Warlocks!

[Captain_Wizbang]

If someone wants to make a case for why we should pre-nerf Warlocks based on alignment, please be very thorough, and I suggest using Sorcerers as a comparison. You'll have to convince both yourself and us that either (1) Warlocks are obviously different from Sorcerers in some way that matters for alignment, or that (2) Sorcerers need to be nerfed and shouldn't be allowed to be Lawful Good.


I was expecting this to be part of the thread. MOAR popcorn please




Dang! Why didn't someone tell me making spells was this easy? Why did we devs spend weeks making sure Earthquake worked right, for both players and monsters? Should have just copied the text and BAM, done!


You mean that's not how it's done?


Erm. Yes? This is at least somewhat based on tabletop. Giving a dozen spells (or invocations) is generous based on the source material, especially with up to ~12'ish more from Pacts and Tainted Scholar.

(Not that all Warlocks are into books, really.)

I really have to applaud you all for tackling the alignment issue with warlock. When I 1st heard the rumors, that was the 1st thing that popped into my mind.
In PnP I've seen some DM's ignore/tweak this facet with some terrible results, and a lot of bickering.


The translation for PnP to DDO is a huge undertaking. I have a feeling the players will be split on how it's received and opined.

question, will any of this development affect other alignment factors currently in-place throughout the game?

And additionally, will you develop some alignment based items that are class restricted?

[FuryFlash]

If i understand correctly, there will be some alignment restriction placed into some of the enhancement trees.

How will this affect the Warlock's ability to mix and match between their own trees?

Also could be a concern that players new to the class might not be aware that their alignment choices may be restricting.

The plan is actually to make alignment restrictions on some of the pacts, not enhancement trees. This is chosen at level one, so one would not be able to create their character without understanding the alignment needs. Presumably the enhancement trees themselves will be free of alignment restrictions, so mixing and matching won't be prevented.

[slarden]

This is an absolute disaster. For over a year now there has been a player led thread detailing how to possibly implement warlocks in a both player friendly, development friendly, and overall unique class-perspective friendly way. Either no one has read that thread amongst the dev team, or you have outright ignored all the player feedback in said thread. This as is a complete disaster, I wouldn't play Warlock. Hell, this is enough to make me consider ceasing my sub and definitely not worry about getting completionist again on my nearly tripple-completionist toon. If you want to see how Warlocks should have been made, go back and read https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...Class-Project? from start to finish Sev and team.

You can speak for yourself, but not everyone agrees with that assessment. I think the proposed implementation is better.

[FestusHood]

The plan is actually to make alignment restrictions on some of the pacts, not enhancement trees. This is chosen at level one, so one would not be able to create their character without understanding the alignment needs. Presumably the enhancement trees themselves will be free of alignment restrictions, so mixing and matching won't be prevented.

If that's the case, why are so many people going on about the lack of alignment restrictions?

[Slasheboy]

Dear Varg, thanks for reading all our queries and answering them, especially on a weekend.

After further inspection, I realized that the warlock presented here is not the 3.5e Warlock that we know and love, but the 5th Ed warlock that is new to all of us.

Therefore, I approve of the shift, only if everything in DDO slowly moves towards 5th Ed.
Lets face it, 3.5e is a mess at the higher levels, and don't get me started on the omnishambles that is epic levels.
DDO only started going downhill because of epic levels, forcing the inclusion off stuff like dodge, PRR, spellpower, MP and RP, and so forth, while stuff like AC, to-hit bonuses, DR becomes completely marginalized.

Going back to the topic, the current proposal is missing a few things from the 5th Ed template, some which can be easily overlooked. I should have seen it earlier thoughu, because the patrons and the added spells are straight ripped from 5th Ed, which makes me glad that Turbine finally got the 5th Ed license.


- Communication - Perhaps it would be expedient to explain to the rest that the version of warlock currently being implemented is the 5th Ed warlock, not the 3.5e warlock, as we house rule them into a 3.5e environment. That would explain the alignment ruling as well as the complete lack of invocations as "unlimited spells"

- Invocations: The 5th Ed invocations acted more as class feats than spells most of the time, but are conspiciously missing in the current prototype. They can be covered under the enhancement trees, but do remember to add stuff that are more universal towards the lower parts of the tree. I'm tempted to recommend that you still add some slots for class feats within the level progression for the picking of some of the invocations in the rulebook so that they can be universal for all trees as well as level-gating some of the more powerful ones.

- Pacts : We also need the implementation of pact of the tome vs pact of the blade vs pact of the chain. They are vital to the balance and power level of the class.

- Spell slots/Spell points - The 5th Ed warlock regains ALL spell slots with a short rest, which is fundamentally different from the other casters which need a long rest for all their spells. That being said, the slot recovery is only up to lvl 5, as the have a "one spell per level per long rest" system for lvl 6 spells and above via mystic arcanum, so take that in account. I do not know how to implement this elegantly (SLAs, maybe?) but do consider options other than SLAs, such as an activated ability that makes all warlock SLAs (or spells) free for 20 secs with a 90 sec cooldown, or an enlarged and empowered echoes, or some foolery involving temp spell points, etc.

- Mystic Arcanum : I did mentioned it earlier, but the 5th Ed warlock gets to cast one spell of each level from 6th spell onwards per long rest, which can be done in forms of SLAs/activated abilities that can only be used 3 times per rest. I'm not sure if the current mention of placing them within the spells known list is sufficient, though I do understand that the 5th Ed spells are quite underpowered, leading you guys to put in powerful 3.5e spells in their place to suit the 3.5e environment.

- Proficiency bonus : 5th Ed uses proficiency bonus for every thing, which has alot of implications for casters and their spells: 3th level and 8th level spells have the same save DC despite spell levels, a fireball placed in a 3th level spell slot will do the same damage regardless of whether it was being cast by a lvl5 wizard or a lvl 15 wizard (excluding DC differances due to increased proficiency bonus), meaning they have the same total damage dice. Please take all these in considering when porting the 5th Ed warlock into 3.5e, or even better, when slowly moving DDO to 5th Ed. It means that all of the spells of the warlock in 5th Ed are balanced to have the same DC, and the main core of the damage comes from eldritch blasts.

- Metamagics - Due to 5th Ed having no metamagics (except for sorcerers), I would recommend against allowing empower and maximize for eldritch blast, because EB then has to be balanced around them, and would become an unnecessary feat tax for those who use them, just like how all ranged characters need to take rapid shot and point blank shot.

- Epics - Please remember to give some method of scaling EBs to epic levels, in a way that is not pigeonholed into a single tree.

[FuryFlash]

If that's the case, why are so many people going on about the lack of alignment restrictions?

The class itself has no alignment restriction. This means that not only can you multiclass with Paladins or Monks, which some people dislike, but it diverges from standard D&D alignment rules on Warlocks, which has upset many DDO players who play it for it's D&D aspects.

Despite being a D&D player myself, I think that the current planned way for alignment works. You can't be a Fiend pact Paladin, but you can be a Fey pact Paladin; not 100% following D&D, but not completely against it either. It doesn't upset game balance, and I don't care that much about the lore implications, so it works.

[FestusHood]

It seems pointless for people to keep arguing about which version of Warlock this will be based on. This inevitably will, and should be, DDO's version of Warlock.

[XxJFGxX]

Instead of the invocation shapes of eldritch blast being part of the enhancements, wouldn't it be more optimal for them being an auto grant when you level in Warlock?

[patang01]

The class itself has no alignment restriction. This means that not only can you multiclass with Paladins or Monks, which some people dislike, but it diverges from standard D&D alignment rules on Warlocks, which has upset many DDO players who play it for it's D&D aspects.

Despite being a D&D player myself, I think that the current planned way for alignment works. You can't be a Fiend pact Paladin, but you can be a Fey pact Paladin; not 100% following D&D, but not completely against it either. It doesn't upset game balance, and I don't care that much about the lore implications, so it works.

My suggestion to people who want to be purists that way, don't multi class in a way that seem unalign-ish.

As a rule I only worry about my own play; not others. Alignment in DDO is sorta meaningless unless you role play the alignment. Otherwise it has absolutely no impact on the gameplay itself.

In fact I'd say that alignment in MMOs is kinda silly anyways unless it's paired with a PvP type play or where there are real player consequences for playing a specific way. Again - you can always decide to role play the character your way - but forcing in alignments makes for some truly limited artificial play style that has no consequence in game other than what you can do with your character. And only mechanically; none with consequence or otherwise NPC interaction.

[Jango-EX]

The class itself has no alignment restriction. This means that not only can you multiclass with Paladins or Monks, which some people dislike, but it diverges from standard D&D alignment rules on Warlocks, which has upset many DDO players who play it for it's D&D aspects.

Despite being a D&D player myself, I think that the current planned way for alignment works. You can't be a Fiend pact Paladin, but you can be a Fey pact Paladin; not 100% following D&D, but not completely against it either. It doesn't upset game balance, and I don't care that much about the lore implications, so it works.

Yep... it works, it's uncalled for, but it works.

Severlin talked about why should we want to "pre-nerf" warlocks by restricting alignments. I think they are looking it from the opposite way, since what's going on, the lack of alignment restrictions, is actually a buff, and I think that people that are upset about this departure from 3.5 restrictions (the only so far) are upset because there is no reason for it. The buff x nerf doesn't even matter that much to be honest. It is the departure from the rules that is the issue.

I'm sure that the alignment is being talked in depth behind the scenes and the devs and the player council are better suited to define what's better for DDO than me, Unnamed Player #89223.

However, it would be nice to understand why this departure is happening. We always knew that 3.5 alignment restrictions were in place. It seems that they aren't anymore.

[Augon]

Character alignment does affect game play in DDO. A character's alignment can prevent him or her from using certain weapons and items. There are also at least a few quests in which a character has to be Lawful or another specific alignment in order to interact with an NPC (e.g. Prison of the Planes).

http://ddowiki.com/page/The_Prison_of_the_Planes

All arbitrary, unnecessary restrictions,

In D&D, alignment had to be maintained, it wasn't just something you chose at the beginning of your life as an entry in your character sheet. Your actions could shift your alignment, which could create problems especially in alignment restricted classes.

In DDO, If the alignment concept was removed, it would have no impact on any one. Yes, in POP you have to have Lawful in your character sheet to talk to the guy in the first room. But that does not mean you have to play your character in a Lawful way, it just has to be an entry in the character sheet. That is useless and arbitrary.

[moo_cow]

What is the heroic past life for Warlock going to be?

[Lonnbeimnech]

Speaking of which what do you guys envision as the Warlocks means for self healing?

One of the reason I would like to see more mid loading of class functions is that this problem could take care of itself with multiclassing... PM forms, Bard, Cleric, FvS, 5 levels of Barbarian etc. If Warlocks ship as "pure or go home" as they appear at early glance to be shaping up, they are going to need heals.

To me there looks to be strong synergy with swashbuckler for different tack (cha to damage), either that or going pdk for cha to damage, or splashing pally fvs or cleric to get divine might.

This is assuming that the cooldown for eldritch blast is 1 or more seconds, so that while you are standing there in melee range you may as well do a little meleeing.

[voodoogroves]

I still don't think a class that gets UMD as a class skill and a bonus to that skill will have problems healing. Or teleporting, or casting GH or any other scroll-available buff / spell / utility.

[Angelic-council]

To me there looks to be strong synergy with swashbuckler for different tack (cha to damage), either that or going pdk for cha to damage, or splashing pally fvs or cleric to get divine might.

This is assuming that the cooldown for eldritch blast is 1 or more seconds, so that while you are standing there in melee range you may as well do a little meleeing.

Warlock's primal damage is coming from eldritch blast, and possibly enchantments.. and at level 1 they deal 1d6 damage.. I don't think it should have longer than 1 sec CD really.. or none so you can spam it like archers with bow.

[Lonnbeimnech]

I still don't think a class that gets UMD as a class skill and a bonus to that skill will have problems healing. Or teleporting, or casting GH or any other scroll-available buff / spell / utility.

Correct, but some people feel that they absolutely need to be able to heal to full in one click to be able to play a character.

[Lonnbeimnech]

Warlock's primal damage is coming from eldritch blast, and possibly enchantments.. and at level 1 they deal 1d6 damage.. I don't think it should have longer than 1 sec CD really.. or none so you can spam it like archers with bow.

Anything more than 1 second and it's essentially just another cleave to add to the rotation.

Unless we are thinking of it wrong and it works more like an arcane archers toggles and you just attack normally, which would actually be pretty sweet.

[slarden]

It is a charisma-based class with UMD as class skills. The obvious answer is Heal scrolls.

I would probably run warlock in Exalted Angel. Twisted Cocoon + fully maximized and empowered cure moderate wounds SLA will be solid self-healing.

[Qhualor]

Doing some light reading up on Warlocks, have to express my opinion that everything I read points to them being of a chaotic nature. I do feel their alignment should be required as Chaotic.

[Vargouille]

* I am really disappointed that I don't see any from of hit point regeneration or life steal. These sorts of things have been pretty common for warlocks in all three editions, and I would like to have some level of self-sufficiency. I know there are heal scrolls, but they aren't realistic in epic content as you can't make concentration check high enough to deal with incoming damage. Again from the description of the soul eater tree it looks like we might get life steal or healing on kill, which would be a nice addition.

Our current thoughts include some healing for Enlightened Spirit and some forms of temporary hitpoints in other trees. We'll have to see how this plays out in practice.

* Will warlocks get the magical training feat?

Probably. (We aren't as convinced as others that Warlock is an inherently feat-starved class. Sure, my Sorcerer would love more feats, but pretty easily manages to get the ones he feels he needs. Warlock isn't so different.)

* Will switching blast shapes/eldritch essences while eldritch blast is active take any time? Will they have a cool down?

We don't expect these to be very long term things. If you want to switch from Cone to Single Target, that shouldn't be onerous.

* I would like to know a little bit more about how the eldritch blast DC is going to be calculated (I know that is still being worked out). I do think that letting either evocation or conjuration DC boosting feats/items boost the blast would be a good way to help keep it relevant. Maybe a base of 10 + Warlock level + Cha mod + applicable spell focus?

Our current thinking is that Eldritch Blast will be Evocation and gain appropriate boosts for that, and otherwise act like an Evocation Spell. (We're still looking into tech for spell levels.)

* Could we get a little more info on what dark delirium is? Is it an active ability or some kind of guard proc?

An active ability that dazes an enemy.

Are the pact spells in addition to the 2 spells they already get per level per rest, or do they have to use one of their precious slots if they want to use their pact spell? Any reason it's not just an SLA? Could even be on charges per rest and use no SP, like the wiz past life?

These are added to the spells you know. Tentatively, any level 20 Warlock will have direct castable access to 3 spells per spell level - per level, 2 would be chosen, and another would come from the Pact.

I think that, since warlocks have less spell slots than other casters, each spell slot is more valuable. And since each spell slot is more valuable, any spell that goes into that slot should be a bit more useful/powerful or versatile than spells from other classes. Thus the suggestions below.

I'm not sure we agree completely on this. The classes need to be balanced, but that doesn't necessarily mean powering up each spell.

2) Rage: I could get this from a rage potion. Perhaps make it a spell version of Barbarian Rage?

We're probably least happy with this choice for pact spells, and we're open to ideas for other options for a level 2 Fiend spell. It's a difficult choice, because we'd like to not take "staples" out like Blur, for instance. (That also means that this spot is a place we might be more likely to create a custom spell to fill a hole, but exploring many options is best.)

4) Binding Chain: If this is the ability used by certain named devils in the old raids, it doesn't need any changes.

This is indeed cast by some monsters already in DDO.

question, will any of this development affect other alignment factors currently in-place throughout the game?

And additionally, will you develop some alignment based items that are class restricted?

We're currently not expecting to make major changes throughout DDO relating to alignments, though that could be another discussion. If there's interesting ideas for class or alignment specific items, we're open to ideas.

The plan is actually to make alignment restrictions on some of the pacts, not enhancement trees. This is chosen at level one, so one would not be able to create their character without understanding the alignment needs. Presumably the enhancement trees themselves will be free of alignment restrictions, so mixing and matching won't be prevented.

This is correct. We're currently NOT expecting to include alignment restrictions in the Enhancement trees.

After further inspection, I realized that the warlock presented here is not the 3.5e Warlock that we know and love, but the 5th Ed warlock that is new to all of us.

It's not quite that simple, but we are taking some of the elements fairly directly from 5th.

- Invocations: The 5th Ed invocations acted more as class feats than spells most of the time, but are conspiciously missing in the current prototype. They can be covered under the enhancement trees, but do remember to add stuff that are more universal towards the lower parts of the tree. I'm tempted to recommend that you still add some slots for class feats within the level progression for the picking of some of the invocations in the rulebook so that they can be universal for all trees as well as level-gating some of the more powerful ones.

There's still room for mana-less re-usable abilities. This probably includes the activated Pact feats (and of course the passive ones!), as well as abilities in the Enhancement trees (including things like Eldritch Blast Shapes and Eldritch Essences).

- Pacts : We also need the implementation of pact of the tome vs pact of the blade vs pact of the chain. They are vital to the balance and power level of the class.

These are pretty interesting, but we didn't think they were explicitly vital to the class and there's already a lot of axis of customization in Warlock. The pacts are major differentiators (for making one Warlock unlike another), along with Enhancement trees and spell selection, before we even get into multiclass options.

- Metamagics - Due to 5th Ed having no metamagics (except for sorcerers), I would recommend against allowing empower and maximize for eldritch blast, because EB then has to be balanced around them, and would become an unnecessary feat tax for those who use them, just like how all ranged characters need to take rapid shot and point blank shot.

I encourage anyone suggesting that Warlocks not be able to use any metamagics think about what that means for the larger class design. My sorcerer wouldn't know what to do with all his feat slots if metamagics were not an option (and saving throws didn't matter!) We may also make some more general, selectable feats for customizing Warlock (epic feats are more likely than heroic ones), but what feats are Warlocks expected to take, if not some metamagics? Similarly, this is one of the reasons we are likely to make Eldritch Blast get boosted by Evocation related feats - it lets you build your Warlock differently from other Warlocks, choosing to focus on that aspect.

From a game design & build variety stance, it's unfortunate to see suggestions for no metamagics or no saving throws at all on Eldritch Blast. Yes, we can see how all Warlocks might be more powerful or simpler without having those drawbacks. Every Warlock could deal full maximum damage all the time at every level without any build decisions or requirements to reach that maximum power. But that's not what DDO is about! If choosing a Fey patron means you worry more about your saving throws than Fiendish Warlock, who worry more about piercing damage resistance than Great Old Ones, who worry more about dealing with bosses because charm effects don't work on them... that's interesting and good gameplay before you even step into the game. That encourages variety in class builds and character designs. It's good for DDO if players argue about what Pact is best and worrying about the weakness of each, similarly for enhancement trees and similarly for Warlock vs. other classes.

If players aren't worrying, something has gone terribly wrong.
/readyforthequoting