How is warlock different from wizard or sorcerer in DDO

[Deathdefy]

Yea, sort of like how redundant it is to have so many classes that physically strike another being with a weapon. I mean can't they come up with anything new? Physical damage has been done to death already!

Lol! Even better the second time!

If you genuinely don't have an issue with a 4th class getting "Mass Hold Monster" and "Wail of the Banshee" then that saddens me, though in fairness you're apparently not alone.

There's also significantly more to the argument about what iconic features of Warlock (e.g. infinite casting, generally weaker invocations, demon shapeshift) should have carried over but are being skipped in favour of doing exactly the same thing as the existing arcane casters.

[Lonnbeimnech]

sorcs and wizards are extremely powerful while they have a full mana bar, and are pretty weak when it is empty.

Warlock has moderate but infinite casting in the form of EB, so in that way they are more similar to melees than they are to other casters. Other than the fact that haste boost, alacrity, double strike, BaB, glancing blows, offhand%, seeker, deadly items, better [w], improved critical, weapons with expanded crit range or multipliers, adrenaline, masters blitz, etc etc have no effect on their dps.

[Faltout]

Lol! Even better the second time!

If you genuinely don't have an issue with a 4th class getting "Mass Hold Monster" and "Wail of the Banshee" then that saddens me, though in fairness you're apparently not alone.

There's also significantly more to the argument about what iconic features of Warlock (e.g. infinite casting, generally weaker invocations, demon shapeshift) should have carried over but are being skipped in favour of doing exactly the same thing as the existing arcane casters.

You keep focusing on the spells a warlock has, when spells are VERY limited in a Warlock. Their main attraction is the Eldritch Blast ability and neither wizard, nor sorcerer have that. And Eldritch Blast is a ranged weapon that does get amplified by spell power instead of ranged power. So, instead you should be asking: What's the difference between ranger and warlock because they have more in common than wizard and sorcerer (although still huge differences). And that's what makes warlock unique.

[Deathdefy]

You keep focusing on the spells a warlock has, when spells are VERY limited in a Warlock. Their main attraction is the Eldritch Blast ability and neither wizard, nor sorcerer have that. And Eldritch Blast is a ranged weapon that does get amplified by spell power instead of ranged power. So, instead you should be asking: What's the difference between ranger and warlock because they have more in common than wizard and sorcerer (although still huge differences). And that's what makes warlock unique.

I do agree that warlocks are different via Eldritch Blast. I like the implementation and apart from worrying that damage won't be high enough at end-game (and will demand very specific items such as Lantern Ring) think it's well done.

Playing with scaling and the active past-life feat could even fix that on their own.

There should though, also be differentiation in terms of the spells they cast and how many times they are able to cast (read 'infinitely') vs bard/wiz/sorc, and there is not.

'Eldritch blast is different = tick for uniqueness' is, in my opinion, the wrong way to be looking at the class.

I probably wouldn't have stated things as bluntly as this topic, but I think there could and should be more differentiation made between warlocks and existing arcanes.

[bartharok]

Lol! Even better the second time!

If you genuinely don't have an issue with a 4th class getting "Mass Hold Monster" and "Wail of the Banshee" then that saddens me, though in fairness you're apparently not alone.

There's also significantly more to the argument about what iconic features of Warlock (e.g. infinite casting, generally weaker invocations, demon shapeshift) should have carried over but are being skipped in favour of doing exactly the same thing as the existing arcane casters.

Infinite evocations are not quite the same thing as infinite casting. And having some spells does not make a warlock identical with wizard and sorcerer.

[Lonnbeimnech]

Should be glad they got spells (even if limited by sp) instead of the invocations (even if unlimited). Go look up the invocations they get in pnp, things like a single target slow that only lasts one round, or the ability to take control over a summoned creature, and these are their higher level ones. Instead they give us irresistible dance, howl of terror, power word kill etc.

[HAL]

Lol! Even better the second time!

If you genuinely don't have an issue with a 4th class getting "Mass Hold Monster" and "Wail of the Banshee" then that saddens me, though in fairness you're apparently not alone.

There's also significantly more to the argument about what iconic features of Warlock (e.g. infinite casting, generally weaker invocations, demon shapeshift) should have carried over but are being skipped in favour of doing exactly the same thing as the existing arcane casters.

The point is that no matter how you wrap it up, spell damage is going to be the same as we already have, just like physical damage. And I'm sure Turbine is trying their best to balance their limited resources with giving us a new class.

[Cathimon]

Warlock seems useless to me. What role does it cover that other classes don't? None from what I've seen. We already have damage dealers and we already have buffers. Is it crowd control? We have that already. It certainly isn't a healer or a trapper.

When you introduce a class like that, that brings no new role to the table, only a hybrid of sorts, which might end up doing something better than an other class which was focused on that role, then it weakens the game variety. Like Paladin doing more damage fighters. It makes fighters useless. It's bad for the game.

[HAL]

Warlock seems useless to me. What role does it cover that other classes don't? None from what I've seen. We already have damage dealers and we already have buffers. Is it crowd control? We have that already. It certainly isn't a healer or a trapper.

When you introduce a class like that, that brings no new role to the table, only a hybrid of sorts, which might end up doing something better than an other class which was focused on that role, then it weakens the game variety. Like Paladin doing more damage fighters. It makes fighters useless. It's bad for the game.

What role did Monk bring to the table that we didn't already have? It took physical damage and wrapped it in a new delivery system. Sometimes a new shiny is nice and can draw players to a game.

[Cathimon]

What role did Monk bring to the table that we didn't already have? It took physical damage and wrapped it in a new delivery system. Sometimes a new shiny is nice and can draw players to a game.

Do you think if we had 50 different classes the game would be better?

[HAL]

Do you think if we had 50 different classes the game would be better?

I'm not sure what you hope to gain by going to extremes. How would we get to these "50 different classes"? All at once? If Turbine continues to add classes at the rate they have been, even if the classes aren't "necessary", I think that would be great. And regarding "necessary", if we wanted to restrict DDO to only necessary classes we'd only have 4: 1 melee, 1 trapper, 1 divine, 1 arcane. Doesn't sound very fun to me.

[scipiojedi]

Do you think if we had 50 different classes the game would be better?

Yes. I derive most of my fun from the game by multiclassing. So the more classes they introduce the longer longevity of fun it will be for me.

[slarden]

I did some play-testing on Lamannia and warlock plays very different than Wizard and Sorc.

I think Turbine did a great job implementing the last major 5E class not in DDO. It needs some fine tuning, but it's going to be fun to play.

[Cathimon]

I'm not sure what you hope to gain by going to extremes. How would we get to these "50 different classes"? All at once? If Turbine continues to add classes at the rate they have been, even if the classes aren't "necessary", I think that would be great. And regarding "necessary", if we wanted to restrict DDO to only necessary classes we'd only have 4: 1 melee, 1 trapper, 1 divine, 1 arcane. Doesn't sound very fun to me.

It's a question of principle, and you're evading it. I say the more classes there is, the more useless(gimp/flavor) classes there is. Just like the feats, for exemple, we got a bunch of them, and maybe I don't know, 75% of those are never used by anybody.

[HAL]

I'm not sure what you hope to gain by going to extremes. How would we get to these "50 different classes"? All at once? If Turbine continues to add classes at the rate they have been, even if the classes aren't "necessary", I think that would be great. And regarding "necessary", if we wanted to restrict DDO to only necessary classes we'd only have 4: 1 melee, 1 trapper, 1 divine, 1 arcane. Doesn't sound very fun to me.

It's a question of principle, and you're evading it.

I'm not evading anything - I thought I answered your question quite thoroughly. If there is some principle that you think I didn't address, I think you weren't clear about it in your post.

I say the more classes there is, the more useless(gimp/flavor) classes there is.

Ok I'll bite: what current classes do you consider "useless (gimp/flavor)"?

Just like the feats, for exemple, we got a bunch of them, and maybe I don't know, 75% of those are never used by anybody.

Feats are entirely separate from classes and yes there are a bunch that aren't used and could be updated.

[Cathimon]

Ok I'll bite: what current classes do you consider "useless (gimp/flavor)"?

Fighter.

[HAL]

Ok I'll bite: what current classes do you consider "useless (gimp/flavor)"?

Fighter.

Lol, the one class that is possibly splashed more than any other melee class is useless?

[Khatzhas]

I'm actually thinking Warlocks might be closer to Artificer in playstyle, but with more offensive options and less support.

Infinite amount of ranged damage, some of which is elemental. Some offensive and CC spell options to back it up.

[Cathimon]

Lol, the one class that is possibly splashed more than any other melee class is useless?

Nobody splash fighters anymore, save for druids and they are weak overall compared to pure class pallies and barbs. And if you consider a class power by how much its getting splashed rather than going pure, you're doing it wrong.

[Powskier]

Fighter.

FOOLS! Fighter is great if you take a magical feat for some spell points in epic- the capstone damage in kensai is matched by other classes, but still super fun....and you get to pick more of your own feats as a fighter.
Curious about Warlock using med armor? is this same from the pnp Warlock ,or a ddo fantasy???