Warlock Revamp - Upcoming Changes

[Fury]

Have I mentioned that I would have your virtual babies? Because... yeah.

[GodBeastX]

It should work on errbody. It'll require some scripts with the plugin though because you gotta manually turn it on and off with encumberance and what not, but otherwise it should work.

[Peridan]

Oh my goodness. Please, please do this for rogues too.

[GodBeastX]

This is a warlock thread, but I may as well post this.

I found a fix for uncanny dodge while I was looking into Barbarian problems, and it should handle the bullshit bug from obsidian. It's a server side plugin that will enable it's functionality (Bypass the bug).

That should be a good first start.

[wangxiuming]

Any chance warlock skill points/level might increase to 3 or 4 +INT similar to the boost wizards and sorcerers got earlier in the year?

[Doubtful]

True, although the damage point was brought up in response to a comment on the perceived high damage values. Comparing the base damage potential of one class to the base damage potential of another is hardly a dangerous thing to do, both classes have ways and means.of becoming more dangerous to opponents.

Apples and oranges yes, but they're still both fruit. We're not talking apples and quantum microprocessors.

[Lotus]

9D6 (average of 31.5) once per round vs any melee based fighter with 4 attacks per round and an average damage of between 25-35 with crits tripled or quadrupled.

It's irresponsible to compare damage from one skill and not the immense amount of utility and crowd control the Warlock has. Apples and oranges, dude.

[thaelis]

9D6 (average of 31.5) once per round vs any melee based fighter with 4 attacks per round

Only the first of which usually hits :P But yeah, I have to admit if its only once per round it's not as scary as I thought. I have been killed plenty of times by Warlocks but then again I've been killed plenty by Fighters too heh

[GodBeastX]

The goal isn't really to buff them, it's to make them less cookie cutter. I'm not sitting here planning "OH WARLOCKS NEED MORE DAMAGE!" I just want warlocks to have options beyond everyone taking exact same spells.

[Doubtful]

9D6 (average of 31.5) once per round vs any melee based fighter with 4 attacks per round and an average damage of between 25-35 with crits tripled or quadrupled. It's hardly comparable. Allowing an epic warlock to add a whole 16 points of damage per round hardly seems scarily overpowered.

Sure, high ac can protect from a sword but any melee antics will slush a warlock before they've gotten two or three blasts off (if they succeed the concentration checks of course).

That aside it would be nice to see some barbarian loving. Give em sneak!

[thaelis]

Can barbarians get some love next? Maybe so they are actually worth anyone making a non-dwarven one?

Agreed! I've never thought of Warlocks as something that needed any help. Unlimited 9d6 irresistible damage is pretty scary already if you ask me! +50% damage on top of that seems excessive to say the least.

And yes, I realise warriors can do just as much or more damage, but high AC and/or DR can protect against physical damage, whereas hardly anyone is capable of defending against magic damage.

[Torgar]

Can barbarians get some love next? Maybe so they are actually worth anyone making a non-dwarven one?

[Doubtful]

I did not explicitly say it before, so ...

Thank you GBX, Doubt, and Sundren staff!

Don't thank me, this is pure GBX awesomeness!

[GodBeastX]

I'm wondering if people would complain if it says an attempted spell resist succeeds that doesn't. The Spell Resist function handles more than SR, and from what I understand it's hardcoded to take the caster level in half for the engine (Intentionally no less).

I put a fix in which works with SR, but spell mantle and immunities would need to be handled as well and it's an all or nothing deal with that function which puts out text in combat log which won't be what happens.

[wangxiuming]

I did not explicitly say it before, so ...

Thank you GBX, Doubt, and Sundren staff!