To people who say that Warlock is a simple caster: Warlocks are actually quite complex because they have a large amount of complexity outside of spellcasting. Not only do they actually have a decent amount of spellcasting, but they also have Pact Boons and numerous Eldritch Invocations.
I know that the latter of those two features allows you to control the degree of complexity with them somewhat, but keeping track of the options can still be pretty hard. Not only that, but a new player might panic and get confused when they see so many options without a way to sort through all of them and no way to figure out which to take and which ones are mechanically weak.
So Warlocks may be simple for a caster… But they are not simple whatsoever when compared to a martial. And if you want new players to be able to easily play a spellcaster, then there needs to be at least one spellcaster that is simple even when compared to martials. Because otherwise, you are telling new players they have to play a martial and if they want to do something else, then they will just need to deal with not being able to fully understand how that something else works.
And just to clarify, I am not saying that all spellcsters should be simple because that would involve taking away complex options from advanced players and that would really just not be fair. What I am saying though is that there needs to be at least one “simple” spellcaster that new players can easily play and enjoy. Were that caster to be Warlock, Warlock woud need to have the base class be simpler, and it would also probably need to have a couple simple subclasses too since (unless I’m missing something) there doesn’t seem to be many simple Warlock subclasses in 5e.
A better solution would just be to add another class into the game.
TL;DR: I don't think Warlocks are actually that simple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Warlocks aren't more simple or complex than any other arcane spellcaster, they have access to all the same spells, just use them at a different pace.
In 5e (we don't know about One) they have a smaller spell list and a low number of known spells, so yes, they're more simple. In addition, the dominant paradigm is the hex/agonizing blast eldritch blast spammer, which is easy to play, and unlike comparably simple paradigms for other casters, is actually reasonably effective.
Warlocks aren't more simple or complex than any other arcane spellcaster, they have access to all the same spells, just use them at a different pace.
In 5e (we don't know about One) they have a smaller spell list and a low number of known spells, so yes, they're more simple. In addition, the dominant paradigm is the hex/agonizing blast eldritch blast spammer, which is easy to play, and unlike comparably simple paradigms for other casters, is actually reasonably effective.
As someone who normally plays spell casters, I can say I don't agree with the idea that warlock is simpler. It is simpler than sorcerer which is easily the most complicated caster. It is simpler than druid and probably bard. But I would put it on a similar level of complication to the wizard and it is definitely more complicated than the Cleric. Cleric has been my easiest spell caster. Their spell list isn't filled with too many complicated spells and their ability to change them on the fly makes them much easier than the warlock. In addition, their traditional casting means you dont feel as resource starved as a warlock and their are less decision points with only having casting and channel divinity than thinking about spells AND eldritch invocations. The problem is most people DO think that all you have to do is cast eldritch blast and take agonizing blast and that is it, but to play an effective warlock it is much more complicated than that.
As someone who normally plays spell casters, I can say I don't agree with the idea that warlock is simpler. It is simpler than sorcerer which is easily the most complicated caster. It is simpler than druid and probably bard.
I would not consider sorcerer 'easily' the most complicated, or even close to the most complicated. The kings of "if you play your character right, you'll completely break the adventure" are bard, druid, and wizard.
This touches on what I was trying to say with my post on Simplicity vs Complexity. No one is talking about the same things when they talk about simplicity. Are they decisions made during character creation? Or are they made during play? How many spells/abilities/rules do you have to memorize before its easy? Do you do it at the start, or as you go? Is it easier to pick new spells every day, or only once at level up and done?
Even after you have lots of experience, the definitions and answers aren't the same. To me, Sorcerers are the easiest spellcaster class. You pick a few spells, have a small pool of points to modify them, and you just repeat the same combos most of the time. But to Aquilontune, they're the most complicated. Neither of us are wrong. We're just talking about different forms of complications. And to make it even worse, some people see complexity as a positive thing, and others simplicity. Not because one is naturally better than the other. We just see the results we want from the things we identify with these terms.
Until we can speak the same language in identifying the problems, I don't know how any of these conversations can lead anywhere. No one needs to use my terms either. We just have to be better able to explain what it is we find complex and what we want changed.
As someone who normally plays spell casters, I can say I don't agree with the idea that warlock is simpler. It is simpler than sorcerer which is easily the most complicated caster. It is simpler than druid and probably bard.
I would not consider sorcerer 'easily' the most complicated, or even close to the most complicated. The kings of "if you play your character right, you'll completely break the adventure" are bard, druid, and wizard.
Yes, but they are also easy to not screw up at the same time. Sorcerer is the most complicated because of both the high floor and the high ceiling. Wizard, bard and druid have high ceilings but their skill floors are just as low if not lower than the warlocks, in other words you can be effective with them without too much thought and it is hard to completely mess them up and make bad wizards, bards or druids.
If I were to rank classes from most complicated to least.
How the hell is sorcerer "complicated"? It's both the easiest and weakest of the various full casters to play. Metamagic basically doesn't exist and the sorcerer is all of the lack-of-features of the wizard with less than half the spells.
The sorcerer's access to metamagic is so sharply limited for so much of any given sorcerer's run that the purported flexibility of the system never really materializes. You get two Special Moves you can do once or twice a day and that's it, and everybody picks the same Special Moves. When was the last time you saw Extended or Distant Spell on a sheet? When was the last time you saw a sheet that DIDN'T have Quicken, Twin, or both?
Yes, but they are also easy to not screw up at the same time. Sorcerer is the most complicated because of both the high floor and the high ceiling. Wizard, bard and druid have high ceilings but their skill floors are just as low if not lower than the warlocks, in other words you can be effective with them without too much thought and it is hard to completely mess them up and make bad wizards, bards or druids.
The skill floor for a sorcerer is "I play a draconic sorcerer and I learn evocation spells". The skill floor for a wizard is "I play an evoker and I learn evocation spells". The draconic sorcerer, because they get innate durability boosts, is easier to play than the evocation wizard. You can either ignore metamagic (just use your sorcery points to buy more spell slots) or use the super straightforward ones like empowered spell.
The skill ceiling for sorcerer, due to a small number of spells known and a relatively mediocre spell list, is not particularly high, and metamagic is rarely much of a game changer.
In my current game, I have a Sorcerer that uses Distant Spell every day to great effect.
But this is all besides the point.
Everyone keeps trying to convince each other that their side is the 'right' one and the other side is delusional or worse. But the real issue is that everyone has different definitions of complexity. You're all correct. The things that you define as complex are complex to you. But they're not the same things. Until people stop trying to prove each other wrong, this thread will run into 300 posts of the same unproductive arguments as the last one.
The sorcerer's access to metamagic is so sharply limited for so much of any given sorcerer's run that the purported flexibility of the system never really materializes. You get two Special Moves you can do once or twice a day and that's it, and everybody picks the same Special Moves. When was the last time you saw Extended or Distant Spell on a sheet? When was the last time you saw a sheet that DIDN'T have Quicken, Twin, or both?
LOL, most sorcerers I play with use metamagic every round. You are only correct in that the different metamagics horribly imbalanced from each other. Twin is easily the best, with Quicken a close second, and Subtle the go-to third.
LOL, most sorcerers I play with use metamagic every round. You are only correct in that the different metamagics horribly imbalanced from each other. Twin is easily the best, with Quicken a close second, and Subtle the go-to third.
Twin spell is not the best spell, it's a trap option. The vast majority of spells you can twin are spells you shouldn't be casting in the first place.
The sorcerer's access to metamagic is so sharply limited for so much of any given sorcerer's run that the purported flexibility of the system never really materializes. You get two Special Moves you can do once or twice a day and that's it, and everybody picks the same Special Moves. When was the last time you saw Extended or Distant Spell on a sheet? When was the last time you saw a sheet that DIDN'T have Quicken, Twin, or both?
Um... literally every time I play the game. My sorcerer lives and dies by subtle spell and distant spell. One of my go to crowd control tricks is to use distant spell to cast the light cantrip on someone's eyeball. Distant spell or Subtle Spell paired with Minor Illusion are absolutely amazing, and doubling the range on Dimension Door and Misty Step are life savers.
Um... literally every time I play the game. My sorcerer lives and dies by subtle spell and distant spell. One of my go to crowd control tricks is to use distant spell to cast the light cantrip on someone's eyeball.
Light targets an object. An eyeball is not an object. A lot of options look better if you don't actually use the rules.
If you look at any set of statistics about players in D&D, you will discover
High level play is rare.
High level has a reputation for being hard to DM, hard to play, and unbalanced.
These observations have been true for every edition of D&D.
Now, if we look for what might cause these problems, there's really only one possible answer: it has to be spellcasters. A 20th level fighter or rogue doesn't really play hugely differently from first level, they just have bigger numbers. Wizards has recognize this for monster design -- if you compare MMM to VGtM or MToF, it's the spellcasting monsters that have been dramatically changed and simplified -- but they've already made two changes in One D&D that cut in the wrong direction:
Classes such as Bard and Ranger are now prepared spells casters, which is a vast complexity increase.
Number of spells prepared is increased. A level 10 ranger in 5e had 6 spells known, in One D&D it's 10 (9 base, hunters mark always prepared). A level 10 bard in 5e had 14; in One D&D it's 20 (15 base, 5 bonus).
Now, a lot of the problem has to do with what spells do, rather than the mechanics for using them, but still: reducing complexity in play (or making it so you can choose complexity at a cost in power -- say, subclasses whose only real benefit is more spells prepared) seems like it would go quite a way to making high level play something people would actually choose to do.
I think a good argument could be made for Prepared Spell classes actually being easier and more forgiving. Unless you have a DM who is willing to fudge a bit for new players, known spell classes lock you in to a set of spells until you level up, and you can only swap one spell at a time, and you can only swap cantrips when you hit a leve with an ASI. Prepared spell classes let you swap out spells on a long rest. This makes it easier for new players to adjust without getting locked in. Honestly, I feel like the new direction they are going will make the spellcasters a lot more newbie friendly, and think it's a step in the right direction.
Um... literally every time I play the game. My sorcerer lives and dies by subtle spell and distant spell. One of my go to crowd control tricks is to use distant spell to cast the light cantrip on someone's eyeball.
Light targets an object. An eyeball is not an object. A lot of options look better if you don't actually use the rules.
I'm thinking the DM played older editions where light could target someone's eyes and blind them. Cool effect but it would need to become a leveled spell again to allow that in my games. But to each their own.
Um... literally every time I play the game. My sorcerer lives and dies by subtle spell and distant spell. One of my go to crowd control tricks is to use distant spell to cast the light cantrip on someone's eyeball.
I really wouldn't allow that at my table. Too much power for a cantrip.
How the hell is sorcerer "complicated"? It's both the easiest and weakest of the various full casters to play. Metamagic basically doesn't exist and the sorcerer is all of the lack-of-features of the wizard with less than half the spells.
This is easy to understand. Look at the size of the sorcerer's spell list. Now count the number they get to know. How many of the spells can they pick end up being a trap without the right build? Everyone keeps talking about sorcerer like all they can do is blasting spells. Is blasting spells the only spells on their spell list or do they have other things on that list as well? If there are other things on their spell list why is it that everyone is just talking about blasting sorcs? Sorcs have a very limited number of spells known + they have meta-magic. The Limited spells known AND restrictive change over means if a spell from their list (that is nearly the same size as the wizards) doesn't work the way they thought for a situation they wanted it for they could be stuck with it for much longer than prepared casters including wizards who get more than double the number of spells known from a similarly sized list with the same number of spells per long rest cast. Sorcerers have to plan each of their spells ahead, and to be efficient with them you also need to think about which meta magics will compliment which spells you are going for.
Wizards are the EASIEST arcane caster, pick spells add them to your book, prep them like every other prepared caster. Don't like a spell, don't prepare it except for the rare circumstance you need it. Want a new spell, let your dm know and find a scroll and add it. You have your subclass that will change how the spell works but other than that. read the spell, cast the spell nothing to it. Sorcerer, picked a spell you didn't like? well you have to wait a whole level. You have changed all your spells eventually and now your metamagics don't really benefit the spells you have, guess you are just a worse wizard now huh?
Sorcerer takes actual planning about their spells. Having a limited number of spells with a lot of slots and a lot of options combined with options that synergize only with certain spells creates complications. less spells =/= less complication it can be the opposite if you can't freely change them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
To people who say that Warlock is a simple caster: Warlocks are actually quite complex because they have a large amount of complexity outside of spellcasting. Not only do they actually have a decent amount of spellcasting, but they also have Pact Boons and numerous Eldritch Invocations.
I know that the latter of those two features allows you to control the degree of complexity with them somewhat, but keeping track of the options can still be pretty hard. Not only that, but a new player might panic and get confused when they see so many options without a way to sort through all of them and no way to figure out which to take and which ones are mechanically weak.
So Warlocks may be simple for a caster… But they are not simple whatsoever when compared to a martial. And if you want new players to be able to easily play a spellcaster, then there needs to be at least one spellcaster that is simple even when compared to martials. Because otherwise, you are telling new players they have to play a martial and if they want to do something else, then they will just need to deal with not being able to fully understand how that something else works.
And just to clarify, I am not saying that all spellcsters should be simple because that would involve taking away complex options from advanced players and that would really just not be fair. What I am saying though is that there needs to be at least one “simple” spellcaster that new players can easily play and enjoy. Were that caster to be Warlock, Warlock woud need to have the base class be simpler, and it would also probably need to have a couple simple subclasses too since (unless I’m missing something) there doesn’t seem to be many simple Warlock subclasses in 5e.
A better solution would just be to add another class into the game.
TL;DR: I don't think Warlocks are actually that simple.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Warlocks aren't more simple or complex than any other arcane spellcaster, they have access to all the same spells, just use them at a different pace.
In 5e (we don't know about One) they have a smaller spell list and a low number of known spells, so yes, they're more simple. In addition, the dominant paradigm is the hex/agonizing blast eldritch blast spammer, which is easy to play, and unlike comparably simple paradigms for other casters, is actually reasonably effective.
As someone who normally plays spell casters, I can say I don't agree with the idea that warlock is simpler. It is simpler than sorcerer which is easily the most complicated caster. It is simpler than druid and probably bard. But I would put it on a similar level of complication to the wizard and it is definitely more complicated than the Cleric. Cleric has been my easiest spell caster. Their spell list isn't filled with too many complicated spells and their ability to change them on the fly makes them much easier than the warlock. In addition, their traditional casting means you dont feel as resource starved as a warlock and their are less decision points with only having casting and channel divinity than thinking about spells AND eldritch invocations. The problem is most people DO think that all you have to do is cast eldritch blast and take agonizing blast and that is it, but to play an effective warlock it is much more complicated than that.
I would not consider sorcerer 'easily' the most complicated, or even close to the most complicated. The kings of "if you play your character right, you'll completely break the adventure" are bard, druid, and wizard.
This touches on what I was trying to say with my post on Simplicity vs Complexity. No one is talking about the same things when they talk about simplicity. Are they decisions made during character creation? Or are they made during play? How many spells/abilities/rules do you have to memorize before its easy? Do you do it at the start, or as you go? Is it easier to pick new spells every day, or only once at level up and done?
Even after you have lots of experience, the definitions and answers aren't the same. To me, Sorcerers are the easiest spellcaster class. You pick a few spells, have a small pool of points to modify them, and you just repeat the same combos most of the time. But to Aquilontune, they're the most complicated. Neither of us are wrong. We're just talking about different forms of complications. And to make it even worse, some people see complexity as a positive thing, and others simplicity. Not because one is naturally better than the other. We just see the results we want from the things we identify with these terms.
Until we can speak the same language in identifying the problems, I don't know how any of these conversations can lead anywhere. No one needs to use my terms either. We just have to be better able to explain what it is we find complex and what we want changed.
Yes, but they are also easy to not screw up at the same time. Sorcerer is the most complicated because of both the high floor and the high ceiling. Wizard, bard and druid have high ceilings but their skill floors are just as low if not lower than the warlocks, in other words you can be effective with them without too much thought and it is hard to completely mess them up and make bad wizards, bards or druids.
If I were to rank classes from most complicated to least.
1 Sorcerer
2. Druid
3. Bard
4. Warlock
5. Wizard
6. Ranger
7. Cleric
8. Monk
9. Paladin
10. Rogue
11. Fighter
12. Barbarian.
How the hell is sorcerer "complicated"? It's both the easiest and weakest of the various full casters to play. Metamagic basically doesn't exist and the sorcerer is all of the lack-of-features of the wizard with less than half the spells.
Please do not contact or message me.
The sorcerer's access to metamagic is so sharply limited for so much of any given sorcerer's run that the purported flexibility of the system never really materializes. You get two Special Moves you can do once or twice a day and that's it, and everybody picks the same Special Moves. When was the last time you saw Extended or Distant Spell on a sheet? When was the last time you saw a sheet that DIDN'T have Quicken, Twin, or both?
Please do not contact or message me.
The skill floor for a sorcerer is "I play a draconic sorcerer and I learn evocation spells". The skill floor for a wizard is "I play an evoker and I learn evocation spells". The draconic sorcerer, because they get innate durability boosts, is easier to play than the evocation wizard. You can either ignore metamagic (just use your sorcery points to buy more spell slots) or use the super straightforward ones like empowered spell.
The skill ceiling for sorcerer, due to a small number of spells known and a relatively mediocre spell list, is not particularly high, and metamagic is rarely much of a game changer.
In my current game, I have a Sorcerer that uses Distant Spell every day to great effect.
But this is all besides the point.
Everyone keeps trying to convince each other that their side is the 'right' one and the other side is delusional or worse. But the real issue is that everyone has different definitions of complexity. You're all correct. The things that you define as complex are complex to you. But they're not the same things. Until people stop trying to prove each other wrong, this thread will run into 300 posts of the same unproductive arguments as the last one.
LOL, most sorcerers I play with use metamagic every round. You are only correct in that the different metamagics horribly imbalanced from each other. Twin is easily the best, with Quicken a close second, and Subtle the go-to third.
Twin spell is not the best spell, it's a trap option. The vast majority of spells you can twin are spells you shouldn't be casting in the first place.
That's a personal opinion, many articles out there have valued the twinning of spells
Um... literally every time I play the game. My sorcerer lives and dies by subtle spell and distant spell. One of my go to crowd control tricks is to use distant spell to cast the light cantrip on someone's eyeball. Distant spell or Subtle Spell paired with Minor Illusion are absolutely amazing, and doubling the range on Dimension Door and Misty Step are life savers.
Light targets an object. An eyeball is not an object. A lot of options look better if you don't actually use the rules.
I think a good argument could be made for Prepared Spell classes actually being easier and more forgiving. Unless you have a DM who is willing to fudge a bit for new players, known spell classes lock you in to a set of spells until you level up, and you can only swap one spell at a time, and you can only swap cantrips when you hit a leve with an ASI. Prepared spell classes let you swap out spells on a long rest. This makes it easier for new players to adjust without getting locked in. Honestly, I feel like the new direction they are going will make the spellcasters a lot more newbie friendly, and think it's a step in the right direction.
I'm thinking the DM played older editions where light could target someone's eyes and blind them. Cool effect but it would need to become a leveled spell again to allow that in my games. But to each their own.
I really wouldn't allow that at my table. Too much power for a cantrip.
This is easy to understand. Look at the size of the sorcerer's spell list. Now count the number they get to know. How many of the spells can they pick end up being a trap without the right build? Everyone keeps talking about sorcerer like all they can do is blasting spells. Is blasting spells the only spells on their spell list or do they have other things on that list as well? If there are other things on their spell list why is it that everyone is just talking about blasting sorcs? Sorcs have a very limited number of spells known + they have meta-magic. The Limited spells known AND restrictive change over means if a spell from their list (that is nearly the same size as the wizards) doesn't work the way they thought for a situation they wanted it for they could be stuck with it for much longer than prepared casters including wizards who get more than double the number of spells known from a similarly sized list with the same number of spells per long rest cast. Sorcerers have to plan each of their spells ahead, and to be efficient with them you also need to think about which meta magics will compliment which spells you are going for.
Wizards are the EASIEST arcane caster, pick spells add them to your book, prep them like every other prepared caster. Don't like a spell, don't prepare it except for the rare circumstance you need it. Want a new spell, let your dm know and find a scroll and add it. You have your subclass that will change how the spell works but other than that. read the spell, cast the spell nothing to it. Sorcerer, picked a spell you didn't like? well you have to wait a whole level. You have changed all your spells eventually and now your metamagics don't really benefit the spells you have, guess you are just a worse wizard now huh?
Sorcerer takes actual planning about their spells. Having a limited number of spells with a lot of slots and a lot of options combined with options that synergize only with certain spells creates complications. less spells =/= less complication it can be the opposite if you can't freely change them.