|
Personally I played a couple warlocks. They were fun. No, I wasn't out-damaging anyone else in the group but I had a nice little bag of tricks to use and had fun with it. There were a number of items to boost your EB that made it at least mildly effective and if you took hellfire warlock you had more d6s. I fully agree that it's about the player and not the class. You needed to know what to do with it. The one thing I found nice about warlocks was their survivability. They had enough to keep them going and if they needed to gtfo they could.
A friend of mine played a 3.5 game and went cleric/warlock into eldritch disciple and played den mother the entire time. The stories he has are hilarious of draging the party's arses out of the dungeon.
I'm afraid I don't understand the O.P.'s joyful statement.
It's simple: "If I don't like it, nobody else should be allowed to like it, either."
I'm afraid I don't understand the O.P.'s joyful statement.It's simple: "If I don't like it, nobody else should be allowed to like it, either."
That and the "If I can't imagine a use for it...nobody should use it and it should not be in a book." Pretty much sums up the problems I have with alot of gamers complaints now a days.
In my opinion, classes, spells, feats, etc. do not "break" a game. Only extreme powergamer players determined to try and "win" at all costs, and weak/pushover GMs who allow them to do so, can "break" a game. If some folks could just control their urge to scour the rules for loopholes and obscure combinations that will make their characters the "uberbestest", there would be no problem. Ditto if strong and confident GMs would just use logic and their rule-given discretion to smack people with these tendencies down consistently before they become a problem, there would be no problem.
That said, I don't think we are going to purge extreme powergamers or doormat GMs from the community any time soon (nor should we, they are hamrless enough if they play with others who like to play that way). There are some classes and spells and feats and combinations that are more vulnerable to being abused than others. Warlock's probably not one of them, although the argument that it is only underpowered at low levels leaves me a bit cold, since if the game goes off the rails at lower levels, it never gets to high levels.
The best test I have for whether some class/spell/feat/combo/weapon/magic item might be overpowered is if experienced and skilled players always choose it over other options. In general these players aren't stupid. They know what works best. So, if I were going to "rebalance" the game, that's where I would start, by analyzing builds from those types of players, identifying those options that are always chosen and finding a way to balance them with the other options. Of course then there would be great wailing and gnashing of teeth in PFland, as everyone's favorite stuff got nerfed/more expensive/higher level.
In my opinion, classes, spells, feats, etc. do not "break" a game. Only extreme powergamer players determined to try and "win" at all costs, and weak/pushover GMs who allow them to do so, can "break" a game. If some folks could just control their urge to scour the rules for loopholes and obscure combinations that will make their characters the "uberbestest", there would be no problem. Ditto if strong and confident GMs would just use logic and their rule-given discretion to smack people with these tendencies down consistently before they become a problem, there would be no problem.
Not completely sure I agree with this 100% -- I've played a couple of characters I've had to step away from when I realized I wasn't on the same power curve as everyone else in the party. I wasn't trying to go over that edge, but I did and I recognized it said something to the GM and stepped back -- once or twice it was just a minor tweak needed, a few times the build as a whole was the problem and I changed to a different character.
Huh. I threw several warlocks in as baddies and my players kicked the living cee-ar-a-cee-pee out of them every time. Down in a round. I thought they looked pretty badass when I first saw the class, but it turned out to be eh every time.
Not completely sure I agree with this 100% -- I've played a couple of characters I've had to step away from when I realized I wasn't on the same power curve as everyone else in the party. I wasn't trying to go over that edge, but I did and I recognized it said something to the GM and stepped back -- once or twice it was just a minor tweak needed, a few times the build as a whole was the problem and I changed to a different character.In my opinion, classes, spells, feats, etc. do not "break" a game. Only extreme powergamer players determined to try and "win" at all costs, and weak/pushover GMs who allow them to do so, can "break" a game. If some folks could just control their urge to scour the rules for loopholes and obscure combinations that will make their characters the "uberbestest", there would be no problem. Ditto if strong and confident GMs would just use logic and their rule-given discretion to smack people with these tendencies down consistently before they become a problem, there would be no problem.
which differentiates you from the "extreme-power-gamer" (come one guys; call a spade a spade "Rules lawyer-munchkin") and a normal powergamer. A true power gamer gets there through basic building not loop-hole wrangling.
Not completely sure I agree with this 100% -- I've played a couple of characters I've had to step away from when I realized I wasn't on the same power curve as everyone else in the party. I wasn't trying to go over that edge, but I did and I recognized it said something to the GM and stepped back -- once or twice it was just a minor tweak needed, a few times the build as a whole was the problem and I changed to a different character.In my opinion, classes, spells, feats, etc. do not "break" a game. Only extreme powergamer players determined to try and "win" at all costs, and weak/pushover GMs who allow them to do so, can "break" a game. If some folks could just control their urge to scour the rules for loopholes and obscure combinations that will make their characters the "uberbestest", there would be no problem. Ditto if strong and confident GMs would just use logic and their rule-given discretion to smack people with these tendencies down consistently before they become a problem, there would be no problem.
And that is whay you didn't "break" the game. You recognized the problem, worked with your GM to resolve it, and accepted his decision. To me, that is a good example of how players and GMs should behave. So, in the end, no problem.
Well remember when you are rating on a curve like that, its not just one player causing the curve.
The other players could also be seriously underpower, such as with my table once. We had a kobold druid who could do 1 point of damage, a bard using a whip, a truenamer, a low level artificer, and me (A totemist).
I built with just a little orientation towards damage, and out damaged them all, i found out as well that I wasn't even using the right build for making damage in the first place.
To echo what others have said, I've never seen a warlock (or any class for that matter) cause problems because it is overpowered or underpowered. The problems have always been caused by the player usually intentionally trying to break the game somehow.
Huh. I threw several warlocks in as baddies and my players kicked the living cee-ar-a-cee-pee out of them every time. Down in a round. I thought they looked pretty badass when I first saw the class, but it turned out to be eh every time.
Off topic, but what is a cracp? :)
Eldritch blast?
Eldritch Blast is only powerful until other players start to get iterative attacks. A level 11 fighter will smoke a level 11 warlock in DPR terms (and he gets to use his sword as many times a day as he wants, too).
Eldritch blast?Eldritch Blast is only powerful until other players start to get iterative attacks. A level 11 fighter will smoke a level 11 warlock in DPR terms (and he gets to use his sword as many times a day as he wants, too).
Fighters can far outdamage warlocks even sooner than that. Our group is 6th level and our greatsword-wielding, power-attacking fighter consistently does double to triple the damage our warlock does, even more if she hits on both of her attacks, which happens pretty often. If it weren't for eldritch chain and the fact that the warlock is hitting two foes each round, his damage output would be laughably pathetic compared to the rest of the party. Even our paladin, with a 1h weapon and no power attack, regularly does alot more damage than our warlock.
People who claim that EB is "overpowered" have obviously never played a warlock or been in a group with one. They're actually pretty underpowered. IME, they were slightly underpowered in 3.5 (and fell further behind as the party went up in level), but with the buffs to weapon using classes in Pathfinder and the insane new Power Attack feat, they've been left in the dust. I've been seriously considering buffing them.
|
Its a matter of familiarity in my opinion. The warlock was 3.5's alchemist or summoner. There is another threat about over powered alchemists:
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/advice/alchemistOverpowered
most of the concerns could be levelled against the warlock.
I had the first 2h weapon barbarian in my group. At level 1 with a base 20 strength i was attacking for +9 (1d12+10) while raging with a masterwork great axe.
I could only rage once per day, my ac was rubbish, but all people saw was the massive damage and cried broken...
Once the fighter started using a greatsword, used power attack, and attained weapon specialisation things levelled out, but it was too late, my character was forever tainted.
The warlock suffered the same fate. It was different, it could overcome DR and high AC. It cast longer than other spell casters. Still how many sorcerers ran out of spells before the fighter ran out of hp's?
|
|
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.
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.
A level 6 human archer-archetype fighter would demolish a level 6 warlock in just a couple of rounds. She would be averaging around 34 DPR versus the warlock's 7.5 or so. It's not even close.
I liked the invocation that turned your blast into a melee weapon. You could do a full-touch-attack while power attacking. Mix in some of that Prc that boosted EB, Maybe maximize SLA, add a blast essence that requires a save and then they have to roll after every swing, gotta fail eventually.
I liked the invocation that turned your blast into a melee weapon. You could do a full-touch-attack while power attacking. Mix in some of that Prc that boosted EB, Maybe maximize SLA, add a blast essence that requires a save and then they have to roll after every swing, gotta fail eventually.
That one was actually in the races of the dragon, which I believe required you to take draconian heritage feats to get.
Fly at will, See invisible always on, darkness (3.5 version) at will, see through darkness, invisibility at will, dimension door at will, wall of fire at will...
Eldritch Blast is really not a problem at all.
Dming, I once TPK'd my players using those tactics on a psuedo-dragon warlock. The sad part was it was the first boss of the adventure.
Fly at will, See invisible always on, darkness (3.5 version) at will, see through darkness, invisibility at will, dimension door at will, wall of fire at will...
Eldritch Blast is really not a problem at all.
Fly at Will? Compare that to Overland Flight or a Flying Carpet. It's nice, but far from game breaking.
See Invisibility Always on? Umm, my Wizard can do the same thing with permanency. Granted, it's at a higher level, but how many really low level creatures use Invisibility anyway?
Darkness at will? Oh my. This is the spell I now call "dimness" ever since it was struck with the nerfbat in 3.5. Next...
Invisibility at will? Again, I can do this with a 20k gold ring. Also, since you become visible when you attack, and warlocks don't get Improved Invisibility until at least 16th level, it's hardly as powerful as it sounds. For general sneaking around, the Wiz's or Sorc's Invisibility lasts 10 min./level, which is usually plenty of time.
Dimension Door, for warlocks this is close range. A Conjurer specialist wizard can also teleport around alot, and it hardly has broken anything in our game. For warlocks this also has a somatic component, so you can't use it to escape from grapples, which is one of the main things my wiz uses dimension door for. So warlocks can't use DD for what, IMO, is its most important function.
And lastly, wall of fire, big deal? A warlock has to be 11th level minimum to get this, and by then, a wizard is tossing out 6th level spells. And how many times a day could an 11th level sorcerer cast wall of fire if he wanted to? Plenty.
Warlocks look very scary on paper, but in practice, their at-will abilities aren't anywhere near as poweful as some people make them out to be.
Fly at will, See invisible always on, darkness (3.5 version) at will, see through darkness, invisibility at will, dimension door at will, wall of fire at will...
Eldritch Blast is really not a problem at all.
Ah yes..
Player: I can fly at will!
DM: Big woop, you are in a dungeon.
Player: I can still fly though :(
Player: Ha! I can see invisibilty
DM: Like I've told you before, there isn't anything invisible. Well cept for that invisible sheet.
Player: Haha! I see the sheet! whats behind it?
Party: That orc with a great axe.
Player: Crap.
Player: HA I can cast darkness!
DM: Congrats. Now no one can see anyone.
Player (Later): Kay now i blast the orc..
DM: You can't see the orc.
Player: It was here, I shoot there.
DM: Congrats.. you hit the Orc...
Player: YES!
DM: ...ale, please reroll a new character oracle
Oracle: What the hell.. (rerolls)
DM: Kay give it to the ex warlock, Your thingamajig killed him.
Player: Ha this time I have see through darkness!
DM: great... I thought you gave him a new character.
Oracle: I did..
Player: Crap.. I don't have darkness. :(
Player: I cast invisibility!
DM: Wonderful.. so what to you do next.
Player: I move through the bell and trip wirefactory
DM: How so
Player: I'm invisible, I rush in to stop the human sacrifice
DM: Kay roll a fort save and a will save.
Player: But I'm invisible
DM: Invisible yes, Silent no.
Player: I cast WALL OF FIRE!
DM: You are in the dungoen libary
Party: We get the freek out of there.
Player: I'm still casting wall of fire here!
DM: upon completing your spell in the dusty dungeon library filled with cob webs as you've been battling these spiders.. It all goes up in flames. Make five reflex saves.. and... Oh yes the +2 int tomb is destroyed in the blaze, make a fort save as well.
I liked the invocation that turned your blast into a melee weapon. You could do a full-touch-attack while power attacking.
Which was a commmon problem with people totally misinterpretting that ability, Eldritch Glaive. It was a Blast Shape that modified the Eldritch Blast SLA.
Haste does not let you get extra attacks from an SLA. Power Attack can be used with melee weapons, NOT SLA's. Folks read that you could get melee touch attacks and suddenly decided this spell like ability could use all the feats and powers that modified melee combat. Which it did NOT.
Warlock were never broken. Most of the time it was unimaginative DM's who could not figure a way to challenge or counter them.
At will abilities are only overpowered if the ability itself is powerful. The vast majority of Warlock powers were 'nice' but never overpowered, even if you combined them with Ability Focus or the SLA Metamagic feats.
I DM'd a game with a warlock from levels 14-23 and I never had any real problems with it. At most some of their abilities can be annoying because as a DM (or GM if pathfinder :p ) you need to be aware of their at will abilities.
Warlocks are actually a class I plan on reconstructing for my next campaign (there are some things I'd like to change for flavor and setting reasons).
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.
What did it do? If it was level 10 it should have been putting out 5d6(average 18ish points of damage). Even with the empower SLA feat that only gives it 27 points of damage. It would not have a high AC or a lot of hit points.
Grapple it, pin it, kill it.
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.
I liked the invocation that turned your blast into a melee weapon. You could do a full-touch-attack while power attacking.Which was a commmon problem with people totally misinterpretting that ability, Eldritch Glaive. It was a Blast Shape that modified the Eldritch Blast SLA.
Haste does not let you get extra attacks from an SLA. Power Attack can be used with melee weapons, NOT SLA's. Folks read that you could get melee touch attacks and suddenly decided this spell like ability could use all the feats and powers that modified melee combat. Which it did NOT.
Warlock were never broken. Most of the time it was unimaginative DM's who could not figure a way to challenge or counter them.
At will abilities are only overpowered if the ability itself is powerful. The vast majority of Warlock powers were 'nice' but never overpowered, even if you combined them with Ability Focus or the SLA Metamagic feats.
Never said it worked with haste. Eldritch Glaive works just like a regular glaive, says so right in the SLA, so all you have to do is make attacks with it and you get to Power Attack.
Warlocks are the easiest 'caster' class to DM for. You know everything they can ever do. If you can't design a challenging encounter with that information, I don't know what to tell you.
You know "everything" any of your characters can do do if you look at their character sheet. When the DM starts metagaming just to beat their players, somewhere something went wrong.
i actually liked the unique mechanics the warlock brought. i didn't like thier lack of powers or thier inability to make full attacks. but if pathfinder could bring them back in an updated rewrite. it could actually work. i also liked the binder, the swordsage, the shugenja, and the psionicist. what do all these classes have in common?
they were all 3.5 edition splat classes
none of them were ever truly updated
they all introduced an oddball mechanic you could never find elsewhere.
they were all less powerful than the core casters.
out of the 5, i have played both a swordsage and a shugenja. neither could keep up with thier core counterpart.
the shugenja couldn't keep up with the cleric (nor the favored soul)
and the swordsage couldn't keep up with the fighter, the duskblade, nor the massively multiclassed slayer of evil outsiders.
|
|
You know "everything" any of your characters can do do if you look at their character sheet.
Not true. You have to know every spell you allow your cleric and druid characters to use to know that, thanks to them being able to swap them completely each day.
When the DM starts metagaming just to beat their players, somewhere something went wrong.
When did anyone say anything about 'beating' players? All I mentioned was 'challenging encounters'. Do you equate challenging your players with beating them?
I've rarely seen the Warlock actually do some substantial damage at the gaming table. Yea, his EB is nice at the first few levels and multiclassed with the Cleric and Eldritch Disciple or even the Wiz/Sor for Eldritch Theurge it gets better with some added bonuses but the drawbacks are just too much not to take into account. The damage is only 1/round (even if it is at-will), the at-will invocations are pretty "meh" espically considering when you get to use them, and his take 10 on UMD checks is really the one thing that stands out as WOW.
For DPR, I just wouldn't go this route. A two-weapon fighting Rogue just does a better job and can use magical devices nearly as well at higher levels. I have Swashbuckler 3/ rogue 6/ swordsage 1 that averages something like high 90's DPR with some "shadowy gimmicks" from the Tome of Battle. In addition, my DM graciously let me take the feat Superior Finesse which allows me to swap Str for Dex on melee damage rolls. So with TWF and the feat Daring Outlaw, I deal 6d6+8 per attack with my +2 shortsword and 7d6+7 per attack with my +1 Assassinating shortsword. And I get 4 normal attacks per round.....Say 3 out of 4 hit (which is normally the case) and thats just around 80 DPR average (not optimal, but far out paces a Warlock 10).
Player: I can fly at will!
DM: Big woop, you are in a dungeon.
Player: I can still fly though :(
The ability to hover 1" off the ground has saved the hide of many of an adventurer at my table.
And I don't begrudge them or try to work around it. It's a reasonable way of avoiding traps that would other affect a gravity-bound player.
Greg
Player: I can fly at will!
DM: Big woop, you are in a dungeon.
Player: I can still fly though :(The ability to hover 1" off the ground has saved the hide of many of an adventurer at my table.
And I don't begrudge them or try to work around it. It's a reasonable way of avoiding traps that would other affect a gravity-bound player.
Greg
Yea, but so does an Unseen Servant dragging a 100lb sack of flour across the floor to trigger traps. One is just as useful and requres a 1st level wand and a sack of flour.
Yea, but so does an Unseen Servant dragging a 100lb sack of flour across the floor to trigger traps. One is just as useful and requres a 1st level wand and a sack of flour.
I'm totally using that idea.
Yea, but so does an Unseen Servant dragging a 100lb sack of flour across the floor to trigger traps. One is just as useful and requres a 1st level wand and a sack of flour.
How many times is that going to work before you get a player revolt? Once? Maybe twice? But after that, if I were a player I'd start thinking the DM was metagaming. One NPC shouldn't use the same "unique" tactics as the last one without some reasonable transfer of information.
And really, if an NPC was worried about flying characters why would he put a pressure plate down in the first place?
Edit: I do think this is useful to keep players on their toes, but I wouldn't use it more than once.
Greg
How many times is that going to work before you get a player revolt? Once? Maybe twice? But after that, if I were a player I'd start thinking the DM was metagaming. One NPC shouldn't use the same "unique" tactics as the last one without some reasonable transfer of information.And really, if an NPC was worried about flying characters why would he put a pressure plate down in the first place?
Edit: I do think this is useful to keep players on their toes, but I wouldn't use it more than once.
Greg
Depends on what sort of adventure the DM is running honestly. Any sort of published adventure would have more than one floor/pressure plate trap in the adventure. So in that sort of setting, I think it's a viable option a few times. Would any sensible DM give XP for that more than once or twice is a better question. I'd say probably not depending on the circumstances.
Plus, just because the sack of flour triggers the trap doesn't mean it'll survive and thus not be used against the second trap a few squares later.
But I'll agree with you that even a 1' hover isn't bad and has many uses.
Could you please point out WHAT in the warlock class was overpowered?
Infinitely spammable Take-20 dispel magic that's for all intents and purposes Take-20.
Infinitely spammable anything from range blows.
Permanent fly + invisibility is also lame. Can you do it with a bunch of magic items? Sure. With a bunch of magic items.
While eldritch blast wasn't too bad, infinitely spammable auto-damage from range is also pretty lame.
Infinitely spammable Take-20 dispel magic that's for all intents and purposes Take-20.
I think this is probably one of the better aspects of the Warlock. But at what level do you get this?
Infinitely spammable anything from range blows.
Could you elaborate please? I'm not really sure where you going with this.
Permanent fly + invisibility is also lame. Can you do it with a bunch of magic items? Sure. With a bunch of magic items.
While they're nice, they're only self-serving and not all that useful to a ranged attacker per se. Allow the Warlock to use these on someone else and now your talking. But even so, a Sorcerer with Mass Fly which is able to be cast at 10th level and Greater Invisibilty (8th lvl)......they're just the better choice.
While eldritch blast wasn't too bad, infinitely spammable auto-damage from range is also pretty lame.
Firstly, not "auto" because it requires a Ranged attack (unlike Magic Missile). Yea, they get an average BAB so maybe at higher levels it'll hit more often. But it's still subject to Spell Resistance and against creatures Immune to Magic......what then? Just because it's an ability that's usable at-will doesn't make it great even if it is "spammable".
Most of the folks that are bewildered by the idea of the warlock being overpowered are relying heavily on average damage arguments as well as situations where their at will abilities are not very useful. However, I argue that this game of ours is only rarely one of averages and that it is in non average situations that the warlock abilities become headache inducing. Yes, the warlock cannot out damage a fighter of equal level in melee combat, which how things should be, but what warlock would even be in that situation? They would be flying around using their invisibility to good advantage, and attacking from areas the fighter can't reach easily. There is also the fact that while yes, any spellcaster can do what the warlock does better when they have time to prepare, the operative word there is prepare. In my experience, warlocks are hard to have in a party not because they are damage machines but because they usually need challenges specifically designed to fight them otherwise they will outlast due to their at will abilities.
In your example however you are adding spells from another class entirely to buff your paladin. While I get what you are trying to get at you have to take the paladin abilities alone to factor in DPR.Let me see if I am getting this straight. My paladin is lv10, and does 1d10+18 damage per hit, and definitely hits on the first attack except on bosses, likely the second as well. In 9 out of 10 fights, one of the casters drops either Haste or Blessing of Fervor on him, meaning his damage output is 3d10+56 per round. Add smite and it goes to 3d10+86 per round.
This is not an optimized character. He has a +2 sword (+2), powerattacks (+9), uses a bastard sword twohanded (+6 due to 18str with belt), and has his Warrior of Holy Light aura going almost every fight (+1). Pretty straightforward.
And you are saying that the notion of someone dropping 5d6 in a line is overpowered?
Warlock10: 5d6 for an average of 17
Paladin10: 3d10+56 for an average of 82You need to catch 5 people to do more damage total.
Having something available all day is not a gamebreaker. You don't NEED to be able to do something all day. You need to kick down the opposition whenever it comes at you.
Warlock is good for one thing: Newbies. It gives them something VERY easy to play. You have a handful of abilities, and you can use them as you wish.
Then it is 2d10+36 (47). Let's say I only get off a single hit for some reason, and then get reduced to using Vital Strike: 2d10+18 (29). Well above 5d6 (17.5). Sure, the blast hits easier, but after lv10, everything and their uncle has Spell Resistance, meaning the Warlock not only has to hit, but get through SR as well. My paladin will hit most anything, and go through any troublesome DR as long as the target is evil (which is 80-90% of everything you face at high level).
This is also not factoring in his ability to enhance his sword to get the Holy or Axiomatic property for an additional 2d6 against evil or chaotic...
also isn't vital strike pf only? You may need to alter the situation for 3.x.?
Firstly, not "auto" because it requires a Ranged attack (unlike Magic Missile).
LOL. It's a ranged touch attack. Yeah, for all intents and purposes it really is "auto".
But it's still subject to Spell Resistance and against creatures Immune to Magic......what then? Just because it's an ability that's usable at-will doesn't make it great even if it is "spammable".
Wow. Corner cases. SR is barely a concern past 8th level and is rare enough. "Immune to magic"???
Freehold DM's post is also excellent, and covers a lot of what I would say.
I can already see your position on this, so it's probably little use for us to discuss any further. Needless to say, we're not going to agree.
Warlock overpowered?
Not so much by itself, IMO. Granted, they could have superior mobility (Spiderwalk, Fell Flight) and great senses (Devil's Sight, See the Unseen, Voidsense)); after 8th level (with both Fell Flight and Walk Unseen), they could act as a flying, invisible scout. They could also perform decently at battlefield control (Earthen Grasp, Summon Swarm/Hungry Darkness, Stony Grasp), but by the time you gained Greater (11th level) and Dark (16th level) Invocations, the regular 9 spell-level spellcasters (even the warmage) had enough options that being able to use the handful of invocations you knew at will wasn't that big of a deal.
As far as Eldritch Blast goes, a sorcerer, warmage, or wizard with a wand of acid splash or scorching ray (or one of the lesser orb spells at CL 3 or 5) can do comparable damage to a warlock (if not more) with ranged touch attacks. Heck, with a wand of summon monster IV, a wizard could spend a couple rounds summoning lantern archons to zap things and then cast other spells while the archons continue to do damage.
Even when acting as ranged attacker, a well developed archer could still do more DPR against normal AC (including masterwork/enchanted weapon bonuses, Str with a composite bow, Rapid Shot, etc.) than a warlock against touch AC.
Warlock overpowered?
Not so much by itself, IMO. Granted, they could have superior mobility (Spiderwalk, Fell Flight) and great senses (Devil's Sight, See the Unseen, Voidsense)); after 8th level (with both Fell Flight and Walk Unseen), they could act as a flying, invisible scout. They could also perform decently at battlefield control (Earthen Grasp, Summon Swarm/Hungry Darkness, Stony Grasp), but by the time you gained Greater (11th level) and Dark (16th level) Invocations, the regular 9 spell-level spellcasters (even the warmage) had enough options that being able to use the handful of invocations you knew at will wasn't that big of a deal.
As far as Eldritch Blast goes, a sorcerer, warmage, or wizard with a wand of acid splash or scorching ray (or one of the lesser orb spells at CL 3 or 5) can do comparable damage to a warlock (if not more) with ranged touch attacks. Heck, with a wand of summon monster IV, a wizard could spend a couple rounds summoning lantern archons to zap things and then cast other spells while the archons continue to do damage.
Even when acting as ranged attacker, a well developed archer could still do more DPR against normal AC (including masterwork/enchanted weapon bonuses, Str with a composite bow, Rapid Shot, etc.) than a warlock against touch AC.
Again, imeo, the problem with the warlock had very little to do with DPR and more with the abilities you thankfully named. It wasn't about raw power or utility, it was their extreme tactical mobility mixed with their battlefield control and the fact that they had no real limits with the vast majority of them. There was also a serious issue I discovered in game when it came to multiple warlocks in the same party- after a while the DM had to come up with specially crafted characters to simply nail down these guys, let alone fight them.
|
I played a 3.5 Warlock in a campaign going from 3rd to 16th level a couple of years back. He wasn't overpowered, but he certainly was never an embarrassment to the party.
He wasn't a single-class Warlock, though. It was 3.5, and we were all prestige class-happy. So, he was a Beguiler 1/Warlock 4/Mindbender 1/Eldritch Theurge 7/Marshal 1/Chameleon 2. I was allowed to use the Precocious Apprentice feat to gain access to Eldritch Theurge with a single level of Beguiler, and he had Practiced Spellcaster for both Beguiler and Warlock. He had the Mindsense feat and Telepathy 100' from Mindbender, so he acted as the Martian Manhunter of the party.
The Chameleon levels gave him a floating feat. On adventures, this was usually Quicken Spell-like Ability (Eldritch Blast), although it was sometimes Extra invocation. Between adventures, it was usually an Item Creation feat, so he was also the party's crafter. His high UMD check (and the ability to take 10) practically guaranteed him access to almost any item you could craft.
He had Gloves of Eldritch Admixture, a Warlock's Scepter, and a Greater Chasuble of Fell Power. His normal eldritch blast was 9d6 (or up to 12d6 using the Scepter, and he could also add a couple of dice of elemental damage from the gloves). He was by no means anywhere close to being the main damage dealer of the group (or we'd be dead many times over). He could, however, often deal 70 or 80 points of damage (using a quickened EB) in the opening round of a combat, and since he was a part of an adventuring party and wasn't in competition with the other players, that was enough.
He was also the party face, with Bluff +33, Diplomacy +27, Disguise +32, Gather Information +35, and Sense Motive +23.
In short, he contributed to the group in a number of ways, without really overpowering anyone, and he was flexible enough to present as much of a challenge to our DM as any other PC in the group.
Again, imeo, the problem with the warlock had very little to do with DPR and more with the abilities you thankfully named. It wasn't about raw power or utility, it was their extreme tactical mobility mixed with their battlefield control and the fact that they had no real limits with the vast majority of them. There was also a serious issue I discovered in game when it came to multiple warlocks in the same party- after a while the DM had to come up with specially crafted characters to simply nail down these guys, let alone fight them.
Their battlefield control is pretty meh, compared to sorcerer/wizard spells like animate rope, color spray, grease, sleep, flaming sphere, glitterdust, gust of wind, web, deep slumber, hold person, sleet storm, stinking cloud, wind wall, etc. (not to mention the summon monster spells), until they hit 11th level and gain Greater Invocations. Even then, their best control invocations (Chilling Tentacles and Wall of Perilous Flames) are basically the same as 4th level spells that the wizard has had access to since 7th level.
A bunch of summoned flyers (to include flying swarms) and ranged attackers do just fine against most warlocks. Daylight and either faerie fire or glitterdust ruin darkness and invisibility. Enlarge person and reach weapons (including the ever-popular spiked chain in 3.5) let melee combatants attack them from 20 ft away (more than enough in most enclosed areas). Mid level foes that don't prepare for flying/invisible opponents and/or lack battlefield control tactics of their own deserve to be spanked.
To echo what others have said, I've never seen a warlock (or any class for that matter) cause problems because it is overpowered or underpowered. The problems have always been caused by the player usually intentionally trying to break the game somehow.
Huh. I threw several warlocks in as baddies and my players kicked the living cee-ar-a-cee-pee out of them every time. Down in a round. I thought they looked pretty badass when I first saw the class, but it turned out to be eh every time.Off topic, but what is a cracp? :)
That's me typing faster than I can spell.
It's all in the reflexes.