A change to damage type for Warlocks.

Winterburn

It's the nature of man to ask questions.-Belgarath
Hi.

Now this is going to ruffle some feathers, of that I'm sure.

There are monsters that get healed by certain elemental damage (Iron golems gets healed by fire, the acis stone elementals in acid wit gets healed from acid and then there are some that gets buffed by some, like the flesh golems that gets hasted by electric and there might be more that I just can't think of on top of my head).

Then there is also monsters that are immune to certain elemental damage. Now both the sorcerer and alchemist have a bypass skill for this which I for one are all for (saw another post a few days ago about someone not liking that, something about no more "silverbullets" or something like that if you want to read that guys post).

Now for my suggestion:

Since the pact damage is really the key damage output on a warlock I don't think it should count as elemental as in like a fire spell or an acid spell. For me it's more like a deity damage that just happends to be elemental in it's "shape". I would like it to be counted as untyped damage and it could either be boosted by the element it's supposed to represent aka fiend pact although the damage type is "untyped" it gets boosted by fire spellpower and fire lore for crits or all warlock pacts could be boosted by impulse and kinetic lore spellpower which would make gearing easier since the other part of the damage is force (unless you use the skill that makes it evil).

I would be ok with either of those options but if that makes it too easy then make it boost by the element that it's representing, aka Fiend - fire spellpower, Great Old One - acid spellpower etc, just make the damage type untyped.

This way you don't have to turn off your pact every time you run into monsters that are healed or buffed by your main damage type. Or be secerly crippled when fighting mobs that are immune to your pact damage.

I don't want to change the look af the blasts or anything and I kind of still want them to be representative of the elements since it makes it cool, I just don't want it to be treated as for fiend as example as normal fire, but a demons fire that nothing is immune to or gets healed/buffed from and the easiest way to make that change i think would be to make the damage untyped but still look like fire.

Edit: I kind of take back where I want it to be boosted by impulse/kinetic lore. Even if I would be ok with that change I would rather it's boosted by the element it's supposed to represent.
 
Upvote 3

Lazuli

Well-known member
Warlock is one of the few classes that deserved a bypass. I don't know why devs didn't give it to him and gave it to the dragonlord or the druid.

Casters with big spellbooks deserve a design that fits their generalist play rather than forcing them to adapt to the current ultra-specialist design that only favors specialist casters. But the devs don't want to consider that different playsyles need different designs, and that trying to fit round pieces into square holes is not going to work well.

Warlock also needs an ED geared towards them, just as non-bypass generalist casters need a mantle not designed for bypass specialists. But devs don't listen.
 

Winterburn

It's the nature of man to ask questions.-Belgarath
Warlock is one of the few classes that deserved a bypass. I don't know why devs didn't give it to him and gave it to the dragonlord or the druid.

Casters with big spellbooks deserve a design that fits their generalist play rather than forcing them to adapt to the current ultra-specialist design that only favors specialist casters. But the devs don't want to consider that different playsyles need different designs, and that trying to fit round pieces into square holes is not going to work well.

Warlock also needs an ED geared towards them, just as non-bypass generalist casters need a mantle not designed for bypass specialists. But devs don't listen.
Well posting these suggestions might get some attention, not sure if it will but we can always hope. Especially if a lot of people comment, like and such.

There is always hope.
 

Lazuli

Well-known member
Well posting these suggestions might get some attention, not sure if it will but we can always hope. Especially if a lot of people comment, like and such.

There is always hope.
I completely agree with you. The only hope that the devs will one day become aware of the situation of certain classes is to draw their attention again and again. That's why I continue writing in these forums, although I become more and more disenchanted. And that's why I've pointed out once again that design and ED changes are needed for these classes.

But personally I think that to change the pact damage from warlock to untyped, the devs could just give him the bypass, after all it is one of the few classes that deserves it. Warlock is even more of a specialist than the sorc, who is a specialist by nature.

And the warlock really really really needs more personalized attention in the overall game design: EDs, feats, gear. His playstyle is unique, the devs can't expect him to fit well into a square hole. It fits, but badly, because it is not a square!
 

Winterburn

It's the nature of man to ask questions.-Belgarath
I completely agree with you. The only hope that the devs will one day become aware of the situation of certain classes is to draw their attention again and again. That's why I continue writing in these forums, although I become more and more disenchanted. And that's why I've pointed out once again that design and ED changes are needed for these classes.

But personally I think that to change the pact damage from warlock to untyped, the devs could just give him the bypass, after all it is one of the few classes that deserves it. Warlock is even more of a specialist than the sorc, who is a specialist by nature.

And the warlock really really really needs more personalized attention in the overall game design: EDs, feats, gear. His playstyle is unique, the devs can't expect him to fit well into a square hole. It fits, but badly, because it is not a square!
I can agree on that.

Edit: One thing that could be done to not make casters super OP in comparison to melee when it comes to stripping immunities from monsters is to reducing the damage on for example fire monster that today is immune to fire and when the fire immunity is stripped aka from fire sorc skill takes full damage you could make it take damage in comparison to a melee not having the "right" DR breaker weapon like silver or good against devils. I don't know the actual % in damage drop if you don't break DR but it's not that you do 0 damage with a regular weapon.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: DBZ

Lazuli

Well-known member
Casters are not op compared to melees, with or without bypass. Currently casters are clearly inferior to melees, although some more than others. It's the reason most powergamers aren't playing spellcasters right now.
 

Purr

Well-known member
Warlock has a couple of problems.
1) the pact damage is all or nothing. They fixed this with the regular eldritch blast dice by giving you the option for it to be evil or pierce instead of force, but not with pact. Would love to see a similar option where you can change your pact to light or evil damage based on which pact (e.g. celestial changes to light), maybe at a reduction of scaling.

Yes, the end result would probably be that most people would just play alignment damage and only need to worry about radiance lore.

2) terrible imbues. Yes, ES (but not AoS) gets access to a very meagre imbue, but there are no good ways to increase it. If there was a light (or evil) imbue on each hit, it would mitigate some of the problems with having to turn off pact damage on some monsters.

I'm generally negative on giving away bypass abilities. i like the reduction 5/10/15 of energy type like in fiend, but not a "your fire does damage to golems now."

Honestly, the whole warlock theme is bad right now, even though it is still arguable the easiest and fastest levelling experience 1 to 20.
 

Visik

Well-known member
I agree with the problem. I'm not... onboard?.. with the proposed solution.

I propose an alternative. First a quick restatement of the problem: Warlock pact damage is fixed and unchangeable. Casters (even those who get bypasses) often have the option to take a 2nd element to use on resistant or healed mobs. Warlocks do not. In addition, the nature of Eldritch Blasting is such that doing ANYTHING else, be it casting a spell, turning off Pact damage (or changing it, were that possible) or whatever, creates a huge hiatus in blasting DPS output.

Thus, Warlocks reasonably need some kind of bypass even more than other caster types who've gotten one. And making it of the 'cast this SLA to make the mob vulnerable' type isn't really an appropriate solution, either.

OTOH, mobs have resistances and are healed by damage types for a reason. AND Warlocks also always have a second damage type, be it Force, Evil, Piercing, or whatever.

As such, I think maybe something like a progressive reduction in mob immunity as they're hit by multiple blasts might be more equitable and make for a decent playstyle. If each blast within 5 seconds reduced immunity by 20-25%, I think there'd be a decent balance between the extremes of no immunities and the current situation.
 
Last edited:

Visik

Well-known member
Warlock has a couple of problems.
1) the pact damage is all or nothing. They fixed this with the regular eldritch blast dice by giving you the option for it to be evil or pierce instead of force, but not with pact. Would love to see a similar option where you can change your pact to light or evil damage based on which pact (e.g. celestial changes to light), maybe at a reduction of scaling.

Yes, the end result would probably be that most people would just play alignment damage and only need to worry about radiance lore.

2) terrible imbues. Yes, ES (but not AoS) gets access to a very meagre imbue, but there are no good ways to increase it. If there was a light (or evil) imbue on each hit, it would mitigate some of the problems with having to turn off pact damage on some monsters.

I'm generally negative on giving away bypass abilities. i like the reduction 5/10/15 of energy type like in fiend, but not a "your fire does damage to golems now."

Honestly, the whole warlock theme is bad right now, even though it is still arguable the easiest and fastest levelling experience 1 to 20.

I think you're misstating with the 'reduction 5/10/15 of energy type'; the statement, iirc, is that you bypass the first 5/10/15 resistance of that type. Which, if I'm not losing my mind, simply means that if the mob is immune, you do, at most 15 damage per hit to it. That's.. nonsense. At the VERY least that bypass needs to be percentage-based, where you bypass up to 15% of their energy resistance. Because by the time you get it, a 15 bypass is nothing.

Unless I completely misunderstand that bypass, ofc. I've never bothered to take it, because it seems so anemic.
 

Winterburn

It's the nature of man to ask questions.-Belgarath
I think you're misstating with the 'reduction 5/10/15 of energy type'; the statement, iirc, is that you bypass the first 5/10/15 resistance of that type. Which, if I'm not losing my mind, simply means that if the mob is immune, you do, at most 15 damage per hit to it. That's.. nonsense. At the VERY least that bypass needs to be percentage-based, where you bypass up to 15% of their energy resistance. Because by the time you get it, a 15 bypass is nothing.

Unless I completely misunderstand that bypass, ofc. I've never bothered to take it, because it seems so anemic.
Yeah I'm not sure about the bypass either and one thing I'm not sure of is if the mob is immune there is no bypass to be made so if they are immune they are immune unless you have a skill that strips immunity which I'm not sure that the bypass do.

It's more like if a mob have like inbuilt fire reduction or let's say an enemy casts fire resist on himself you strip some of that reduction and do more damage to them then you would have without that reduction. But some fire elementals for example are immune to fire damage and then that skill don't apply. Please do correct me if I'm wrong here :D
 

Winterburn

It's the nature of man to ask questions.-Belgarath
I agree with the problem. I'm not... onboard?.. with the proposed solution.

I propose an alternative. First a quick restatement of the problem: Warlock pact damage is fixed and unchangeable. Casters (even those who get bypasses) often have the option to take a 2nd element to use on resistant or healed mobs. Warlocks do not. In addition, the nature of Eldritch Blasting is such that doing ANYTHING else, be it casting a spell, turning off Pact damage (or changing it, were that possible) or whatever, creates a huge hiatus in blasting DPS output.

Thus, Warlocks reasonably need some kind of bypass even more than other caster types who've gotten one. And making it of the 'cast this SLA to make the mob vulnerable' type isn't really an appropriate solution, either.

OTOH, mobs have resistances and are healed by damage types for a reason. AND Warlocks also always have a second damage type, be it Force, Evil, Piercing, or whatever.

As such, I think maybe something like a progressive reduction in mob immunity as they're hit by multiple blasts might be more equitable and make for a decent playstyle. If each blast within 5 seconds reduced immunity by 20-25%, I think there'd be a decent balance between the extremes of no immunities and the current situation.
The part i'm not agreeing with you on is the part OTOH and so on where you say that warlocks have a 2nd damage type like sorceres and other caster usually have access to, the problem is that when you turn off your pact you do half your supposed damage or even less (not sure which is the higher of the 2 damage types for warlock pact or eldritch or if they are even) as for a sorc using a different element like say you are a fire sorc and now you face an iron golem, you can't use your fire spells but you have acid as backup which means that your acid spells do full damage on the iron golem as for the warlock that only do half damage.

That is my take on it and since you can't change your pact damage type I think that it should be treated differently then normal elemental damage. A fire sorc in comparison to a fiend pact earlock is different in that the fire sorc just uses regular fire where imo the warlock made a pact with a demon, that should count for something. Sorc also gets skill to strip immunity where warlock don't. I know you said that you're not a fan of stripping immunities and I have seen others that too don't like it.

So a question to you and others that want to chime in, what exactely is it that doesn't feel right with that kind of ability on a specialist class like sorcerer for example? I can see that for a non PM wiz that it shouldn't be a thing since they are generalist caster and their strength lies in having access to many spells and can easily change them to fit a specific quest (or even change them in quest at a rest shrine, as can clerics).

In order to make classes playable you need these kind of bypasses/immunity strippings or noone would ever play them or everyone would pick the element that has fewest drawbacks and the rest would be unplayable. Same for warlocks imo, if you pick fey pact there is little in the game that are immune to it and if you pick fiend there is a lot in certain level spans that are immune/resistant and some that heals from it.

I currently have an acolyte i'm playing that i grew tired of just because of this where i met monsters that healed from my pact damage or were immune to it making the build i have under perform and it kind of took the fun out of playing him. I know that there will come a time where I'm done with those quests and I get to do more quests where monsters don't heal from his damage but there is still lots of fire mobs in the game (elementals and mephits) and all of them will only take the eldritch damage. Now is it a deal breaker, no but it does take some of the fun out of playing him.

Now as to how they choose to adress this (if they ever will) is something that I don't say my way is the best option but I think thatit kind of fits since it's demon pact. But other solutions like you said first hit don't do the pact damage but makes the mob vulnerable to it for a short duration, lets say you get 1 or 2 hits in before it wears off making every "3rd hit" a miss but 2/3 of the 3 hits still do damage would be ok for me.
 

Purr

Well-known member
Bypass bypasses resistance. So, like, fire mephits have FR 30, and bypass might knock it down to 15.

Immunity is different, and bypass does nothing. So a fire elemental still takes no damage even with bypass.

Healing from certain damage is a 3rd thing. I don't know if bypass changes things, but it doesn't change the fact that iron golems heal from fire.

Some things do immunity stripping, like scorch from telling, so that fire elementals and iron golem would both be changed to take damage from fire.
 

Winterburn

It's the nature of man to ask questions.-Belgarath
Bypass bypasses resistance. So, like, fire mephits have FR 30, and bypass might knock it down to 15.

Immunity is different, and bypass does nothing. So a fire elemental still takes no damage even with bypass.

Healing from certain damage is a 3rd thing. I don't know if bypass changes things, but it doesn't change the fact that iron golems heal from fire.

Some things do immunity stripping, like scorch from telling, so that fire elementals and iron golem would both be changed to take damage from fire.
Well imo nothing in the game should have immunities to your damage, not in any way shape or form or get healed by your damaging effects (the one thing I feel can stay is the flesh golems getting hasted by your lightning because you can still hurt them even if they start runnning and attacking faster). Resistances yes that is ok IF there are ways to overcome them (or at least reduces them) like DR breakers and resistance bypasses to an extent like the skill in draconics and if you have one in your class tree too they should stack so you can get it down further. Same for mobs having spell resistance or high saves that is also ok because that makes it so you need to to some degree specialize yourself if you want to guarantee success.

No class or build should ever feel completely useless at any point even if you have a bad build and mobs save so they take half damage you would at least do some damage and learn how to overcome that by either respec'ing or get better gear etc. Now I know that these occasions for a warlock is situational but it is to much presence of some mobs in the game that makes certain pacts more useless then others and if you want to make an acolyte you are forced into a pact (fire) that is among those that are worse, the only other i can think of that might be worse is the cold (lots of skeles in the game) or negative one (heal undead with your pact damage)

Now apart from that there are mechanics in the game that i don't feel should be opened up for all like trapping, healing etc (yes some self heals is ok but not be able to completely take over a cleric/FvS's role and be able to heal everyone as if you were a cleric when you play lets say a paladin or a ranger). I mean you could make the argument for it with the game now beeing more solo or duo then not (except for raids and high/mid reapers) but I don't think it would be a good idea since you have the option to multiclass if you really want to be able to do traps for example.
 

Visik

Well-known member
In order to make classes playable you need these kind of bypasses/immunity strippings or noone would ever play them or everyone would pick the element that has fewest drawbacks and the rest would be unplayable. Same for warlocks imo, if you pick fey pact there is little in the game that are immune to it and if you pick fiend there is a lot in certain level spans that are immune/resistant and some that heals from it.
It's nowhere near as simple as that. Picking a pact is a balancing act between the element, the pact spells, the saving throw (Yes, Fey's sonic has little that resists it, but those that make Reflex saves and have evasion take NO damage, which can be.. disturbing.), and probably other things I'm not recalling atm. Anyone who picks Fey only considering the damage type may be surprised.
 

rabidfox

The People's Champion
I would like it to be counted as untyped damage
I do a ton of MRR (and other players add on even more) debuffs on my warlocks. So my immediate concern would be that the untyped suggested needs to work with debuffs or warlocks would have a big net loss of damage in exchange for dealing with select immune mobs; which isn't a good tradeoff for me.
 

Winterburn

It's the nature of man to ask questions.-Belgarath
It's nowhere near as simple as that. Picking a pact is a balancing act between the element, the pact spells, the saving throw (Yes, Fey's sonic has little that resists it, but those that make Reflex saves and have evasion take NO damage, which can be.. disturbing.), and probably other things I'm not recalling atm. Anyone who picks Fey only considering the damage type may be surprised.
Well first off half pact damage is still damage done and not 0 as with immunities, 2nd half damage is also not healing mobs faster then you can hurt them. I don't mind the saving on high reflex, fortitude or will for half damage here and I don't think I even mentioned that. Truth be told I didn't even remember that it was a thing.

So there you have it then, take away immunities and mobs beeing healed from your damage, keep the fact that they can be buffed from some and they can even add more stuff like that if they want as long as you can still kill them and not do crap damage or actually heal them and they can roll for a save that halves the pact damage. I'd be fine with that because you still do damage.

It's like when you play a melee mob and forgot to bring a DR breaker, you still do some damage even though it's nowhere near what you are capable of doing but it's not 0 and yes the warlock have another source of damage from the eldritch part but if you take away the pact damage you basically more then half their damage output as compared to if the mob makes their save you maybe reduce the damage by 20 - 25%.

For me that takes away some of the fun to play even if this isn't in every quest, it's in to many quests if you play certain pacts. Not only that but some key quests too like if you run the ravenloft chain *spoilers*
and do the A raven at the door quest. At the end there is 2 iron golems that are healed by fire. They do a lot of cloud kill spells and spam dragonbolt acid spells at you that hurts a lot. If you're unlucky and you get a few reapers to show up too you really want all the firepower you have and not heal the golems to have full health while killing the reapers and then turn off you pact to do half damage against the 2 golems. If you solo play and with hirelings beeing dumb it can be more then annoying.

Now this is situational but an example of where you get the very short straw and can potentially make you not want to play that char anymore.
 

Purr

Well-known member
Well imo nothing in the game should have immunities to your damage, not in any way shape or form or get healed by your damaging effects (the one thing I feel can stay is the flesh golems getting hasted by your lightning because you can still hurt them even if they start runnning and attacking faster). Resistances yes that is ok IF there are ways to overcome them (or at least reduces them) like DR breakers and resistance bypasses to an extent like the skill in draconics and if you have one in your class tree too they should stack so you can get it down further. Same for mobs having spell resistance or high saves that is also ok because that makes it so you need to to some degree specialize yourself if you want to guarantee success.

No class or build should ever feel completely useless at any point even if you have a bad build and mobs save so they take half damage you would at least do some damage and learn how to overcome that by either respec'ing or get better gear etc. Now I know that these occasions for a warlock is situational but it is to much presence of some mobs in the game that makes certain pacts more useless then others and if you want to make an acolyte you are forced into a pact (fire) that is among those that are worse, the only other i can think of that might be worse is the cold (lots of skeles in the game) or negative one (heal undead with your pact damage)

Now apart from that there are mechanics in the game that i don't feel should be opened up for all like trapping, healing etc (yes some self heals is ok but not be able to completely take over a cleric/FvS's role and be able to heal everyone as if you were a cleric when you play lets say a paladin or a ranger). I mean you could make the argument for it with the game now beeing more solo or duo then not (except for raids and high/mid reapers) but I don't think it would be a good idea since you have the option to multiclass if you really want to be able to do traps for example.
Your basic claim of "fire elements should not be immune to fire damage" seems maybe non-reflective.

Rabidfox's and others point that it's all a trade-off is accurate. Warlocks are generally the easiest class to level 1 to 20. A few hard quests, like Raven, doesn't change that, it just means that you'll have to adjust your play style in those circumstances.

And I agree that there should be more options to change damage types, but there should be an additional trade off, like APs or reduction in damage, to make that happen.
 

Lazuli

Well-known member
Reduction in damage? Warlock is not the class with more dps! It"d easy in heroics because It is a very simple class. But no way the class with more dps. And his scaling is bad in epics-legendary and atrocius in high reaper.

Warlock really needs the bypass. Do you know who doesn"t need it? Dragonlotd but got It. Warlock lose half of his dps against immune enemies.
 

PraetorPlato

Well-known member
Your basic claim of "fire elements should not be immune to fire damage" seems maybe non-reflective.

Rabidfox's and others point that it's all a trade-off is accurate. Warlocks are generally the easiest class to level 1 to 20. A few hard quests, like Raven, doesn't change that, it just means that you'll have to adjust your play style in those circumstances.

And I agree that there should be more options to change damage types, but there should be an additional trade off, like APs or reduction in damage, to make that happen.
YMMV, warlocks feel painfully slow to me throughout heroics bc of the lack of burst. I strongly dislike leveling them because of that. Otoh, I find immunity problems not that bad in heroics, because warlock gets easily accessible force damage, evil damage, chaotic damage, pact damage—one of those will almost always work. In epics, I agree they need a way to deal with immunity *and* a damage buff, in heroics, just a damage buff seems appropriate.
 
Last edited:

Lazuli

Well-known member
YMMV, warlocks feel painfully slow to me throughout heroics bc of the lack of burst. I strongly dislike leveling them because of that. Otoh, I find immunity problems not that bad in heroics, because warlock gets easily accessible force damage, evil damage, pact damage—one of those will almost always work. In epics, I agree they need a way to deal with immunity *and* a damage buff, in heroics, just a damage buff seems appropriate.
I use tier 5 tainted scholar which gives a eldritch ball which has a nice burst damage... But again its scaling is bad in epics and is useless in legendary. And in heroics It is not the best burst damage of course, comparing with other classes.

Heroic warlock dps seems fine because we usually level up in low difficulty. It's less fine if you raise skulls. Heroic warlock dps it is not big either.
 
Last edited:
Top