and I'm not seeing a sentence that says the blast comes from your hands...
Your only warning is the glowing of the eyes!
My last warlock had lost his hand, and shot his blast from the stump. I declared war on flumphs, and was searching for a magical item that would have allowed me to roll myself into a ball.
My last warlock had lost his hand, and shot his blast from the stump. I declared war on flumphs, and was searching for a magical item that would have allowed me to roll myself into a ball.You might as well have given the class laser beam eyes. It would, for all intensive purposes have been just as lame.I'm looking at Eldritch Blast right now, and I'm not seeing a sentence that says the blast comes from your hands...
Your only warning is the glowing of the eyes!
Rotfl!
As I said I have nothing against soneone posting a topic or thread. It makes the forums interesting. too often though a poster comes on makes a blanket ststement that imo 90% of the time is wrong and its like "ANYONE ELSE WITH ME?....cue the rolling tumbleweed and crickets chirping off in the distance... "uh anyone?" and then get verbally smacked off the side of the head and leave.
Then I'd suggest coming up with ways to make the warlock better, from builds to homebrew changes. For my groups game that I DM, I allow the warlock a feat that boosts his EB to d8's and at least 1 more invocation per-day specifically for blast shames. Other changes or ideas?It's not so much not wanting to improve the Warlock so much as having enough classes. I like classes but I'm just no longer willing for the mooemnt to convert over 3.5 ones to Pathfinder.
I am starting to see where other forums get their policy on mea culpa posts from.
As far as historical or literary references, you can find examples for all other classes (Merlin for wizards, Conan for Barbarians, Lancelot for Paladins, etc) Warlocks can be found in name only (a male witch).
Link, Goku, Danny Phantom, Achron (from my wife's "dark hunter" series), Inu Yasha, Mega Man, Ice Queen (from the lion the witch and the wardrobe), the hero from Crystalis, Mario (with a fire flower), Cyclops, Skeksis (from dark crystal), Chaos Legion (playstation game), Ursala (from Gladius for playstation), Orphen...
Generally anything where you have a specific list of powers (preferably granted by something else) works.
There is plenty of flavor for the warlock -- or rather as much as any class... flavor comes from the player not the book.
I am starting to see where other forums get their policy on mea culpa posts from.
...meaning?
Any class can be ran by powergaming munchkins for a variety of reasons. You still have not said how the warlock class was made for munchkins. Do you not have reason?
While it is true that any class can be abused, the reason that the Warlock was Munchkin centric is that at the time it was produced, it was at the time that WotC was dumping out content just to sell books.
Game quality was giving way to comercialism. Dump as much content as fast as possible to sell books.
The Warlock is a cookie cutter class that uses a simple generic mechanic.... Character can do xD6 damage times level at will.
Take the Generic character template, insert snazzy name and cool sounding name the attack power and you have a new class.
Using the same design you could make a:
Battle Master:
This character can use his "Awesome Strike" ability once per round at will and does XD6 damage per hit.
His knowledge of battle is unequaled giving him a +X per level bonus to (attack/damage/ initiative) etc.
It is just a generic damage machine with a few flowery titles and names thrown on it. It is a cardboard character class with no depth. Just like the Warlock. Thats pandering to the Munchkin. give them the damage machine they want just so you can sell books.
Maybe some are of the opinion that the warlock might seems a bit too "videogamey" to them due to that "all-day-at-will-no-downtime" arcane blast. Personally, I don't agree with such a viewpoint but it does seem to exist.
Some video games have a positive impact on PnP gaming (The Elder Scrolls series and Dragon age games), while others like (Diablo and World of Warcraft) have IMHO have damaged it.