I think its more that wizards are ridiculously broken. What does any class being to the table when you have a wizard,. That fighter, what do they do every round, oh attack, attack, attack, lol how funny. It just is more obvious when the thematics of the two classes are similar like wizard to warlock.
This. It's unfair really to compare Warlocks to Wizards. Everyone except maybe bards pale in comparison, because they have a spell for everything. The problem is wizard, not warlock. Compare warlock to other classes, particularly martials, and warlocks look pretty fantastic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
There are a few levels where the warlock feels amazing:
2. EB+AB+Hex is great 1d10+3+1d6. Add in whatever other invocation you took and its a fun time. 5. Extra beam on EB gives you generally better damage with hex than anyone except GWM or SS. OR 5. Take two shortrests as a fiend/efreet genie and do 6 fireballs in a day. The fathomless doing 6 lightning bolts also deserves mention. Or 5. Extra attack on pact of the blade (bladesinger and swords bard are wondering what deal you made to get extra attack at 5th) 11. Three beams, 3rd spell slot, and mystic arcanum. You have reliably good EB+AB damage and that 3rd slot is badly needed with MA. 12. Lifedrinker. Many pact of the blade users multiclass, but level 12 is very much worth it.
Depending on other builds you may or may not see other nice power bumps, but those are the levels where I see Warlocks excel. There is absolutly an issue levels 6-10 and those levels are hard. I usually supplement spell slots with fey/shadow touched to help manage those levels.
The Warlock in my campaign hit level 5, and she received a pretty big boost from it, especially because she forgot to give herself level 4 stat/or feat bonus--so she's feeling pretty good.
I don't think it's unfair to compare casting classes, they're birds of feather. It looks like no one is arguing that the Warlock can do anything better than what a Wizard can do. Also that the Wizard can do basically everything the Warlock can do, except better. The reason to compare is so that people can make informed decisions to have fun. If the monk sucks and a person wants to be melee, I'm not going to suggest a monk.
The primary case for the warlock not being awful seems to be this
1. Good social potential due to high CHR 2. High potential damage output if short rests are used effectively.
Its not awful, but in terms of casters out there, I'd rank it Wizard, Sorc/Druid, Warlock.
The Warlock in my campaign hit level 5, and she received a pretty big boost from it, especially because she forgot to give herself level 4 stat/or feat bonus--so she's feeling pretty good.
I don't think it's unfair to compare casting classes, they're birds of feather. It looks like no one is arguing that the Warlock can do anything better than what a Wizard can do. Also that the Wizard can do basically everything the Warlock can do, except better. The reason to compare is so that people can make informed decisions to have fun. If the monk sucks and a person wants to be melee, I'm not going to suggest a monk.
The primary case for the warlock not being awful seems to be this
1. Good social potential due to high CHR 2. High potential damage output if short rests are used effectively.
Its not awful, but in terms of casters out there, I'd rank it Wizard, Sorc/Druid, Warlock.
The Warlock in my campaign hit level 5, and she received a pretty big boost from it, especially because she forgot to give herself level 4 stat/or feat bonus--so she's feeling pretty good.
I don't think it's unfair to compare casting classes, they're birds of feather. It looks like no one is arguing that the Warlock can do anything better than what a Wizard can do. Also that the Wizard can do basically everything the Warlock can do, except better. The reason to compare is so that people can make informed decisions to have fun. If the monk sucks and a person wants to be melee, I'm not going to suggest a monk.
The primary case for the warlock not being awful seems to be this
1. Good social potential due to high CHR 2. High potential damage output if short rests are used effectively.
Its not awful, but in terms of casters out there, I'd rank it Wizard, Sorc/Druid, Warlock.
Thanks for the info all.
The warlock CAN do some things better tho.
The warlock gets a far better version of a familiar if they choose pact of the chain, which if combined with invocations, make them pretty good, same with the rest of their pacts. Along with the fact that invocations allow quite possibly the most customisations, with plenty of at will spells and unique effects that wizards can only mimic a part of at level 18.
The Warlock in my campaign hit level 5, and she received a pretty big boost from it, especially because she forgot to give herself level 4 stat/or feat bonus--so she's feeling pretty good.
I don't think it's unfair to compare casting classes, they're birds of feather. It looks like no one is arguing that the Warlock can do anything better than what a Wizard can do. Also that the Wizard can do basically everything the Warlock can do, except better. The reason to compare is so that people can make informed decisions to have fun. If the monk sucks and a person wants to be melee, I'm not going to suggest a monk.
The primary case for the warlock not being awful seems to be this
1. Good social potential due to high CHR 2. High potential damage output if short rests are used effectively.
Its not awful, but in terms of casters out there, I'd rank it Wizard, Sorc/Druid, Warlock.
Thanks for the info all.
I want to be clear it isn't just damage output. Without rests warlocks can do better at will damage than any other caster in the game rivalling some martial classes. With rests the warlock becomes one of the best control and utility casters in the game in addition to having the good damage output that they always bring to the table.
Chain warlocks get a far superior familiar to anyone and can make for excellent scouts, in some cases making the rogue or druid blush because the tiny flying intelligent, invisible creature with dexterous hands can get in just about as many places the rogue can and some places it can't. When it gets detected the warlock just shunts it back into a pocket dimension for safety while the rogue has to high tail it out of their.
The blade lock (particularly the hexblade) is one of the best gish classes in the game capable of dealing solid damage in melee, being tough thanks to spells like armor of agathys and still loses none of the potency of their control spells because both the blade and the spells use charisma.
So essentially if the question is "what can a warlock do better than a wizard". The answer is Charisma checks, sustained single target damage, and, depending on the rests, build and circumstances, out of combat utility casting.
Obviously the wizard has access to more spells out of combat, but if you need someone to cast fly to get across the gorge, probably let the warlock cast it and then take a short rest saving the wizard his spell slots and basically getting across that gorge for free. If you need to speak a language, let the warlock cast tongues then take a short rest after all the conversations are done and move on. The ability to cast leveled spells take a rest and not lose any combat strength is really under-rated. It won't always be available but when it is the warlock is just an "I win" button.
And if they do run out of spells EB+AB is just as good as just about any martials attacks. So essentially martial combat capability slapped with solid utility and control spells.
Warlock isn't really a caster. It's an archer. On most turns, it spams eldritch blast like a ranger spams a bow, though it does have some spells to play with to change things up.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
In my experience the color of a warlock outshadows its equity in play when placed against other hybrids. Is it a full caster? I have played clerics, wizards, and a druid, most people think that access to the higher level spells make you a full caster, but if you play them as a full caster instead of a hybrid, you will be disappointed. I feel like crzyhawk is more correct in that the design is an archer hybrid that used its invocations to apply consistent effects unlike the arcane archer. The sword weilding warlock is more of a modified paladin that plays weaker in the long and short game.
In my experience, if you really want to play a warlock styled character, take your first level as sorcerer, then three levels of warlock, then return to finish as a sorcerer. Everything a warlock has to offer is gained by level 3 in most cases. This builds a sorcerer 17/warlock 3 that has 9th level spells and a lot more versatility in spell selection and spells per day. Not maximizing the effects for OP game play either. I am currently playing a GOOlock/draconic sorcerer and it is way more fun that just a draconic sorcerer or GOOlock solo. I do feel behind slightly in spell levels compared to my counterparts, but then I have the ability to craft my spells as needed with metamagic and not just be a 120ft cannon that is push/pulling every round because we did not have a short rest between each encounter.
I have played a warlock to 20 and it was fun, but I found myself suffering A LOT every time I had to use a spell slot, even in the higher tiers. It is a class that has almost all of its power held behind a short rest paywall with very specific builds that are not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
IMHO, Earthdawn is still the best fantasy realm, Shadowrun is the best Sci-Fi realm, and Dark Sun is the best D&D realm.
What we've tested in my playtest group and what I've done in 2 campaigns now is that we change the spell slots progression from the warlock "pact magic" and the invocation system to mirror that of the Artificer. They can choose daily the invocations that they want to be "active" from he ones they know vs can use. And the half caster spell progression still allows them to feel unique with the invocations and have a power level that's more on par with the other arcane classes. They tried something very similar in OneDnd playtest 5 and people evidently didn't like it and preferred things the way there were before. Which I think is still the wrong way to go but that's just me.
Wizards and other spellcasters have more options overall, but the truth is in most DnD games, unless you have the chance to prepare for a very specific situation, you're probably going to have the same rotation of three or four actions - a cantrip, a higher level spell, a combination you use, etc - and it's rarely going to switch from that except for rare exceptions. I've played both wizard and warlock in mid to high level games and I find that yeah, while it's nice to have a ton of options, you're only dropping the same four or five spells with regularity as a wizard in combat.
When it comes to setting up those few static rotations with some extra options thrown in, Warlock can really shine. There are a lot of passive buffs that you can give yourself via your invocations that don't require concentration and getting back pretty much all of your features on a short rest can be really important depending on the game you're in.
If your DM runs the type of game where you only go through two or three encounters between long rests, then yeah, the wizard or any full spellcaster is definitely going to outperform nearly any other party member in damage because they can simply burn through a high level spell every single turn of combat.
As a DM and a player, I think it's first and foremost important to let my players get to play who and what they want to play - and there are classes like the Warlock, Ranger, Monk (and really, this can apply to martials in general in higher level games) where the DM might have to tweak the campaign and encounters to make sure everyone gets their moment to shine. You have a warlock in the party with Eldritch Spear and Repelling Blast? Give him stuff to snipe. Put archers up on hillsides and battlements and spread them out so the Wizard can't AOE them.
I run a Strixhaven game with two martials in it, and it's been a fun challenge tweaking things to make sure they stay effective in combat. It's not as easy to run and balance as a game of full martials or full spellcasters, but the campaign is better for it because the martial players feel invested in the characters and the world, and it makes for a much more enjoyable experience at the table.
What we've tested in my playtest group and what I've done in 2 campaigns now is that we change the spell slots progression from the warlock "pact magic" and the invocation system to mirror that of the Artificer. They can choose daily the invocations that they want to be "active" from he ones they know vs can use. And the half caster spell progression still allows them to feel unique with the invocations and have a power level that's more on par with the other arcane classes. They tried something very similar in OneDnd playtest 5 and people evidently didn't like it and preferred things the way there were before. Which I think is still the wrong way to go but that's just me.
the playtest warlock was flat out better. I don't think that the people who complained really play warlocks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
What we've tested in my playtest group and what I've done in 2 campaigns now is that we change the spell slots progression from the warlock "pact magic" and the invocation system to mirror that of the Artificer. They can choose daily the invocations that they want to be "active" from he ones they know vs can use. And the half caster spell progression still allows them to feel unique with the invocations and have a power level that's more on par with the other arcane classes. They tried something very similar in OneDnd playtest 5 and people evidently didn't like it and preferred things the way there were before. Which I think is still the wrong way to go but that's just me.
the playtest warlock was flat out better. I don't think that the people who complained really play warlocks.
It was flat our worse, I don''t think the people who liked it play warlocks.
What we've tested in my playtest group and what I've done in 2 campaigns now is that we change the spell slots progression from the warlock "pact magic" and the invocation system to mirror that of the Artificer. They can choose daily the invocations that they want to be "active" from he ones they know vs can use. And the half caster spell progression still allows them to feel unique with the invocations and have a power level that's more on par with the other arcane classes. They tried something very similar in OneDnd playtest 5 and people evidently didn't like it and preferred things the way there were before. Which I think is still the wrong way to go but that's just me.
the playtest warlock was flat out better. I don't think that the people who complained really play warlocks.
It was flat our worse, I don''t think the people who liked it play warlocks.
I think the playtest 5 was better than what we currently have, but not better than playtest 7 which is also better than current. Other than that I felt playtest 5 and 7 were different not better or worse than each other. Just different and expressing different playstyles. Also very funny interaction where people make bad assumptions about each other because they disagree. (Ya I know yours was tongue in cheek due to response).
What we've tested in my playtest group and what I've done in 2 campaigns now is that we change the spell slots progression from the warlock "pact magic" and the invocation system to mirror that of the Artificer. They can choose daily the invocations that they want to be "active" from he ones they know vs can use. And the half caster spell progression still allows them to feel unique with the invocations and have a power level that's more on par with the other arcane classes. They tried something very similar in OneDnd playtest 5 and people evidently didn't like it and preferred things the way there were before. Which I think is still the wrong way to go but that's just me.
the playtest warlock was flat out better. I don't think that the people who complained really play warlocks.
It was flat our worse, I don''t think the people who liked it play warlocks.
I think the playtest 5 was better than what we currently have, but not better than playtest 7 which is also better than current. Other than that I felt playtest 5 and 7 were different not better or worse than each other. Just different and expressing different playstyles. Also very funny interaction where people make bad assumptions about each other because they disagree. (Ya I know yours was tongue in cheek due to response).
I generally think everyone was advocating for what fit their table the best. The playtest 5 one worked for some tables like i can't remember their names but the person who said they never got short rests as if you ever take an hour off evil advances an hour while you are doing nothing. I never understood the logic of it, given they also need to take long rests. But I accept it as being what happens at their table even if it was likely somewhat exaggerated for effect. Just like i'll never get the people who do real time advancement in their games where if a week passes in real life a week passes in the game no matter where you stopped the game. Had to end the night right after a big fight due to the baby crying and can't get together for another 2 weeks well 2 weeks passes with the PCs stuck in the dungeon, i hope they had enough food and survive all the random encounters. I'll never get that, but if that is what brings them joy have at it, and I'd understand them advocating for things that support that as that is what fits their table. My table the 1/2 caster model was trying to solve a problem that did not exist for us and made the warlock just feel like a bad wizard. Instead of like a unique caster who kind of reflects an arcane warrior.
What we've tested in my playtest group and what I've done in 2 campaigns now is that we change the spell slots progression from the warlock "pact magic" and the invocation system to mirror that of the Artificer. They can choose daily the invocations that they want to be "active" from he ones they know vs can use. And the half caster spell progression still allows them to feel unique with the invocations and have a power level that's more on par with the other arcane classes. They tried something very similar in OneDnd playtest 5 and people evidently didn't like it and preferred things the way there were before. Which I think is still the wrong way to go but that's just me.
the playtest warlock was flat out better. I don't think that the people who complained really play warlocks.
It was flat our worse, I don''t think the people who liked it play warlocks.
I think the playtest 5 was better than what we currently have, but not better than playtest 7 which is also better than current. Other than that I felt playtest 5 and 7 were different not better or worse than each other. Just different and expressing different playstyles. Also very funny interaction where people make bad assumptions about each other because they disagree. (Ya I know yours was tongue in cheek due to response).
I generally think everyone was advocating for what fit their table the best. The playtest 5 one worked for some tables like i can't remember their names but the person who said they never got short rests as if you ever take an hour off evil advances an hour while you are doing nothing. I never understood the logic of it, given they also need to take long rests. But I accept it as being what happens at their table even if it was likely somewhat exaggerated for effect. Just like i'll never get the people who do real time advancement in their games where if a week passes in real life a week passes in the game no matter where you stopped the game. Had to end the night right after a big fight due to the baby crying and can't get together for another 2 weeks well 2 weeks passes with the PCs stuck in the dungeon, i hope they had enough food and survive all the random encounters. I'll never get that, but if that is what brings them joy have at it, and I'd understand them advocating for things that support that as that is what fits their table. My table the 1/2 caster model was trying to solve a problem that did not exist for us and made the warlock just feel like a bad wizard. Instead of like a unique caster who kind of reflects an arcane warrior.
I completely agree with this. I also think it is for those tables that often only did like 1 or 2 encounters in a day making the long rest resource individuals just worlds better than most other classes. In general the table should do what is best for the table. As long as everyone is having fun role playing we are playing D&D right. If one or more people are not having fun and their team fantasy or role is not being met due to some combination of differences between, tone, pace, or mechanics than players and gm's should be encouraged to change mechanics that aren't working. The first place to check should be the DMG with alternate rules that may work for your table. If those aren't working some homebrew or rules alterations are usually pretty fine. Even as the playtest 5 warlock was, it was, I believe, universally seen as incomplete. Even those that liked it often said it still needed a little extra work in the balance department before it was fully ready. Even when said individual was complaining about rests I didn't see why they couldn't utilize different rest rules to solve the rest problem at their table. The issue for them became one that wasn't mechanical, but narrative, they couldn't wrap their head around the idea that you could do stuff during a short rest like eat, treat wounds and plan the next course of action rather than just doing nothing and all your stuff came back which they were just adamantly against doing.
I'm a DM and player of course; I've played with Warlocks, and has a player who is playing a warlock. In one of my campaigns I'm a level 10 wizard along with a level 10 warlock companion.
I feel like I completely overshadow the Warlock, like to a substantial degree--enough so that I often don't use my familiar just so there can be value to his play. My wizard feels like cheat-mode--there's nothing the Warlock can do that the Wizard can't also do, or do better (am I wrong here though?)
In my own campaign where I have a player playing a warlock--it's like this: Eldritch Blast...Eldritch Blast....Eldritch blast. Such to the point that the other players laugh whenever its her turn, because basically Eldritch Blast is most of what she does in combat.
I've looked and researched, and I can't figure out what makes anyone choose a warlock at all (especially over a Wizard) Hexblade I understand, but what about the other subtypes?
It just seems so boring and limited--but maybe I'm missing something? Looking for feedback!
First things first, level 10 is right at the end of the "warlock doldrums"; at level 11 they will gain a third pact magic slot, a sixth level Mystic Arcanum (1/day) slot, and even an extra Eldritch Blast beam. Meaning doubling the amount of slots they can throw down in big epic no-short-rest fights.
But what makes the warlock? Caster effectiveness and shenanigans combined with minimal faff. Minimal faff because they aren't juggling multiple levels of spell slots and if you don't know what to do Eldritch Blast is never wrong. They just get two. The warlock is the easiest to play major caster (although hardest to level up)
As for shenanigans? There is a lot of mileage in, for instance, turning Disguise Self into an at will spell so you can disguise yourself like you were Bugs Bunny. Or not having to count the cost of a Silent Image. Warlocks are top tier Illusionists thanks to this quantity of illusions, and with the ability to do things like have enhanced darkvision and continually on detect magic or speak with every single dead body they are the best diviners in the game.
If the Warlock player forgot the 4th level ASI I am guessing you are comparing an experienced player (yourself) to a player with less experience. An experienced player is chomping at the bit for any ASI.
You are correct, the Warlock is predicated on Short Rests. Imagine if Long Rests were as difficult to get at some tables as Short Rests are. If your Wizard does not get his Long Rests, he will look pretty anemic, too.
There are so many things the Warlock gets that Wizards do not that make them just enough different to not make your comparison as viable as you think. Right now my Hexblade is running around in a dungeon with his 24 hr Specter friend who can peek his head through doors to see what is on the other side, or through walls to find Secret passageways or rooms for us, and he can fight. [He cannot speak, but can nod yes or no to such questions.] A Warlock with Devil's Sight (which Wizards cannot get) can hide in a Darkness Spell, or Shadow of Moil for Disadvantage on attacks against the Warlock and the Warlock gains Advantage on attacks, and spells that need to see the target do not work, including Counterspell. The Warlock can have fun pushing an enemy away from a friendly in danger with EB and Repelling Blast, or push something weak with low AC like a caster into their area of effect spell.
At 8th Level, the Warlock and Wizard both have two 4th level spells. If the Warlock gets three Short Rests per day, the Warlock can cast a 4th Level spell eight times in one day while the Wizard can only cast a 4th level spell twice in that same period. There is really too much going on to really compare, and again, I think you are comparing yourself to a player less experienced than you which is really the thing going on here.
If Short Rests are tough in your campaign, take the Catnap spell and help your friendly Warlock.
Imagine if Long Rests were as difficult to get at some tables as Short Rests are. If your Wizard does not get his Long Rests, he will look pretty anemic, too.
One thing I wanted talk about is this. It is something odd about short rests. They take 1 hour and somehow no one can find the space to do them, look out if we try to rest we will be ambushed, the monsters will kill the hostage, the thieves will get far away. But a long rest which takes 8 no one has a narrative or practical problem taking whenever they need it. There are instances in the story where sure that makes sense, at that exact moment you can't rest but by the time you get to the long rest all those issues are gone. But the reality I suspect 99% of the time is, the wizard, barbarian etc doesn't want to yet, i haven't used enough slots to get the most out of arcane recovery, i haven't lost enough hit points. Dude just take the rest because your friend wants to, its not a big deal.
Imagine if Long Rests were as difficult to get at some tables as Short Rests are. If your Wizard does not get his Long Rests, he will look pretty anemic, too.
One thing I wanted talk about is this. It is something odd about short rests. They take 1 hour and somehow no one can find the space to do them, look out if we try to rest we will be ambushed, the monsters will kill the hostage, the thieves will get far away. But a long rest which takes 8 no one has a narrative or practical problem taking whenever they need it. There are instances in the story where sure that makes sense, at that exact moment you can't rest but by the time you get to the long rest all those issues are gone. But the reality I suspect 99% of the time is, the wizard, barbarian etc doesn't want to yet, i haven't used enough slots to get the most out of arcane recovery, i haven't lost enough hit points. Dude just take the rest because your friend wants to, its not a big deal.
Welcome to 5e where short rests are long and long rests are short (at least at some tables).
The problem is, a lot of times it doesn't make narrative sense to sit down and rest for an hour. Say you're clearing out a dungeon clearing room to room, it doesn't make any sense to just stop and wait an hour before you go on to the next room. Mechanically, it makes perfect sense, but it can feel very meta-gamey. My group doesn't like to do that, and it absolutely kills my ability to get spell slots back.
There are plenty of house rules to address that by making short rests faster, but, honestly it's a shortcoming of the 5e game design/short rest classes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This. It's unfair really to compare Warlocks to Wizards. Everyone except maybe bards pale in comparison, because they have a spell for everything. The problem is wizard, not warlock. Compare warlock to other classes, particularly martials, and warlocks look pretty fantastic.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
There are a few levels where the warlock feels amazing:
2. EB+AB+Hex is great 1d10+3+1d6. Add in whatever other invocation you took and its a fun time.
5. Extra beam on EB gives you generally better damage with hex than anyone except GWM or SS.
OR
5. Take two shortrests as a fiend/efreet genie and do 6 fireballs in a day. The fathomless doing 6 lightning bolts also deserves mention.
Or
5. Extra attack on pact of the blade (bladesinger and swords bard are wondering what deal you made to get extra attack at 5th)
11. Three beams, 3rd spell slot, and mystic arcanum. You have reliably good EB+AB damage and that 3rd slot is badly needed with MA.
12. Lifedrinker. Many pact of the blade users multiclass, but level 12 is very much worth it.
Depending on other builds you may or may not see other nice power bumps, but those are the levels where I see Warlocks excel. There is absolutly an issue levels 6-10 and those levels are hard. I usually supplement spell slots with fey/shadow touched to help manage those levels.
Interesting feedback.
The Warlock in my campaign hit level 5, and she received a pretty big boost from it, especially because she forgot to give herself level 4 stat/or feat bonus--so she's feeling pretty good.
I don't think it's unfair to compare casting classes, they're birds of feather. It looks like no one is arguing that the Warlock can do anything better than what a Wizard can do. Also that the Wizard can do basically everything the Warlock can do, except better. The reason to compare is so that people can make informed decisions to have fun. If the monk sucks and a person wants to be melee, I'm not going to suggest a monk.
The primary case for the warlock not being awful seems to be this
1. Good social potential due to high CHR
2. High potential damage output if short rests are used effectively.
Its not awful, but in terms of casters out there, I'd rank it Wizard, Sorc/Druid, Warlock.
Thanks for the info all.
The warlock CAN do some things better tho.
The warlock gets a far better version of a familiar if they choose pact of the chain, which if combined with invocations, make them pretty good, same with the rest of their pacts. Along with the fact that invocations allow quite possibly the most customisations, with plenty of at will spells and unique effects that wizards can only mimic a part of at level 18.
I want to be clear it isn't just damage output. Without rests warlocks can do better at will damage than any other caster in the game rivalling some martial classes. With rests the warlock becomes one of the best control and utility casters in the game in addition to having the good damage output that they always bring to the table.
Chain warlocks get a far superior familiar to anyone and can make for excellent scouts, in some cases making the rogue or druid blush because the tiny flying intelligent, invisible creature with dexterous hands can get in just about as many places the rogue can and some places it can't. When it gets detected the warlock just shunts it back into a pocket dimension for safety while the rogue has to high tail it out of their.
The blade lock (particularly the hexblade) is one of the best gish classes in the game capable of dealing solid damage in melee, being tough thanks to spells like armor of agathys and still loses none of the potency of their control spells because both the blade and the spells use charisma.
So essentially if the question is "what can a warlock do better than a wizard". The answer is Charisma checks, sustained single target damage, and, depending on the rests, build and circumstances, out of combat utility casting.
Obviously the wizard has access to more spells out of combat, but if you need someone to cast fly to get across the gorge, probably let the warlock cast it and then take a short rest saving the wizard his spell slots and basically getting across that gorge for free. If you need to speak a language, let the warlock cast tongues then take a short rest after all the conversations are done and move on. The ability to cast leveled spells take a rest and not lose any combat strength is really under-rated. It won't always be available but when it is the warlock is just an "I win" button.
And if they do run out of spells EB+AB is just as good as just about any martials attacks. So essentially martial combat capability slapped with solid utility and control spells.
Warlock isn't really a caster. It's an archer. On most turns, it spams eldritch blast like a ranger spams a bow, though it does have some spells to play with to change things up.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
In my experience the color of a warlock outshadows its equity in play when placed against other hybrids. Is it a full caster? I have played clerics, wizards, and a druid, most people think that access to the higher level spells make you a full caster, but if you play them as a full caster instead of a hybrid, you will be disappointed. I feel like crzyhawk is more correct in that the design is an archer hybrid that used its invocations to apply consistent effects unlike the arcane archer. The sword weilding warlock is more of a modified paladin that plays weaker in the long and short game.
In my experience, if you really want to play a warlock styled character, take your first level as sorcerer, then three levels of warlock, then return to finish as a sorcerer. Everything a warlock has to offer is gained by level 3 in most cases. This builds a sorcerer 17/warlock 3 that has 9th level spells and a lot more versatility in spell selection and spells per day. Not maximizing the effects for OP game play either. I am currently playing a GOOlock/draconic sorcerer and it is way more fun that just a draconic sorcerer or GOOlock solo. I do feel behind slightly in spell levels compared to my counterparts, but then I have the ability to craft my spells as needed with metamagic and not just be a 120ft cannon that is push/pulling every round because we did not have a short rest between each encounter.
I have played a warlock to 20 and it was fun, but I found myself suffering A LOT every time I had to use a spell slot, even in the higher tiers. It is a class that has almost all of its power held behind a short rest paywall with very specific builds that are not.
IMHO, Earthdawn is still the best fantasy realm, Shadowrun is the best Sci-Fi realm, and Dark Sun is the best D&D realm.
What we've tested in my playtest group and what I've done in 2 campaigns now is that we change the spell slots progression from the warlock "pact magic" and the invocation system to mirror that of the Artificer. They can choose daily the invocations that they want to be "active" from he ones they know vs can use. And the half caster spell progression still allows them to feel unique with the invocations and have a power level that's more on par with the other arcane classes. They tried something very similar in OneDnd playtest 5 and people evidently didn't like it and preferred things the way there were before. Which I think is still the wrong way to go but that's just me.
Wizards and other spellcasters have more options overall, but the truth is in most DnD games, unless you have the chance to prepare for a very specific situation, you're probably going to have the same rotation of three or four actions - a cantrip, a higher level spell, a combination you use, etc - and it's rarely going to switch from that except for rare exceptions. I've played both wizard and warlock in mid to high level games and I find that yeah, while it's nice to have a ton of options, you're only dropping the same four or five spells with regularity as a wizard in combat.
When it comes to setting up those few static rotations with some extra options thrown in, Warlock can really shine. There are a lot of passive buffs that you can give yourself via your invocations that don't require concentration and getting back pretty much all of your features on a short rest can be really important depending on the game you're in.
If your DM runs the type of game where you only go through two or three encounters between long rests, then yeah, the wizard or any full spellcaster is definitely going to outperform nearly any other party member in damage because they can simply burn through a high level spell every single turn of combat.
As a DM and a player, I think it's first and foremost important to let my players get to play who and what they want to play - and there are classes like the Warlock, Ranger, Monk (and really, this can apply to martials in general in higher level games) where the DM might have to tweak the campaign and encounters to make sure everyone gets their moment to shine. You have a warlock in the party with Eldritch Spear and Repelling Blast? Give him stuff to snipe. Put archers up on hillsides and battlements and spread them out so the Wizard can't AOE them.
I run a Strixhaven game with two martials in it, and it's been a fun challenge tweaking things to make sure they stay effective in combat. It's not as easy to run and balance as a game of full martials or full spellcasters, but the campaign is better for it because the martial players feel invested in the characters and the world, and it makes for a much more enjoyable experience at the table.
the playtest warlock was flat out better. I don't think that the people who complained really play warlocks.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
It was flat our worse, I don''t think the people who liked it play warlocks.
I think the playtest 5 was better than what we currently have, but not better than playtest 7 which is also better than current. Other than that I felt playtest 5 and 7 were different not better or worse than each other. Just different and expressing different playstyles. Also very funny interaction where people make bad assumptions about each other because they disagree. (Ya I know yours was tongue in cheek due to response).
I generally think everyone was advocating for what fit their table the best. The playtest 5 one worked for some tables like i can't remember their names but the person who said they never got short rests as if you ever take an hour off evil advances an hour while you are doing nothing. I never understood the logic of it, given they also need to take long rests. But I accept it as being what happens at their table even if it was likely somewhat exaggerated for effect. Just like i'll never get the people who do real time advancement in their games where if a week passes in real life a week passes in the game no matter where you stopped the game. Had to end the night right after a big fight due to the baby crying and can't get together for another 2 weeks well 2 weeks passes with the PCs stuck in the dungeon, i hope they had enough food and survive all the random encounters. I'll never get that, but if that is what brings them joy have at it, and I'd understand them advocating for things that support that as that is what fits their table. My table the 1/2 caster model was trying to solve a problem that did not exist for us and made the warlock just feel like a bad wizard. Instead of like a unique caster who kind of reflects an arcane warrior.
I completely agree with this. I also think it is for those tables that often only did like 1 or 2 encounters in a day making the long rest resource individuals just worlds better than most other classes. In general the table should do what is best for the table. As long as everyone is having fun role playing we are playing D&D right. If one or more people are not having fun and their team fantasy or role is not being met due to some combination of differences between, tone, pace, or mechanics than players and gm's should be encouraged to change mechanics that aren't working. The first place to check should be the DMG with alternate rules that may work for your table. If those aren't working some homebrew or rules alterations are usually pretty fine. Even as the playtest 5 warlock was, it was, I believe, universally seen as incomplete. Even those that liked it often said it still needed a little extra work in the balance department before it was fully ready. Even when said individual was complaining about rests I didn't see why they couldn't utilize different rest rules to solve the rest problem at their table. The issue for them became one that wasn't mechanical, but narrative, they couldn't wrap their head around the idea that you could do stuff during a short rest like eat, treat wounds and plan the next course of action rather than just doing nothing and all your stuff came back which they were just adamantly against doing.
First things first, level 10 is right at the end of the "warlock doldrums"; at level 11 they will gain a third pact magic slot, a sixth level Mystic Arcanum (1/day) slot, and even an extra Eldritch Blast beam. Meaning doubling the amount of slots they can throw down in big epic no-short-rest fights.
But what makes the warlock? Caster effectiveness and shenanigans combined with minimal faff. Minimal faff because they aren't juggling multiple levels of spell slots and if you don't know what to do Eldritch Blast is never wrong. They just get two. The warlock is the easiest to play major caster (although hardest to level up)
As for shenanigans? There is a lot of mileage in, for instance, turning Disguise Self into an at will spell so you can disguise yourself like you were Bugs Bunny. Or not having to count the cost of a Silent Image. Warlocks are top tier Illusionists thanks to this quantity of illusions, and with the ability to do things like have enhanced darkvision and continually on detect magic or speak with every single dead body they are the best diviners in the game.
If the Warlock player forgot the 4th level ASI I am guessing you are comparing an experienced player (yourself) to a player with less experience. An experienced player is chomping at the bit for any ASI.
You are correct, the Warlock is predicated on Short Rests. Imagine if Long Rests were as difficult to get at some tables as Short Rests are. If your Wizard does not get his Long Rests, he will look pretty anemic, too.
There are so many things the Warlock gets that Wizards do not that make them just enough different to not make your comparison as viable as you think. Right now my Hexblade is running around in a dungeon with his 24 hr Specter friend who can peek his head through doors to see what is on the other side, or through walls to find Secret passageways or rooms for us, and he can fight. [He cannot speak, but can nod yes or no to such questions.] A Warlock with Devil's Sight (which Wizards cannot get) can hide in a Darkness Spell, or Shadow of Moil for Disadvantage on attacks against the Warlock and the Warlock gains Advantage on attacks, and spells that need to see the target do not work, including Counterspell. The Warlock can have fun pushing an enemy away from a friendly in danger with EB and Repelling Blast, or push something weak with low AC like a caster into their area of effect spell.
At 8th Level, the Warlock and Wizard both have two 4th level spells. If the Warlock gets three Short Rests per day, the Warlock can cast a 4th Level spell eight times in one day while the Wizard can only cast a 4th level spell twice in that same period. There is really too much going on to really compare, and again, I think you are comparing yourself to a player less experienced than you which is really the thing going on here.
If Short Rests are tough in your campaign, take the Catnap spell and help your friendly Warlock.
One thing I wanted talk about is this. It is something odd about short rests. They take 1 hour and somehow no one can find the space to do them, look out if we try to rest we will be ambushed, the monsters will kill the hostage, the thieves will get far away. But a long rest which takes 8 no one has a narrative or practical problem taking whenever they need it. There are instances in the story where sure that makes sense, at that exact moment you can't rest but by the time you get to the long rest all those issues are gone. But the reality I suspect 99% of the time is, the wizard, barbarian etc doesn't want to yet, i haven't used enough slots to get the most out of arcane recovery, i haven't lost enough hit points. Dude just take the rest because your friend wants to, its not a big deal.
Welcome to 5e where short rests are long and long rests are short (at least at some tables).
The problem is, a lot of times it doesn't make narrative sense to sit down and rest for an hour. Say you're clearing out a dungeon clearing room to room, it doesn't make any sense to just stop and wait an hour before you go on to the next room. Mechanically, it makes perfect sense, but it can feel very meta-gamey. My group doesn't like to do that, and it absolutely kills my ability to get spell slots back.
There are plenty of house rules to address that by making short rests faster, but, honestly it's a shortcoming of the 5e game design/short rest classes.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha