Talk:Warlock

This is a good description

Witch/Warlock

For the record, "witch" originally (and still can) refer to both male and female magic users. "Warlock" only entered the lexicon and made the two terms gendered in popular culture after fiction increasingly associated "witch" with hag archetypes.

Edition separation

For the sake of organization, the "In Dungeons and Dragons" section should be separated into information on Warlocks in 3.X, 4e, and 5e. I would do it myself, but I don't know the first thing about wiki formatting, and I am currently on mobile.

Homebrew bullshit

There's literally an infinite number of ways to make literally any class better. A list of homebrew "here's how I would fix this class if I was designing it" does not belong in this article. - Unsigned comment added by 73.70.13.107

The point it's there is explaining why the Warlock is tier 4 instead of tier 3, but closer than any other tier 4. No other class in the game can move from tier 4 to tier 3 with simple numerical changes: The gap between the two is a matter of fundamental design. The tier system is set up in a way that pure numbers changes aren't going to alter the position of any class (except Truenamer, which is a factor of that class being totally non-functional). Besides that, you keep removing the information on prestige classes. Why are you so against the fact that there are Warlock specific prestige classes? That aside, you keep removing information from other articles at random as well, which doesn't put your positions in a good light. --Agiletek (talk) 22:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

It could be rewritten to make clearer that the Warlock class is unique in this numbers game. But I'm not going to do it. That being said, IP, please don't revert war over this, like I suspect you're going to; it would only make you look like a babyraging autist. Saarlacfunkel (talk) 23:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

5 out of several hundred intended is indeed extremely few --Agiletek (talk) 06:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)