|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:30PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2005
|
I'm kinda peeved at this class. It's a slap in the face for damage warlocks. Is this their answer to how underpowered the warlock is?
Should we just bury the warlock and all play sorcerers now?
Comments.
From what I can see, although it says that Sorcerers are secondary controllers, I still think that Warlocks are better controller than Sorcerers are. Other than sliding a square, I'm not immediately seeing very much control in the Sorcerer, while the Warlock's has always seemed to me to have a decent bit...
Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TMSpeaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:33PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2006
|
Hey...chaos power and dragon power do not have the 1/perround limit like Quarry, Sneak attack and curse...
so ya...SLAP down the warlocks...
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:34PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2005
|
I'm kinda peeved at this class. It's a slap in the face for damage warlocks. Is this their answer to how underpowered the warlock is?
Should we just bury the warlock and all play sorcerers now?
Comments.
I'll wait for Arcane Power and PHB2 to see just how screwed Warlocks are. Wild/Dragon Magic's damaging abilities are clearly better than Curse as it stands right now. I'm pretty bitter with what they did to the pact hammer, so I'm not holding my breath.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:37PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Dec 16, 2008
|
I'm kinda peeved at this class. It's a slap in the face for damage warlocks. Is this their answer to how underpowered the warlock is?
Should we just bury the warlock and all play sorcerers now?
Comments.
I don't think so, they just seem to play differently thats all.
You have to bear in mind that the socerer was developed with Arcane Power out very shortly after PHB2
there will be some nice stuff in there for Warlocks
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:38PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Aug 20, 2007
|
theres no way theyr gonna screw warlocks that hard. And arcane power comes out what? 2 months after phb2? maybe 3 tops? I fully expect wizard warlock and sorc to be on relatively happy par with eachother.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:39PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2007
|
From what I can see, although it says that Sorcerers are secondary controllers, I still think that Warlocks are better controller than Sorcerers are. Other than sliding a square, I'm not immediately seeing very much control in the Sorcerer, while the Warlock's has always seemed to me to have a decent bit...
You don't see the pushes, slides, slows, dazes, -def, -hit? Sure sounds controllerish to me
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:46PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Jan 30, 2005
|
I love the Dragon Sorcerer. Wild, not so much, don't like the choas part of it, but I could see where some might.
Thank god they did not make him a primary controller, that would have been a slap in the face for sorcerers.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:50PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Nov 29, 2008
|
I'm kinda peeved at this class. It's a slap in the face for damage warlocks. Is this their answer to how underpowered the warlock is?
Should we just bury the warlock and all play sorcerers now?
Comments.
It's awfully hasty to make that kind of judgment - you can't compare 3 levels of Sorcerer to 30 levels of Warlock, and you don't know how Arcane Power will switch things up.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:51PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2006
|
then again keep in mind in 3e Warlock came out second, and got lots of love for reinventing the wheel...maybe the shoe is just on the other foot this time... does this mean when 5e comes out I want my fav classes not in the first book!?!?!?!?!
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jan 25, 2009 - 10:56PM
#40
|
|
|
And on another note- why are both arcane strikers strictly inferior when it comes to at-wills to the martial strikers? And by inferior, I mean doing their job- big damage.
Mixing control in and gimping the arcane strikers by making them not best at either isn't my favorite thing ever. It puts some pressure on for the player to not do arcane strikers in order to optimize the party, when what I want to play is an arcane striker.
And while I prefer warlocks to what I've seen of sorcerers tonight, I think the sorcerer is probably strictly better-
and I think both are abortions when compared effectiveness as a striker to the every other existing striker class.
|
|
|
