|
11 months ago ::
Aug 17, 2012 - 10:41AM
#1
|
|
|
Am I the only one really unhappy about the change to Intelligence primary for the Warlock?
Warlocks were always supposed to be the wily darker cousins to wizards and sorcerers. In both 3e and 4e, Warlocks were primarily Charisma based and often played the party face. Making Warlocks Int based takes that away from them and relegates Charisma to secondary in a system where it's harder to get stat bonuses. Warlocks don't even have Charisma as one of their 3 stat choices at character creation! The first pact boon affects Charisma rolls, and even the suggested background of Charlatan focuses on Bluff and not Intelligence skills.
Having the two existing classes with +3 magic attack bonuses both be Int based is bland and dull. If you want a strong attack caster, you're basically forced into Int. Maybe this'll change with more classes, but it doesn't feel right to me.
Basically, I really feel that Intelligence as a Primary ability really does not fit the Warlock at all. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I was so put off by this that I had to speak up somewhere.
Edit
tl;dr: D&D Next Warlock feels like a "dark" Wizard instead of a Warlock
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 17, 2012 - 12:43PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jul 30, 2012
|
I like it better than the split Cha/Con disaster from 4e (They could of at least made the either/or pacts USE either Cha OR Con for attack rolls and such. My Star Pact Warforged Warlock would be so much happier...)
That said, I definitely think Cha is a much better primary stat for Warlock than Int. Especially considering how some of the invocations affect/are determined by your Cha.
"Utinam barbari spatium proprium tuum invadant!"
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 17, 2012 - 2:37PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
Personally I prefer CON, INT or CHA depending on the patron. Some patrons value smart warlocks who must dig to tomes and books to learn their locations and secrets to obtain their power. Other patrons require charismatic warlocks who can even convince them to lend power. And there are others who take anyone and dump power into their bodies and hope they survive.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 17, 2012 - 5:03PM
#4
|
|
|
Personally I prefer CON, INT or CHA depending on the patron. Some patrons value smart warlocks who must dig to tomes and books to learn their locations and secrets to obtain their power. Other patrons require charismatic warlocks who can even convince them to lend power. And there are others who take anyone and dump power into their bodies and hope they survive.
I really like this idea. Having your patron determine your most valuable score makes sense, and would make warlocks more viable for a variety of races. It only makes sense that more scholarly elves are better at contracting with fey patrons, while a dwarf would more often make say, an elemental pact because his body can withstand the overwhelming magic.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 17, 2012 - 5:38PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jul 30, 2012
|
My concern here is what happened to the 4e Warlock. By having 3 "casting" stats (even worse than 4e's "V-class design") which would carry over into Invocations, etc. the pool of available abilities for the average Warlock would be virtually diminished by 2/3rds (assuming roughly equal distribution).
For example, if your primary stat is Int and you want to choose an Invocation that utilizes Con, you will be at a not-insignificant disadvantage. The easy fix for this would be to have all Invocation descriptions use "your primary casting stat" rather than specify Int, Con, or Cha. There would also probably need to be some sort of footnote or sidebar concerning how handle the Spells (Rituals) Warlocks have access to with a flexible casting stat.
Done right, it could work out pretty well. I just don't want to see a repeat of 4e's "V-class design" (or something worse).
"Utinam barbari spatium proprium tuum invadant!"
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 18, 2012 - 10:39AM
#6
|
|
|
I'd much rather just have CHA be their abillity.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 18, 2012 - 12:34PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 14, 2001
|
I agree, that the spellcasting should not be Int. A Warlock is basically taking a shortcut to power compared to a Wizard. It should really be dependent on the entity with whom you made your pact with.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 20, 2012 - 1:46PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2012
|
I wouldn't mind seeing the spells or rituals be based off Int... But have Warlock powers be based on Cha.
This would give some diversity in the class but wouldn't cause to much MAD ... I hope...
Int/Dex/Con Warlock or a Cha/Dex/Con Warlock could be interesting paths for the same class. The Cha uses more powers like shadow veil and the Int based warlock would use more spells/rituals.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 20, 2012 - 1:58PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
+1 to Warlock's magic being based off of Cha. They make pacts and deals. That sounds like Cha based magic to me.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 20, 2012 - 2:06PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jul 17, 2010
|
Personally I prefer CON, INT or CHA depending on the patron. Some patrons value smart warlocks who must dig to tomes and books to learn their locations and secrets to obtain their power. Other patrons require charismatic warlocks who can even convince them to lend power. And there are others who take anyone and dump power into their bodies and hope they survive.
Yes please. Brilliant.
|
|
|
