WARLOCKS!

[Hitman Hard]

Also, if you choose the Devil route, check out the Brimstone Angels series by Erin M. Evans.

[Darksider_war]

I've always thought of feylocks as an entirely different animal. Warlocks in their original design and as NWN has them set up get their powers from demons or devils. Later it was opened up to different kinds of pacts, but no idea what BG considers legit lore or not. One server I played on changed it so shapes for feylocks were different but IMO if you can only turn into a demon/devil then it's a sure sign where the power comes from.

Complete Arcane seems to specify that some warlocks draw their powers from the feywild instead of the abyss/nine hells. Of course, some feys are even worse than fiends (think of The Joker merging with Leatherface and Two Face before embarking on a methadone-fueled trip of wanton carnage and destruction), so if someone tells you "I am an innocent fey pacted warlock" you have all the rights to be unsettled and proceed to lop off his head.

As for the shapes granted by a warlock's abilities...I am not sure I understand what you are meaning. The way I see it, if you are a fiend pacted warlock you can just morph into fiends, and if you are not a fiend pacted warlock you can't turn into fiends at all, ergo you don't pick the Word of Change power at all. Works just fine for me. Playing a good warlock means that you have to heavily restrict some powerful abilities (no undead summon, no fiendish shape, no access to hellfire warlock), and this is even fun.

[Xamot]

I've always thought of feylocks as an entirely different animal. Warlocks in their original design and as NWN has them set up get their powers from demons or devils. Later it was opened up to different kinds of pacts, but no idea what BG considers legit lore or not. One server I played on changed it so shapes for feylocks were different but IMO if you can only turn into a demon/devil then it's a sure sign where the power comes from.

Complete Arcane seems to specify that some warlocks draw their powers from the feywild instead of the abyss/nine hells. Of course, some feys are even worse than fiends (think of The Joker merging with Leatherface and Two Face before embarking on a methadone-fueled trip of wanton carnage and destruction), so if someone tells you "I am an innocent fey pacted warlock" you have all the rights to be unsettled and proceed to lop off his head.

As for the shapes granted by a warlock's abilities...I am not sure I understand what you are meaning. The way I see it, if you are a fiend pacted warlock you can just morph into fiends, and if you are not a fiend pacted warlock you can't turn into fiends at all, ergo you don't pick the Word of Change power at all. Works just fine for me. Playing a good warlock means that you have to heavily restrict some powerful abilities (no undead summon, no fiendish shape, no access to hellfire warlock), and this is even fun.

Agree 100%. In character for me it goes a couple of ways.

PC with limited knowledge of warlocks/feylocks: "I've seen these types of powers before, those aren't spells, you're a warlock, where's my torch."
Whateverlock: "But I'm a whateverlock, I'm doing good with these powers, they don't even come from the nine hells."
PC: "You're a whosawhatsit from where? Where's my torch."
or
PC with a lot of knowledge of warlcoks/feylocks and the difference: "So, you going to give me some story about how your powers aren't evil, or they come from some faerie dust you snorted as a child?"
Whateverlock: "Yah, my pact is with some creature of the feywild named Fizzlesticks Butterscotch."
PC: "Ever heard of the unseely court, where's my torch?"
Whateverlock: "But look, I can turn into a faerie, not a demon."
PC: "Seriously, torch."

Either way, unless you are willing to take the time to study the source of the pact, or have such faith in the word of someone that runs around using powers that could have been given to them for selling their soul to a dark power, most people are going to err on the side of 'where's my torch'. Any whateverlock would understand that too, especially a warlock that is trying to do good. He may not like it but if he's sitting around being emo because people don't like him, well he's fooling himself.

As for the shape change/summon thing I mean that NWN2 is limited in that warlocks, even if you say you are feylock, have stock summons and shapechange that are all evil. In PnP your summons and shapechange are related to your pact source. I played on a server (who shall remain nameless) that changed that. If you picked the feyblood feat with your warlock class you summoned faeries and turned into something else. So a feylock could go 'look, I summon faeries, not undead and hellhounds'. Doesn't prove much other than they aren't a warlock. If that change hasn't happened here, then no matter what you say your pact source is, you are turning into an evil outsider, and summoning undead. It makes it difficult to take a feylock seriously when they turn around and shift into a devil.

[Darksider_war]

Agree 100%. In character for me it goes a couple of ways.

PC with limited knowledge of warlocks/feylocks: "I've seen these types of powers before, those aren't spells, you're a warlock, where's my torch."
Whateverlock: "But I'm a whateverlock, I'm doing good with these powers, they don't even come from the nine hells."
PC: "You're a whosawhatsit from where? Where's my torch."
or
PC with a lot of knowledge of warlcoks/feylocks and the difference: "So, you going to give me some story about how your powers aren't evil, or they come from some faerie dust you snorted as a child?"
Whateverlock: "Yah, my pact is with some creature of the feywild named Fizzlesticks Butterscotch."
PC: "Ever heard of the unseely court, where's my torch?"
Whateverlock: "But look, I can turn into a faerie, not a demon."
PC: "Seriously, torch."

Either way, unless you are willing to take the time to study the source of the pact, or have such faith in the word of someone that runs around using powers that could have been given to them for selling their soul to a dark power, most people are going to err on the side of 'where's my torch'. Any whateverlock would understand that too, especially a warlock that is trying to do good. He may not like it but if he's sitting around being emo because people don't like him, well he's fooling himself.

As for the shape change/summon thing I mean that NWN2 is limited in that warlocks, even if you say you are feylock, have stock summons and shapechange that are all evil. In PnP your summons and shapechange are related to your pact source. I played on a server (who shall remain nameless) that changed that. If you picked the feyblood feat with your warlock class you summoned faeries and turned into something else. So a feylock could go 'look, I summon faeries, not undead and hellhounds'. Doesn't prove much other than they aren't a warlock. If that change hasn't happened here, then no matter what you say your pact source is, you are turning into an evil outsider, and summoning undead. It makes it difficult to take a feylock seriously when they turn around and shift into a devil.

Imo, any self-styled "feylock" that morphs into devils should be either permakilled (if he really is a fey pacted warlock) or killed (in case he is a fiend pacted warlock trying to fool you). My own avoids shapechanging into fiends or summoning undeads for that same reason. After all it does not make any sense if we consider that she is pacted to a seelie (albeit CN) archfey.

As for the rest, recognizing a Warlock is, as stated in many topics and posts, far from easy. It takes experience and knowledge of the subject, you just can't roll spellcraft with, say, 5 ranks in it, and then immediately go on saying "whoppeeee, a warlock!".

Not that I care much, my CG warlock has already been "discovered" after such a preposterous action in her first day of gaming, but she has lots of friends willing and able to take her defence, since she means no harm to mortals (unless attacked, that is) and has already demonstrated it many times. Heck, convincing people to get past the (motivated) first impression of "warlock ---> evil incarnate" is even funny. You'd be surprised at the list of friends my character has.

As for the "limited shapes" issue: don't take the Word of Change power. Issue solved. Doing the opposite is akin to asking a paladin for a smite, and a dm for some "re-education".

Anyway the real problem with warlocks, I think, is not really the source of their power, rather their being often first class "Look amme, Imma evil!" morons, and having the same depth of a saturday-night-cartoon villain. It's even worse if you have to deal with Aasimar warlocks, aka "Munchkins", made for no other reason than obvious powerbuilding. Bonus points if they tell you "but I am an Aasimar, I cannot be evil!" after you've just caught them raising undeads from slain foes.

Regardless, I can count the non moronically evil warlocks around with the fingers of just one hand, and still have lots of available digits left.

[Xamot]

As for the rest, recognizing a Warlock is, as stated in many topics and posts, far from easy. It takes experience and knowledge of the subject, you just can't roll spellcraft with, say, 5 ranks in it, and then immediately go on saying "whoppeeee, a warlock!".

I've never seen anything in the game rules that state Warlocks are a special case when it comes to identifying them. Their specific evocations, sure, just like trying to identify which spell a wizard casts, but anyone that is around adventurers enough should easily be able to identify the class group, and with a little more observation the specific class. Especially when in that class group themselves.

The guy running around with the sword and shield, in heavy armor, is probably a warrior. Does he use magic when he fights? No? Fighter.
The guy mumbling and waving his arms around and throwing flaming bat crap into the air? Wizard.
and so on.
If a guy is casting what looks like spells, but he isn't using components or foci then you can be relatively sure he is a spontaneous caster. After seeing a couple of his 'spells' you can differentiate between divine and arcane to the extent of the effects, but if the effects are just bolts of darkness (or light) that seem to hurt or help people that's a warlock/feylock. Unless I missed the part in one of the rulebooks that says you need special skills to identify a character's class or that warlocks get some special consideration that is.

[Darksider_war]

The problem is that a Warlock's invocations are NOT spells, at least pnp wise, but rather spell like abilities, and therefore subject to greater difficulties than a simple spell. Also, most blasts have a low-level spell equivalent. A good result in a check of spellcraft should point you out that the other guy is using unordinary magic, without actually meaning that you recognize the guy is a warlock. But I don't know what is the dm board's final ruling on the matter.

Anyway and regardless, warlocks are NOT kill on sight just because they are casting eldritch spear. Now, if they DO shapechange into fiends or summon undeads, on the other hand....

[Xamot]

Yup would definitely be up to DMs on the identification of class type but I would hope it would be the same across the board. And yah invocations are not spells, but eldritch blast is a 'blast of baleful energy' which is quite visible and obviously magical in nature. Observation and deduction might not identify what the warlock cast but it wouldn't be hard to eliminate what type of caster he's not and history has shown that people are quick to latch onto assumptions as fact when they've eliminated everything else.

[Hitman Hard]

I've heard player characters claiming a spellcraft roll can distort their blast into a magic missle if it trumps your roll, is this true?

[Xamot]

I've heard player characters claiming a spellcraft roll can distort their blast into a magic missle if it trumps your roll, is this true?

Not that I've ever heard of. There's nothing in the description of Spellcraft about a contested roll or disguising a spell, and I didn't see anything in the warlock writeup.

[AC81]

Yup would definitely be up to DMs on the identification of class type but I would hope it would be the same across the board. And yah invocations are not spells, but eldritch blast is a 'blast of baleful energy' which is quite visible and obviously magical in nature. Observation and deduction might not identify what the warlock cast but it wouldn't be hard to eliminate what type of caster he's not and history has shown that people are quick to latch onto assumptions as fact when they've eliminated everything else.

The problem with this is that we as players always jump to the right assumption. I tried warlocks a fair bit but soon got sick of people with no spell craft telling me they recognised certain blast colours or people with very low spell craft identifying blasts because the game engine treats them as lvl 1 or 2 spells. As warlocks are supposed to be uber rare no one should be able to just say ... "Hmm, not arcane, not divine , must be a warlock! Get it!" That type of reasoning is full of flaws, but it gets used a lot and, sadly, seems to be accepted.

[Hitman Hard]

If I'm not mistaken, one only needs five ranks in spellcraft to know?

[Xamot]

Yup would definitely be up to DMs on the identification of class type but I would hope it would be the same across the board. And yah invocations are not spells, but eldritch blast is a 'blast of baleful energy' which is quite visible and obviously magical in nature. Observation and deduction might not identify what the warlock cast but it wouldn't be hard to eliminate what type of caster he's not and history has shown that people are quick to latch onto assumptions as fact when they've eliminated everything else.

The problem with this is that we as players always jump to the right assumption. I tried warlocks a fair bit but soon got sick of people with no spell craft telling me they recognised certain blast colours or people with very low spell craft identifying blasts because the game engine treats them as lvl 1 or 2 spells. As warlocks are supposed to be uber rare no one should be able to just say ... "Hmm, not arcane, not divine , must be a warlock! Get it!" That type of reasoning is full of flaws, but it gets used a lot and, sadly, seems to be accepted.

I'd personally have to disagree on a couple of points there. Nothing in lore indicates Warlocks are uber rare or rare at all. There's also nothing that says they are special and any harder to identify than any other class, unless I'm missing it. I don't think it's really all that fair to give special consideration to a class just because people don't want to be persecuted. Orcs, Drow, Necromancers, and the like are all easily recognized and open persecution is encouraged, there is no special consideration. If you want to be hard to pin down then RP it that way. Mask your abilities, don't flaunt them. It would be like a cleric of Bane claiming special consideration so he could pray to his deity in the open without being hassled. I played a drow for quite some time and a good one at that and I welcomed the persecution, I chose the race and the alignment for the challenge it posed. Unless I'm mistaken in the lore, or there is some rule in place on BG I haven't seen, one should be able to tell a warlock is a warlock just as easily as telling the difference between a paladin and a fighter. To me, and this is just my opinion, if one doesn't want to handle the stress of contentious RP over class or race, choose a different class or race.

[AC81]

Yup would definitely be up to DMs on the identification of class type but I would hope it would be the same across the board. And yah invocations are not spells, but eldritch blast is a 'blast of baleful energy' which is quite visible and obviously magical in nature. Observation and deduction might not identify what the warlock cast but it wouldn't be hard to eliminate what type of caster he's not and history has shown that people are quick to latch onto assumptions as fact when they've eliminated everything else.

The problem with this is that we as players always jump to the right assumption. I tried warlocks a fair bit but soon got sick of people with no spell craft telling me they recognised certain blast colours or people with very low spell craft identifying blasts because the game engine treats them as lvl 1 or 2 spells. As warlocks are supposed to be uber rare no one should be able to just say ... "Hmm, not arcane, not divine , must be a warlock! Get it!" That type of reasoning is full of flaws, but it gets used a lot and, sadly, seems to be accepted.

I'd personally have to disagree on a couple of points there. Nothing in lore indicates Warlocks are uber rare or rare at all. There's also nothing that says they are special and any harder to identify than any other class, unless I'm missing it. I don't think it's really all that fair to give special consideration to a class just because people don't want to be persecuted. Orcs, Drow, Necromancers, and the like are all easily recognized and open persecution is encouraged, there is no special consideration. If you want to be hard to pin down then RP it that way. Mask your abilities, don't flaunt them. It would be like a cleric of Bane claiming special consideration so he could pray to his deity in the open without being hassled. I played a drow for quite some time and a good one at that and I welcomed the persecution, I chose the race and the alignment for the challenge it posed. Unless I'm mistaken in the lore, or there is some rule in place on BG I haven't seen, one should be able to tell a warlock is a warlock just as easily as telling the difference between a paladin and a fighter. To me, and this is just my opinion, if one doesn't want to handle the stress of contentious RP over class or race, choose a different class or race.

For starters - Spellcraft DC30 - Understand a strange or unique magical effect, such as the effects of a magic stream. Time required varies. No retry.

Somewhere in here someone (Zlaayer maybe) posted a whole bunch of reasons why your average joe shouldn't be able to just identify a warlock (by average I mean anyone other than the VERY few who've studied warlocks intensely). All warlocks are different, they get their powers from different entities, and use the same powers in vastly different ways. One warlock using frightful blast will look entirely different to another warlock. Only problem is, here we're limited by game mechanics. Also, there's absolutely no way that warlocks would be as common place as any other class around here. Hell, most wouldn't have even heard of warlocks. ANY warlock is rare, the vast majority of warlocks should be Lawful Evil, having just signed a pact Infernal, and very, very, very few COULD be Fey.
Most warlocks do try to mask their abilities ... the problems in doing so mechanically having been mentioned.

[Xamot]

That all may be his opinion AC but I've seen no lore yet to support it. I've looked but I just don't see it. Nothing to say they are rare, or that they are hard to recognize. If it's there I definitely want to read it so I can adjust my RP accordingly. Until then I just can't see giving special consideration to one class because the players who play it say it should be that way. Also spellcraft is used to identify the spell, I'm not talking about identifying what the power is, only using deduction to tell what it is not. Your average adventurer knows there are different kinds of magic, and you don't have to study wizards, sorcerers, clerics, etc for very long to at least be able to tell the differences. If a DM comes out and says that warlocks somehow get special treatment in this case then so be it. Until then I gotta RP the reference material I have to go on.

[Hitman Hard]

I should of rephrased my sentiment, I've heard if you can see what sorta spell is being cast in the mechanical box you've identified the power. But until, we get a Dm's word on this it's all conjecture. :p

As far as, being able to re-roll. Take twenty, maybe? As 3.5 lore states with using any skill.