Warlocks!

[FallingIcicle]

This is an abstraction of tabletops limited invocations in some editions.

Even in 3.5e, warlocks had invocation with effective spell levels all the way up to 9th level (such as dark foresight). In 5e, they also get 9th level spells.

Besides, you're already giving them most of the 9th level arcane spells (dominate monster, mass hold monster, Mordenkainen's disjunction, power word kill, summon monster IX, wail of the banshee, etc). You're just arbitrarily making them 6th level spells for this class, which only serves to reduce their save DC. As people have already pointed out, the low save DCs are going to be a problem. Wouldn't the easiest solution be to just give them a spell progression that goes all the way to 9th level? They'd still be getting the exact same spells, they'd just be at their true level.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, or anything, it's just some food for thought.

[Drakos]

We've looked at and examined many, many options. We've had serious discussions about making across the board changes where all Warlock spells very cheap or free but having x5 or x10 cooldowns (anything less seems not meaningful). This would make buffing very annoying, and it would be pretty hard to differentiate those spells from others, etc. We talked about using ability counters (like Action Boosts), one way of not having spell lists at all, etc.

It gives me hope that you are still considering options other than SP. To be quite honest the SP thing has dampened my interest in the class considerably. I am and avid PnP player, and I play both 3.5e and 5e. For DDO I would prefer the class stay closer to the 3.5e rules.

One of the issues I see with the "borrowing from 5e" is that the two editions approach classes quite differently. Properly balancing the 5e content to play with the 3.5e core of DDO presents more risk, IMHO, than creating non-spell abilities, similar to alot of the abilities you create for Enhancement and Epic Destiny trees. Here you are already building some new abilities, why do they need to be tied into the spell subsystem? I know that the it is easier to link them to pre-existing abilities/spells, but can't you link to the base effect and avoid the SP? I guess it all depends a lot on the code base, and after 9+ years I'm sure that there has already been a fair share of jury-rigging going on, but it is disappointing to see the deviation from the 3.5e Warlock.

Please continue to be open to alternatives. I know that I for on would be open to delaying the class if it would allow it to be done the way it should be.

[Drakos]

Personally I don't see the problem with SP for warlocks. It's probably because I've never played PnP, so I'm not used to it being another way.
I'm not sure if the problem is the actual presence of a blue bar or if it's the fact that they are a limited resource, but it sounds to me like warlocks aren't even supposed to have spells like this so having SP seems like a good compromise to me.

It really depends on the edition they pull from. In 3.5e Warlocks don't have spells, they have Spell-like abilities that have unlimited uses, no need to rest to regain spell slots/points. These are called Invocations; their EB is just an Invocation that the receive for free at first level. As they level they get more invocations, maxing out at 12 by level 20. The invocations come in 4 levels, Least, Lesser, Greater, and Dark. Many Invocations are just abilities that change how tour DB lasts, these are called Shape and Essence Invocations. Other Invocations mimic spell effects or even have unique abilities. Some are a combination of both like a Greater Dispel ability that also heals the Warlock by channeling the canceled spell energy into the Warlock.

If you notice I said "unlimited uses", these invocations also do not require components. This makes the Warlock a very low resource management character, but also very limited it terms of flexability in comparison the Sorc's and Wizards.

I hope this sheds some light on what people are saying and the request for changes.

[Drakos]

If you do stay with spell points one thing to keep in mind since the "Spell Slots" concept was borrowed from 5th edition; when a Warlock casts a spell in 5e it is automatically considered to be cast using the highest spell level available, since their spell slots are not tied to specific levels like the other classes. Basically they gel X number of spell slots at to cast any of their spells with, all spell slots are considered to be for their highest spell level. So any spell cast below their highest available level is basically automatically heightened to max available spell level.

[Singular]

Dude, this will make me play Warlock just for the past life. As of right now and it could change when I see them on Live, I have no real interest in playing one. Honestly though, does this make sense for a Warlock? Probably not many will argue against it though.

That makes them a must have 3X for casters, for sure.

[decease]

If there are no so potion, no cash shop sp potion, no cash shop rest shrine, no unique which give sp or regenerate sp(like torch), it might consider a bit op to have free cast spell.

The way to balance the free cast is to limit spell known. Make it so that none of the tree offer sla, and each pact should grant no more then two spell.

P.s.again everything is time consuming, you can take the time to make warlock, or you could build this bard with rune arm. And you willl see how many disappointed dnd fan will quit this forsaken mmo for good. if you don't have the resource to do it then don't do it. it will do more harm then good!!! what we want is warlock, not a bard with rune arm attachrd and couldn't sing that get lable as 'warlock'.

[GeoffWatson]

Can Warlocks change their Pact with Fred, or are they stuck with it (like Favoured Souls and their Faith feats)?

Geoff.

[Xerio]

Unless they would scale with difficulty, have you ever considered what would happen in EH and EN if a summon was viable in EEs? Now that's the extreme. But just how do you balance them I always wondered. It's not as easy as in an "tab target" MMO imo. Too many variables.

I'd like them to be viable as well... but given the difficulty gaps and no scaling mechanic, it just cannot happen maybe?

On warlock's pet: Maybe it's because of WoW and games with Necromancers, but I kinda always had that vision of warlock with summons as well (but there's Pale Masters already). Doesn't really matter in this game though... partialy because of the reasons you stated.

Warlocks are simply NOT a "pet" class in DnD. The inclusion of the enhancements to empower summons is a way of depicting the warlocks STRONGER connection to the planes from which these summons are called.
It stands to reason that a guy with a demonic connection can call upon badass buddies of the nine hells that are a little more badass. They've a closer connection, less is lost in the translation of it and the binding rituals do not need to be as potent. Demon peon001 knows if he messes with warlock001 big daddy pitfiend001 will make demon001 beg for the chance to be summoned. Furthermore, being in most cases direct underlings of the pact creator they're less likely to actually listen to the warlock beyond general requests to follow the warlock. The true master has their own intentions and desires for the summon to carry out.

I for one hope warlocks do NOT get a class specific summon. they're not needed.

In regards to spells, I've given this a good bit of thought. Due to the complexity of the spell system and the ability to freely switch out spells (even if they restricted spells swaps to only be available at level up, which we know they won't) the inclusion of SP in a given. Using feats/actionboosts/SLAs becomes too cumbersome and makes for extremely ugly and sloppy code. We all know the game is already running on an ancient architecture, do reason to go and tear up the foundation. Have some faith, the devs DO have some experience in this..

Being this is drawn from the 5e, a little more flex in required to fit it into DDO, that's expected. I would like to see the pact boon class feats added though. Blade, Tome & Chain. (pg. 107, 5e player's handbook).
I posted suggestions for that a couple of pages back.

[Failedlegend]

Can Warlocks change their Pact with Fred, or are they stuck with it (like Favoured Souls and their Faith feats)?

Geoff.

Assuming the answer to your question is yes it would be limited due to alignment restrictions

Fiend: LN, N, CN
Old Ones: NG, N, CG, CN
Fey: Any

So only CN or N allows for all three..Monks can be Fey or Fiend (Lawful Neutral) and Paladins can only be Fey.

Personally I would have rather seen Dragon (Any Alignment) or Celestial (Any Good) instead of Fey (Celestial would match up better with Enlightened spirit and Dragon would suit Eberron/DDO better), here's hoping we can see them in the future.

Sidenote: The way pacts are being handled would make a great template for cleric domains.

I for one hope warlocks do NOT get a class specific summon. they're not needed.

I personally would be fine either way but if the 3 tier summons boosting line stays it needs to support something, otherwise replace it with something actually useful (or compress it into a single enhancement)'

On warlock's pet: Maybe it's because of WoW and games with Necromancers, but I kinda always had that vision of warlock with summons as well (but there's Pale Masters already). Doesn't really matter in this game though... partialy because of the reasons you stated.

I'm not a big ummm...."Fan" of WoW (let's leave it at that) but I do have to admit Warlocks are one of the best "Pet class" implementations I've seen in any game MMO or otherwise that has "classes" I also enjoyed the D2 Necromancer and the D3 Witch Doctor(I prefer the D2 Necro but only D3 had a console port) . Their all VERY focused on a symbiotic relationship with their pets instead of the pet just being a minor side thing. I really think DDO could benefit from another "Class-less" Prestige tree called Summoner that way if someone wants to make one they can.

As for scaling with difficulty why would we have to do that, nothing else PC related scales with difficulty? It SHOULD be harder on higher diffs.

[Xerio]

I personally would be fine either way but if the 3 tier summons boosting line stays it needs to support something, otherwise replace it with something actually useful (or compress it into a single enhancement)'

It does support something, hirelings, spell summons. It's not like that is the only option in that enhancement tree. Warlocks seem to be the natural fit to try out summon based enhancement boosts. Now the power of the summoned/hired help comes into question more often than not along with the shotty AI. The AI being the key factor of my disdain for them coupled with many quests where-in they do more harm than good.

I'm not a big ummm...."Fan" of WoW (let's leave it at that) but I do have to admit Warlocks are one of the best "Pet class" implementations I've seen in any game MMO or otherwise that has "classes" I also enjoyed the D2 Necromancer and the D3 Witch Doctor(I prefer the D2 Necro but only D3 had a console port) . Their all VERY focused on a symbiotic relationship with their pets instead of the pet just being a minor side thing. I really think DDO could benefit from another "Class-less" Prestige tree called Summoner that way if someone wants to make one they can.

As for scaling with difficulty why would we have to do that, nothing else PC related scales with difficulty? It SHOULD be harder on higher diffs.

Quoted the wrong guy on that WoW one, credit where it is due for someone's thoughts.
While I agree implemented properly it is a viable idea, my argument being that warlock is NOT the place for it.
I would love to see it adjusted to work with artificer or druid as they've both been historically in DnD related to "pets". The ranger also has a Beastmaster prestige/variant that would be awesome if implemented in the ranger pass. The Artificer elemental binder is essentially an elemental summoner, the druid has had several prestige and variants to primal and animal summons. As for a blanket prestige like the Harper (which I assume is what you are referring to with "class-less") I don't see summoner fitting the bill there as any form of summoning is closely linked to rituals and magic, varying from arcane, divine, primal and fiendish. The harper was an awesome choice as it fit into the lore of the forgotten realms. These "class-less" prestige trees should be limited to organizations such as that such as the order of the gauntlet, the emerald enclave, the lords' alliance and the zhentarim to name a few.

[GoldyGopher]

Having read many of the posts in this I have a request, can we call the new class something besides Warlocks. It is pretty obvious that with the changes that are being crammed into this class that what we the players are getting is not a Warlock by any stretch of the imagination.

[Xoham]

We've looked at and examined many, many options. We've had serious discussions about making across the board changes where all Warlock spells very cheap or free but having x5 or x10 cooldowns (anything less seems not meaningful). This would make buffing very annoying, and it would be pretty hard to differentiate those spells from others, etc. We talked about using ability counters (like Action Boosts), one way of not having spell lists at all, etc.

I am glad you are having these discussions, I hope it is not too late to still allow unlimited casting of invocations. I want to play a warlock who can continue to adventure and explore without having to rest in order to continue to cast invocations; spell points do not allow that possibility.

The issue you are running into in having to make x10 cooldowns for buffs is because of the proposed warlock's spell book. It is too powerful. A level 20 sorcerer can cast from three level 9 wizard and sorcerer spells (say Mass Hold Monster, Wail of the Banshee, and Power Word Kill); in comparison, a level 20 wizard can cast from five level 9 wizard spells (say Mass Hold Monster, Wail of the Banshee, Power Word Kill, Energy Drain, and Mordenkainen's Disjunction). A wizard is balanced relative to the sorcerer by having more powerful spells, but less spell points. A level 20 proposed warlock (say Tainted Scholar with Great Old One pact) can cast from four level 9 wizard and sorcerer spells (say Mass Hold Monster, Wail of the Banshee, Power Word Kill, and Energy Drain). Again, the proposed warlock is balanced relative to the sorcerer by having more powerful spells, but less spell points. This is the same direction a wizard is balanced relative to a sorcerer, and is the complete opposite direction a warlock should be balanced relative to a sorcerer! Trying to keep the same powerful spell book, and then trying to allow unlimited casting, will of course necessitate enormous cooldowns. Instead, a warlock should be able to cast from a less powerful spell book, but cast more frequently (indeed infinitely, not using spell points at all). This is the direction it is balanced in D&D, and is what makes the class different! If the warlock spell book were less powerful, as it is in D&D, then x5 or x10 cooldowns would not be necessary, and in particular buffing would not become very annoying.

The proposed warlock spell book is confusing. First, it is limited to level 6 spells, I assume the precedent being the bard spell book. The bard spell book, although limited to level 6 spells, allows some higher level wizard and sorcerer spells, specifically enchantment spells and sonic spells (those two categories being those considered bard-like) to be reduced to level 6 or below and thus make the spell book. Other spells (say Dimension Door at 4 and Haste at 3) typically stay the same level and some even have their level raised (See Invisibility at 3). Importantly, the only wizard and sorcerer spells above level 6 that are in the bard's spell book are enchantment spells and sonic spells, i.e. those considered particularly bard-like. On the other hand, the proposed warlock spell book, although limited to level 6 spells, allows numerous level 7, 8, and 9 wizard and sorcerer spells to be reduced to level 6 or below and thus make the spell book. Even those already at level 6 or below are frequently reduced (say Dimension Door at 3, and See Invisibility at 1). These reductions extend all the way up in power to the point where the proposed warlock gains level 9 wizard and sorcerer spells (Mass Hold Monster and Wail of the Banshee) before wizards and sorcerers! Besides the non-damaging qualification, there is no 'warlock-like' criteria in place at all.

Furthermore, through enhancements, an archmage wizard can obtain +2 DC to a primary spell school, and +1 DC to a secondary spell school (and +1 DC to all spells from the capstone ability score bonus); and a savant sorcerer can obtain +1 DC to evocation (and +1 DC to all spells from the capstone ability score bonus). On the other hand, through enhancements, a tainted scholar warlock can obtain +3 DC to all spells, and a +2 DC to all spells active ability (and +2 DC to all spells from the capstone ability score bonus). Even ignoring the active ability, and even considering evocation for a sorcerer or a wizard's secondary specialist school, this means that, despite being cast with a base DC of a level 6 spell, the proposed warlock will cast level 9 wizard and sorcerer spells with the same DC as a wizard or sorcerer (10+6+3+2=21 and 10+9+1+1=21). It is confusing what the purpose of the reduction in spell levels of the spell book is, but it seems to only serve to allow warlocks access to the most powerful wizard and sorcerer spells before wizards and sorcerers.

I realise I have again already typed too lengthy a post. I did want to include what I would propose as an example alternate spell book that would be suitable for unlimited casting balanced by cool-downs that are not x5 or x10. A brief summary is that I would have a spell book going up to level 4, with power levels along the lines of: Obscuring Mist at level 1 (least invocations); Charm Monster at level 2 (lesser invocations); enhanced Wall of Fire at level 3 (greater invocations); and single-target mass frog at level 4 (dark invocations). Spells of this power level would not require balancing at the level of x5 or x10. For simplicity I would have double the DC formula such that level 1 warlock invocations are cast as if level 2 (with a base DC of 10+2), level 2 warlock invocations as if level 4 (with a base DC of 10+4), level 3 warlock invocations as if level 6 (with a base DC of 10+6), and level 4 warlock invocations as if level 8 (with a base DC of 10+8). This would also eliminate the need for to very large +DC to all spells that is bound to make balancing multi-class and epic destinies quite difficult.

To be complete, though not the most important point, I would still allow taking epic spells. Without spell points, these would still need to be balanced by a very lengthy cooldown, likely along the lines of at least x5 or x10. I think this is reasonable.

I again apologise for the criticism, I hope it is still constructive. I do also intend to provide feedback on other warlock matters, but I fear this post is too long already, and I believe unlimited casting is the most important issue at stake. I hope either cooldowns or depravity or another resource, along with a possible rethink of the spell book can provide a solution.

[Vargouille]

The 12 x SLA sounds extremely enjoyable (even if you do throw in longer cooldowns, which again I'd submit were unnecessary in other forms of the game due to spell selection).

To be clear, there's no proposal on our part of getting 12 SLAs, with the expectations that come with calling them SLAs.

Yeah Buffing would be a pain. Action Boosts? How does that support unlimited spell casting? No no and NO to action boosts instead of spells. So when are the new spells coming out?

Apologies. This was shorthand based on some earlier discussions - it's not Action Boosts per se, but instead something like "You get 10 spells per rest", using a resource system similar to Action Boosts that drops down every time you cast. (It's not likely to happen, so I didn't want to spend a lot of time on it.)

A Rouge with base Int (8) can still get all the main abilities he'll require to at least be decent. Same for the Bard. Even a Pally can get his Conc right up there. Intimi can be taken if the guy finds place for Quicken. But for a Warlock? Nope. 'Locks need much more skill points. A decent investment in UMD can allow them to use Heal. The rest will have to go into spellcraft. But what about Conc.? You guys have said that you don't want the class to have some "must-have-or-be-gimped" feats or enhancements, But without enough skill points, Quicken is a must. (Consider Fey Pact 'locks too. They need Perform in addition to the other three/two)

Nothing presented here sounds like a problem. Yes, Rogues get more skill points. That's because they are Rogues. Warlocks don't, because they are Warlocks. They can get as many as Sorcerers, and that's fine. (Sorcerers neither need nor deserve more skill points either.)

Basically: No. Warlocks don't need and almost certainly won't get more skill points.

[Delacroix21]

Is this ever going to hit Lammania? As it sounds like it's still in the early beta phase and being fleshed out. It's well past mid month which was when we were told it would hit Lamannia.

[Failedlegend]

Quoted the wrong guy on that WoW one, credit where it is due for someone's thoughts.

Whoops cut+paste mishap will fix shortly after I submit this post

It does support something, hirelings, spell summons. It's not like that is the only option in that enhancement tree. Warlocks seem to be the natural fit to try out summon based enhancement boosts.

While I agree implemented properly it is a viable idea, my argument being that warlock is NOT the place for it.

These two quotes seem to directly oppose each other, my point is either support a summonlock or don't anything inbetween is a waste of coding and space in the tree (again 1 enhancement is meh no biggie but this is taking THREE slots), save the code and fit it into a summoner classless tree or the Arty/Druid doggy's tree's

These "class-less" prestige trees should be limited to organizations such as that such as the order of the gauntlet, the emerald enclave, the lords' alliance and the zhentarim to name a few.

I disagree I think summoner would be the perfect class-less prestige as it would fill alot of niches for nearly every class in DDO whilst simultaneously saving the limited space each class-specific trees get. Limiting it to "Clans/Guilds/etc" only is well very limiting.

Is this ever going to hit Lammania? As it sounds like it's still in the early beta phase and being fleshed out. It's well past mid month which was when we were told it would hit Lamannia.

When it's ready.

Seriously though the devs have gotten alot of feedback, they are probably considering implementing some of it which will take time...I rather they delayed the launch a bit to clean some things up, in the mean time go play some DDO you lived without out Warlock before you can still do it now.

[GoldyGopher]

Apologies. This was shorthand based on some earlier discussions - it's not Action Boosts per se, but instead something like "You get 10 spells per rest", using a resource system similar to Action Boosts that drops down every time you cast. (It's not likely to happen, so I didn't want to spend a lot of time on it.)

The best sounding solution I have hear thus far.

Add in the ability for these Actions Boosts to regenerate, Feats and Enhancements that give more Action Boosts and/or make them regenerate faster.

[Blackheartox]

Is this ever going to hit Lammania? As it sounds like it's still in the early beta phase and being fleshed out. It's well past mid month which was when we were told it would hit Lamannia.

How long have you been playing ddo?
Expect it this or next week on lamaland

Totally unrelated to warlock but, are we getting any new quests this update or only warlock?

[HastyPudding]

How long have you been playing ddo?
Expect it this or next week on lamaland

Totally unrelated to warlock but, are we getting any new quests this update or only warlock?

We're not getting new quests this update, as per the producer's letter. I think the developers wanted to spend all their energy on perfecting warlocks before releasing them. That being said, I'd expect the next update to be sooner than the usual time between updates.

[DrWily]

To be clear, there's no proposal on our part of getting 12 SLAs, with the expectations that come with calling them SLAs.

Will the SLAs be cast for free tho? (Sorry, haven't been keeping up with the things that go on in this thread)

[Ambitious]

The issue you are running into in having to make x10 cooldowns for buffs is because of the proposed warlock's spell book. It is too powerful. A level 20 sorcerer can cast from three level 9 wizard and sorcerer spells (say Mass Hold Monster, Wail of the Banshee, and Power Word Kill); in comparison, a level 20 wizard can cast from five level 9 wizard spells (say Mass Hold Monster, Wail of the Banshee, Power Word Kill, Energy Drain, and Mordenkainen's Disjunction). A wizard is balanced relative to the sorcerer by having more powerful spells, but less spell points. A level 20 proposed warlock (say Tainted Scholar with Great Old One pact) can cast from four level 9 wizard and sorcerer spells (say Mass Hold Monster, Wail of the Banshee, Power Word Kill, and Energy Drain). Again, the proposed warlock is balanced relative to the sorcerer by having more powerful spells, but less spell points. This is the same direction a wizard is balanced relative to a sorcerer, and is the complete opposite direction a warlock should be balanced relative to a sorcerer! [...]

This!

I said this a couple of times already, but the developers don't seem to listen, or at the very least don't understand what my point was.

Sure, I can see the reasoning why Warlocks are getting SP (for spell like abilities from destinies and for epic spells like ruin and hellball). But just because you want to give us SP for epic content doesn't mean you have to make our invocation cost spellpoints.

Give us less invocations and let us cast them at will. Or give us less invocations and alot more sp, so that we can cast them many many times. But giving us alot of spells and few spellpoints is how you balance a wizard, not a warlock. I am saying that not because I think the class will be weak. I think they are pretty **** powerfull in the current design. I am saying this, because the thought of a warlock, that can't cast buffs because he used ruin or hellball one time too many, is just ridiculous. Having a gazillion spells only adds to that. Being a warlock is about making really tough choices what to take and what to leave behind. This just kills the Warlock feeling.
Again, I am not saying that the current design is weak. I'm just saying it's not a Warlock.