The case for expanding the playstyles available to DC based

[wurdpass]

This is a proposal to increase the number of viable and interesting playstyles available to Warlocks, particularly Charisma based warlocks.

As it currently stands, there are very many invocations available to Warlock players that are "strictly dominated" by other invocations in their same grade. Many of them have potentially fun and interesting applications but won't see any action because the opportunity cost of ignoring other "Tier 1" invocations.

I do not think that the warlock class as a whole is underpowered - it has access to constantly available, high quality defensive invocations and high, consistent damage per round abilities. However, most any diversion from using this formula (get your wards up and blast) will usually result in a net decrease in power compared to this standard.

The main reason for this is that a Charisma based Warlock will have significantly lower save DCs than a comparable Divine or Arcane caster. I think there is a good reason for this: Divine and Arcane casters may only have 6 or so "save or stun" DC spells prepared and usable whereas the Warlock has no limit. Thus, a Warlock can potentially afford to cast "save or stun" spells until the target rolls a one, whereas a "traditional" caster does not have this ability.

When you couple a Warlock's potential ability to force its target to roll a save every round until it fails with the very strong defensive invocations available to a Warlock, as well as things like ICE and Blackguard's saves and Divine Shield it is easy to see how a DC based Warlock with great AC and saves could become unbalanced by getting in his tin-can and just forcing saves until a fatal failure.

This strategy is widely regarded as the "dominant" DC-lock build. With Blackguard levels and Steadfast Determination, the build can stand on his own Chilling Tentacles without taking any damage, invoking under ICE and Divine Shield. I don't think that this build needs a buff at all, it's good at what it does but also has some definite weaknesses, namely that it's save DCs will never get so high that they can land consistently. This is, of course, balanced by the fact that this build has enough defense to just cast them until they work.

What I'm proposing is to better allow DC-based Warlocks to have more of a spectrum between Defense and DC/Offense. The Blackguard Warlock build will spend pretty much all of it's pre-epic feats (e.g. PA, Cleave, DShield, CE, ICE, Toughness, Steadfast) as well as the majority of it's Dark invocations on Defense, turning it into a veritable tank with access to a couple, sub-30 DC stuns.

I think that DC-based Warlocks should be given other options to sacrifice some of this defense for having more potent offense.

I think that there are a couple of mechanical ways to accomplish this and then ways to allow players access to these mechanics
- A mechanic by which a Warlock can increase their effective Caster Level and/or Charisma modifier as applied to DC.
- Mechanics by which Warlocks could increase the DC of specific invocations
- Increased access to debuffs to lower opposing saves


In order to maintain balance, I think it's important that gaining access to these mechanics should necessitate sacrificing some defense. Warlocks derive the majority of their defense through Feats and several "Tier 1" invocations, particularly at the Dark invocation level. Here are some potential ideas to give Warlock's access to DC-boosting tools at the cost of defense:

Heritage Feats: Adding a feat to the Fey/Fiend/Dragon chains that allows Warlocks (and only Warlocks) to add 1/2*(Heritage Feats) to the DC of their invocations, or a subset of these. A warlock willing to sacrifice 4 feats to Fey could have 4/ DR, an extra "effective" caster level for blast dice and a +2 save to some DCs. This build would likely have to sacrifice things like ICE, Blackguard, Battlecaster, Steadfast as well as Spellcasting Prodigy for non-Humans/Halfies
- It's unclear to me if Fey Power or Infernal Power increase DC of Warlock invocations, however even if they do it's still generally a suboptimal option compared to Spellcasting Prodigy and then taking defensive feats

Caster Modes: Akin to the bloodcasting available to Spirit Shamans or Blood Magi, Warlocks could spend a feat or invocation slot to gain access to a casting mode that can increase DC either with a flat increase, or a scaled increase based on a multiplier against Charisma for example. These two examples cost HP to use on every spell, however other options such as lowering Armor Class (and/or preventing use of CE/ICE) or immobilizing/slowing the Warlock could also be implemented.

Expanding "Ability Focus Invocation" - Could potentially create a chain of these feats up to +6 at Epic Level, or perhaps a more conservative would be to subdivide invocations/blast essences and allow Warlocks to specialize. These divisions could potentially be Enchantment vs. Curse vs. AoE, or by energy type (cold/acid/fire) or even be a specific feat you take to boost DC of a certain level of Invocation, for example "Greater Ability Focus: Dark Invocations".

Increasing CL / Adding more Debuff Invocations - Personally I really like the idea of a 'hexer'/debuff Warlock that can use their invocations to lower opposing defense and offense. As it is right now, some of these invocations exist but are hardly useful. The main reason for these is they will have worse save DCs than eldricht essences that do more to incapacitate opponents, while also doing damage. In order for the Debuffs to be viable, they need to have a higher DC than comparable eldricht essences. In that case you would cast them first, to lower the targets saves, so that you can then cast the stunning eldricht essences which can be left as is.

Dark Invocation -
Ill Omen - CL4 - -2 AC for rounds*caster level - This might make sense as a lesser invocation. Warlocks don't really care about AC, and the save on a CL4 is going to be too low by the time Dark invocations are available. Note that if a warlock spends cross class skills in Taunt, the will save DC will be higher for the same -32 AC

Dreadful Word - Cl4 - mind affecting piercing confusion, this is strong although since it's basically the pinnacle of non-blast Warlock invocations I think it should be CL6


Greater Invocations -
Web / Tentacles - Not really debuffs/hexes, these are well balanced. I think an invocation could be introduced here to lower a single save by 1 + Caster Level divided 10.


Lesser Invocation - This is where most of these are, but this is also where many of a Warlocks most important invocations are - Haste, Ignore the Pyre , Eldricht Chain, and Invisibility.

Since the debuff DCs are never going to get higher than around ~28, which will be lower than the DC on a "save or stun" eldricht essence that takes the same amount of time to cast and does damage, they will never be used.

Generally these are situationally strong when first unlocked, but by the time you've unlocked Greater invocations they are obsolete.

Curse of Despair could be a "bread and butter" invocation to open every battle for some builds if its DC & debuff scaled better, either through feats or inherently.
Dread Seizure - Fortitude save to slow for 3 rounds, plus a AB debuff. The Slow effect from Hindering or Draining blast is more slow and almost as much AB debuff on a Will save, which is generally more useful since you don't really need to lower the AB of classes with low Fortitude progression.
Frightful Presence - Another debuff that could be fun to stack with other debuffs, if you could get it to land consistently. I think what would be interesting would be to turn it into a short (3-5 round) duration Aura that behaves similar to the Orc War Drummer debuff, rolling a new save every round it is active and then applying a shorter duration debuff (currently it would be 10min)


Some invocations from 3.5 D&D that are not in the game but I think would add to this hexer/debuff build:

Earthen Grasp/Stoney Grasp - Roll grapple check to incapacitate -- Would need to make the grapple check scale off of charisma to prevent abuse by Conlock builds

Enervating Shadow - Impose a strength penalty on nearby creatures -- Any sort of activatable aura that debuffs could be very fun on a Warlock build. It seems to me that a subdued form of the bardic Dirge could also be implemented.

[wurdpass]

Didn't get a whole lot of attention on this, just putting a small bump.

The hope is to amplify/expand on the existing (but rarely used) invocations related to debuffing enemies to give the Warlock more potential playstyles.

I believe that this can be done in a way that does not make the class overpowered by requiring investments in Feats or other invocation slots (like the bard spell that boosts Inspire Courage) that preclude the class from taking full advantage of the defensive abilities offered.

[Steve]

What I'm proposing is to better allow DC-based Warlocks to have more of a spectrum between Defense and DC/Offense

What do you think are acceptable DCs, beyond what exists now for a infinite casting CHA focused Warlock?

How do you propose removing the defense that any Warlock type build can get, so that they become, interns of building parlance, a “glass canon?”

What I think you and many others would wish for is more variety of Invocations to choose from, and then, the need to specialize in that variety in order to make it count, just like Casters have Spell Schools that they must focus in.

But what this requires is a near rewrite of the existing Class on BGTSCC, and THAT would require a Dev to want to expand the Warlock class...which should, imho, not differ much from how the Warlock exists in 3.5e D&D.

[Hammer_Song]

Don't forget the chr-lock, although underused compared to the famous Con-lock and Hips-lock, is still very powerful.
With a +2 chr race, you're looking at 32DC with 30d6 damage per blast. Add blackguard for -2 to enemy saves and +10AC on demand and you've got something that can't be beaten by any melee's. Averages 105 damage per round even if saves are made, and if a save is failed it's auto win for the warlock. Also, a smart chr-lock will also have a reflex, will and fort save blast, so they can attack their enemies weak saving throw. I'm not sure these guys need a power-up and warlocks have a lot of variety in their build types.

I think what Steve said is probably accurate however - maybe more variety in their invocations is needed. Still, I dunno ... giving more power to the already very powerful.

[DiceyCZ]

As for variety and need to specialize, I don't think you need schools for that, if people had to/were forced to pick invocations based on their pact and if there were more invocations pact specific that would be enough I think. And if I remember correctly there was a discussion of something like that coming long time ago, I am even preeeetty sure that I have already seen some version of it on JEGS some...two years ago? Question is what happened to it I guess.

[Nemni]

I basically agree with the OP. It's not more power to have alternatives. Warlocks only get 12 invocations, anything added will mean that they have to sacrifice something that they are using today.

There are currently 380 arcane spells, with more coming. There are 55 warlock invocations. There's plenty of room for additional options, or improving upon the useless ones that exist (such as Ill Omen).

[chad878262]

Hammer_Song brings up the (very valid) point of DC based Warlocks. Basically, DC32 is very strong when you consider it is something that can be spammed. A smart Warlock build with alternate invocations to effect fortitude/reflex/will saving throws is very effective. Is it as likely to succeed at save or x effects as a DC Wizard? NO, of course not...But that Wizard has VERY limited castings of (insert highest level save or suck spell here)...Meanwhile, warlock can fire as many chilling tentacles or binding blasts (one fortitude, one will save there) as they want without rest. While the damage listed (30d6) is actually only ~52.5 on a successful save (~105 on a failed save), his point is still very true. Giving more power specifically to DC based Warlocks would be power creep. They are already quite powerful, they simply don't perform quite as well as CON locks. Comparing against CON lock is sort of like comparing against a Favored Soul...

[wurdpass]

Thank you guys for the engagement!

What do you think are acceptable DCs, beyond what exists now for a infinite casting CHA focused Warlock?

Im proposing providing Warlocks with the ability to boost DCs on Debuff Invocations like Bestow Curse to the 30s level, which is competitive with what a necromancy focused caster should achieve on spells like Curse.

Edit: Currently the DCs on Warlocks blasts will be higher than nonblast invocations. Since blasts also do damage, this seems a little backwards.

How do you propose removing the defense that any Warlock type build can get, so that they become, interns of building parlance, a “glass canon?”

Warlocks get most defense from Feats (ICE, battlecaster) and Dark invos like Premonition.

By providing DC boosting feats, or a Dark invocation that gives a "feat" like the current All Seeing Eyes or the Darkvision one, it would present the builder a "zero sum" choice betw offense and.defense

What I think you and many others would wish for is more variety of Invocations to choose from, and then, the need to specialize in that variety in order to make it count, just like Casters have Spell Schools that they must focus in.

But what this requires is a near rewrite of the existing Class on BGTSCC, and THAT would require a Dev to want to expand the Warlock class...which should, imho, not differ much from how the Warlock exists in 3.5e D&D.

I think that the offensive non damage dealing Warlock invocations are basically useless. They exist in game but no one uses them. I think this can be changed in a way to make playing certain styles of Warlocks more fun without a total class overhaul

[wurdpass]

Hammer_Song brings up the (very valid) point of DC based Warlocks. Basically, DC32 is very strong when you consider it is something that can be spammed. A smart Warlock build with alternate invocations to effect fortitude/reflex/will saving throws is very effective. Is it as likely to succeed at save or x effects as a DC Wizard? NO, of course not...But that Wizard has VERY limited castings of (insert highest level save or suck spell here)...Meanwhile, warlock can fire as many chilling tentacles or binding blasts (one fortitude, one will save there) as they want without rest. While the damage listed (30d6) is actually only ~52.5 on a successful save (~105 on a failed save), his point is still very true. Giving more power specifically to DC based Warlocks would be power creep. They are already quite powerful, they simply don't perform quite as well as CON locks. Comparing against CON lock is sort of like comparing against a Favored Soul...

I think that the current Warlock/Blackguard build is strong as is. However the invocations are pretty cookie cutter IMO.

And for Blackguard youre spending at least 2, likely 3 feats on that class, plus Battlecaster. Not a lot of flexibility.

This is largely accepted as the strictly optimal way to play a DC based lock. Going warlock 30 can get better save DCs but sacrifices so much AC/save defense its not really worth it. You can splash HFW for the Gate 1x/day, but without a Con focus thats it.

I want to clarify that Im not really talking about DC boosts to Essence Shapes.

I am proposing DC boosts to debuffs that you would cast in advance of Binding Blast, etc, that increase the effective DC of Binding Blast by lowering target saves. The "opportunity cost" of these debuffs is already relatively high compared to getting minimum 50 damage and a 5% chance to stun (targer rolls a one on Fort save)

[wurdpass]

I basically agree with the OP. It's not more power to have alternatives. Warlocks only get 12 invocations, anything added will mean that they have to sacrifice something that they are using today.

There are currently 380 arcane spells, with more coming. There are 55 warlock invocations. There's plenty of room for additional options, or improving upon the useless ones that exist (such as Ill Omen).

Thank you, this is my standpoint as well.

I also believe that most DC Warlocks take the same feats, so if they have more feats to take they will sacrifice useful ones that the builds are already taking.


Ill Omen is a great example.. As I wrote this is a Dark invocation that is not much stronger than if a Warlock took the Taunt skill

[aaron22]

i think the use of the word spamming is a bit out of place. you can cast only once per round. a lot can happen in a round and a warlock is very vulnerable because of this. one action per round. thats a long 6 seconds.

you speak as if 108 damage per rnd is good. its not. that would be equiv to a 30 fighter landing his hits for only 17 damage. or NLH for 25? uh... yuck.

I have a DC/Cha lock (on +2 cha race) and it is 100% RP build. its optimized but is still by far the weakest lock build i have and is hardly playable. it is slow and dangerous and working inside your CR is quite the adventure solo. way better with a partner.

a proposal to up the DC's of your invos at the cost of blast dice seems to me to be still well under a power creep. limited use add ons like turn undead and ki couldd be utilized for such a power up.. trade blast dice for limited use clickies for more potent DC's or a clicky feat that lowers blast dice x% for a DC boost etc etc..

this could be done.. it depends if it wants to be done or not.

[metaquad4]

If you sacrifice your blast damage (you'd be dealing 21d6), you can achieve higher DCs as well. The highest DC I've ever done on a warlock build is 38. Not to mention you get defenses almost on par with a dragon druid (Above 60 AC, 50% Concealment, 15 DR, Immunity to Crits, the works). And that is without item usage.

I don't think warlocks really need more power to their DC builds. However, they do need more utility and variety. For invocations, I do think the list is a little lackluster. It wouldn't hurt them to get a few more spells, it only to make invocations actually worthwhile. As it stands, none of them can really beat (21d6+Knockdown/Stun/Daze/Confusion/Blind). And even on their own, current warlock invocations are pretty lackluster at best. If they were put into other spell-books, they would still be worthless.

IMO, first step is making invocations ESL Warlock CL/3. That way, at CL 30 they'd cap at 10. But, because they aren't blasts, they won't be doing damage in addition to their effects. That would warrant the additional +1 DC.

After invocation DCs are made worthwhile, then we can look to seeing what kind of effects invocations could have. Invocations shouldn't be redundant with blasts, in order to create a greater VARIETY of effects.

So, warlocks need:
1) Competent invocation DCs.
2) A greater variety of effects for invocations, rather than ones blasts can already do. And ones that actually have use to the warlock.

[chad878262]

i think the use of the word spamming is a bit out of place. you can cast only once per round. a lot can happen in a round and a warlock is very vulnerable because of this. one action per round. thats a long 6 seconds.

Any Warlock that doesn't take some defensive abilities that makes them not vulnerable is making a design choice (either for RP or flavor) which is hurting their performance. While a Warlock certainly needs to equip themselves similar to a non-caster, they do get UMD and their own self buffs which they have in unlimited quantity. A wand of mirror image and retributive invisibility handles 90% or more of your defensive needs so long as you have at least decent AC. As to how we define spamming....*shrug* they never run out of spells.

you speak as if 108 damage per rnd is good. its not. that would be equiv to a 30 fighter landing his hits for only 17 damage. or NLH for 25? uh... yuck.

Except that's not what it's like at all. The warlock has so many things it can do to increase DPR. Hitting for ~105 against 6 enemies at once, or firing at enemies from a long distance with eldritch spear. How about unlimited summoning of undead minions to soak damage while you fire off your damage from relative safety? Not to mention wards to make you relatively safe from damage and the ability to refresh them unlimited times. Let's also not forget the CHA Warlock (well, any Warlock, but CHA based has higher DCs) still have access to Epic Spells. It is far from what a Fighter landing hits for 17 damage is doing.

I have a DC/Cha lock (on +2 cha race) and it is 100% RP build. its optimized but is still by far the weakest lock build i have and is hardly playable. it is slow and dangerous and working inside your CR is quite the adventure solo. way better with a partner.

How does it compare to a Fighter 30? Again, comparing a CHA lock to a CON lock is like comparing it to a Favored Soul...It doesn't really tell us much.

a proposal to up the DC's of your invos at the cost of blast dice seems to me to be still well under a power creep. limited use add ons like turn undead and ki couldd be utilized for such a power up.. trade blast dice for limited use clickies for more potent DC's or a clicky feat that lowers blast dice x% for a DC boost etc etc..

Nope... what would happen is some HiPS Warlock with high DCs. HiPS mage can cast, HiPS and cast again, with DCs in the ~40 range (higher or lower) this makes them very strong. Give that to a Warlock that doesn't run out of casts (vs. Wizard that might have half a dozen casts of their highest DC spell) and you have the top PvP and PvE build. You have Power Creep.

Seriously, with a DC32 Warlock against Epic Mobs you are going to be successful more often than not so long as you are going against the appropriate saving throw (fortitude against casters, will against melee). Increasing it only makes these builds go from pretty solid (compared to anything besides Tier 1, top of the heap builds) to the new top build.

Not trying to be argumentative, but I do think there is a bit of a failure to see where the issue's lie. I certainly can see the thought process in introducing changes through Feats, but I also wouldn't say Warlocks are feat starved (see builds spending all epic feats on Eldritch Master and extra blast dice). My stance is simply there needs to be more thought in to how introducing options can be done that doesn't simply empower an already top tier class. Nothing thus far is boxed in enough for me to be confident it wouldn't introduce a simple power up.

I do like what metaquad suggests with regard to more/new invocations, but the difficulty that has been seen in the past is they are either a flat power up or not 'strong enough' to compete with the Standard Warlock picksTM. I'm always interested in seeing new ideas for invocations that are interesting enough to pick without introducing power creep (it's a very thin line).

[wurdpass]

If you sacrifice your blast damage (you'd be dealing 21d6), you can achieve higher DCs as well. The highest DC I've ever done on a warlock build is 38. Not to mention you get defenses almost on par with a dragon druid (Above 60 AC, 50% Concealment, 15 DR, Immunity to Crits, the works). And that is without item usage.


So, warlocks need:
1) Competent invocation DCs.
2) A greater variety of effects for invocations, rather than ones blasts can already do. And ones that actually have use to the warlock.

For the first part: 60 AC requires ICE, Battlecaster and Shield Prof. It shouldnt be hard to make it impossible to have both 60 AC and whatever DC boost we come up with at the same time, at least without sacrificing Epic feat slots.

You're dead on with your simmary. I tried to propose some mechanical changes to achieve this.

[wurdpass]

Nope... what would happen is some HiPS Warlock with high DCs. HiPS mage can cast, HiPS and cast again, with DCs in the ~40 range (higher or lower) this makes them very strong. Give that to a Warlock that doesn't run out of casts (vs. Wizard that might have half a dozen casts of their highest DC spell) and you have the top PvP and PvE build. You have Power Creep.

Thanks a lot for your engagement but you're being a bit obtuse here. With 2 skill points a level it is very difficult for a non-Drow to get Shadowdancer and a decent Cha score. Are Drow OP? Sure, but not because of Warlocks

Additionally you can create guard rails quite easily by increasing feat requirements for the DC feats to make getting Dodge/Mobility/Able Learner untenable on a build that also wants Spell Prodigy and Practiced Invoker.

Not trying to be argumentative, but I do think there is a bit of a failure to see where the issue's lie. I certainly can see the thought process in introducing changes through Feats, but I also wouldn't say Warlocks are feat starved (see builds spending all epic feats on Eldritch Master and extra blast dice). My stance is simply there needs to be more thought in to how introducing options can be done that doesn't simply empower an already top tier class. Nothing thus far is boxed in enough for me to be confident it wouldn't introduce a simple power up.

I do like what metaquad suggests with regard to more/new invocations, but the difficulty that has been seen in the past is they are either a flat power up or not 'strong enough' to compete with the Standard Warlock picksTM. I'm always interested in seeing new ideas for invocations that are interesting enough to pick without introducing power creep (it's a very thin line).

My OP contains several ideas for new invocations, changes to existing invocations, feats and "casting modes" akin to Blood Magic. I would love feedback on these!

I dont think that anything I suggested would be stronger than Eldricht Doom+Binding Blast, and I tried to make these things power trade offs rather than just a power ups.

I feel Warlocks are pretty feat starved pre epic. The heritage feats are.. Okay. Ability Focus Invocation is pretty useless. Dark Transient is a QoL for Blasters. Spell Penetration is not really in the same category.

Pretty much any warlock build is spending at least 3 feats on non-invocation related defensive feats. Is this a problem? No. Could you expand playstyle options with more offensive feat selection? I definitely believe so.