Thoughts on the Warlock

[Tanarii]

Its actually the wizards who are the simplified casters. Warlocks and sorcerers are the advanced casters.

I run games for many newcomers to D&D, and I assure you that you are wrong. They find warlocks much simpler than wizards, overall.

[stoutstien]

The only thing wrong with warlock is that awful capstone.
And a hexblade is arguably front-heavy but the same could be said for clerics and fighters

[Man_Over_Game]

Aaactually...as a person who has played Warlocks now, and Battlemaster Fighters, I never found myself in a situation where I was lacking resources as the Battlemaster like I did with the Warlock. Same as when I played a Monk, I only ran into the issue of low resources as a level 2 and 3 Monk. The Warlock is kind of inverted. I had plenty of Resources at level 2 and 3, but after that I found I consistently had too few resources per encounter until level 11.

Sure, but that's comparing a caster to a martial class. Martial classes are supposed to be relatively resourceless, that's kinda their thing.

Naturally the Battlemaster isn't going to care if he's only using his basic attacks, because he's doing them whether or not he's using his Superiority Dice. Now, when the Warlock runs out of resources, he's forced to resorting to his Eldritch Blast (which is still better than the Battlemaster's Longbow). However, the Warlock gets to cast Fireball 2 times where the Battlemaster can give himself reach 4 times.


Also, compare the Ranger to the Monk. Once they're both out of resources, the Monk has some more tricks up their sleeve, yet the Ranger has a unique list of spells at their disposal that nobody else gets.

Lastly, compare the Warlock to another full caster, like the Sorcerer. The Sorcerer can cast a level 2 spell, like Scorching Ray, 3 times for 21 damage each, or the Warlock can cast a cantrip, like Eldritch Blast, for 11+2xMod each time. With a +3 modifier, the Sorcerer spent a level 2 spell slot to deal +4 more damage than the Warlock spent a cantrip for. The difference is, the Warlock can Short Rest and get his level 3 spell slots back where the Sorcerer is still stuck casting Scorching Ray or worse.

[ad_hoc]

My biggest complaint is how some of the class' signature spells don't scale with spell levels.

Spells don't scale well period.

One thing that people don't talk about which I think actually influences how well they like Warlocks is the turn over of their spells.

A lot of people like to have a thing that they do and they want to do more things as they level up. Every 2 levels the Warlock loses their previous spell slots and they gain spell slots of a higher level. So every 2 levels you are casting new spells and not casting old ones. I think that rubs a lot of people the wrong way. They want to keep having their old spells.

The thing is, there are many classes to choose from if that is your thing. I like changing up how I play every 2 levels.

[Tanarii]

One thing that people don't talk about which I think actually influences how well they like Warlocks is the turn over of their spells.

Agreed. IMX most warlock players end up trading out many lower level spells that can't be upcast. The most common I see retained are utility out of combat spells that can occasionally cast with expectation of a short rest afterwards. Given that warlocks have a very high spells known to spell slots on hand ratio, this is not unreasonable to do. Like Paladins, warlocks often have a lot more things they can do (spells prepped/known) than do right now (slots before next rest). That means spreading out to give wider variety isn't terrible, including dedicating some spells known to utility-then-rest spells.

[Max_Killjoy]

My issue with the Warlock is this:

For the large majority of your adventuring career, you have two slots. Two. That's not enough. It feels like such a waste when you cast a 1st level spell at 4th or 5th level.

My fix: Short Rest Spell Points

Take the Spell Point system from the DMG, convert the Warlocks spell slot levels into points. These refresh on a short or long rest. It allows you to cast low level spells without wasting high level slots, and lets you maintain the feel of the Warlock being a short rest caster. "What about invocations that require you to spend a spell slot?" It costs the same amount as it normally costs. Polymorph costs 7 points, as it normally would for a 4th level spell, for example.

No DMG yet -- what's the basic gist of this spell point system?

[sophontteks]

I run games for many newcomers to D&D, and I assure you that you are wrong. They find warlocks much simpler than wizards, overall.

Its simple to play them poorly. Taking advantage of the complex parts of their kits and limited known spells/ slots is much more difficult.

[RSP]

Its simple to play them poorly. Taking advantage of the complex parts of their kits and limited known spells/ slots is much more difficult.

I’d probably state it as: Wizards are more complex at the table; Warlocks require more character making/development planning to have it turn out right.

Wizards, with so many options between number of slots and number of spells known/prepared, will have more options at the table, and are a lot harder, if not impossible to make bad.

Warlocks generally have less at-the-table options than Wizards, but require a lot more planning on how you want to play your Warlock: if you don’t succeed at this point, it’s relatively easy to end up with a Pact, Invocations or spells that don’t actually fit how you want to play.

[Malifice]

Eurgh, don't get me started on the maths. God damn do they suck balls.
So, combat is assumed to last around three turns (we know this because for things like spellcaster NPCs that's how we calculate CR). Given the average damage output of a Fighter, for each level NPCs have twice or more HP than they should, and the gap just widens as CR goes up.

It doesnt though.

I'll happily map out a (long rest dependent) Paladin vs a (short rest dependent) Battlemaster Fighter at any level. You'll see they're roughly balanced around the [20 combat rounds/ 6 encounters/ 2 short rest mark] over long rests.

Ditto Warlocks vs Wizards/ Sorcerers.

[Tanarii]

Its simple to play them poorly. Taking advantage of the complex parts of their kits and limited known spells/ slots is much more difficult.

Do you mean optimizing them is more difficult? Because playing them at the table is totally straight forward, which is why newbie players find them easier to play.

Edit: or are you trying to make some kind of 'no true Scotsman' argument here?

[Jerrykhor]

My main problem is with the weaker Invocations, namely the 1/day big spells that requires spell slot. It just doesn't make sense - Why does casting a daily power requires a short rest resource? When people say Invocations like Sculptor of Flesh gives warlock the 'extra' spells, it doesnt feel like an extra spell because it still requires a spell slot. Trickster's Escape is how it should be done.

And I fully agree with Jaapleton, short rests are hard to come by if your campaign have any sort of urgency at all. Also, even when the situation allows it, sometimes your party members might simply not want to take a short rest.

[Talionis]

I totally disagree about the cast two buff spells in the morning then short rest again being something unrealistic. Long rest is basically over when you wake up by in a normal day people eat breakfast and drink coffee in the morning which should lend itself to just enough downtime in the morning to do that Will you always be able to wake up and immediately short rest? No. But it should be the norm that Warlock s can do that. It’s precisely while Hex gets the crazy long duration. So you can casting upon awakening and then short rest.

[Malifice]

It’s precisely while Hex gets the crazy long duration. So you can casting upon awakening and then short rest.

No, you cast it as a bonus action on Round 1 of your first encounter in the dungeon.

It then lasts all day long (persisting through short rests) unless you lose concentration due to taking damage or casting another concentration spell.

For a blastlock, you're in the backline spamming [EB+AB+RB+Hex] most rounds. At levels 2-10 that leaves you 1 slot for encounters 1-2, 2 slots for encounters 3-4 and 2 slots for encounters 5-6 (presuming a default 6 encounter/ 2 short rest AD).

In your standard dungeon level [6 encounters/ 2 short rests], for a 'archetypical' Warlock [Fiend lock/ blast lock/ Tome lock of 5th level or higher] its expected to go something like this:

Encounter 1: Cast Hex. Spam Hex + EB.
Encounter 2: Use your other slot on [Fireball?]. Spam Hex + EB.
[short rest]: Maintain concentration on Hex, recover slots.
Encounter 3: Spam Hex and EB. Expend slot on Fireball.
Encounter 4: Spam Hex and EB. Expend slot on Fireball.
[short rest] Maintain concetration on Hex, recover slots.
Encounter 5: Spam Hex and EB, expend slot on Fireball
Encounter 6: Spam Hex and EB, expend slot on Fireball.

You have enough juice in a standard median adventuring day (starting at 5th level) to have Hex running all day long (as long as you dont cast another concetration spell, or drop concetration due to damage) and blast away, plus drop a max level Fireball in every single encounter of the day (other than the 1st encounter).

Grab yourself a RoTPK and you can fireball in every single encounter of a 6 encounter/ short rest adventuring day, while also maintaining concentration on Hex.

For non combat encounters you have at will invocations, plus cantrips, plus rituals (and skills etc).

6 max level Fireballs in an adventuring day, plus the ritual power of a Wizard, plus the excellent at will damage of EB + Hex + AB and you're at least on par with your average wizard, presuming the median of 6 encounters/ 2 short rests per long rest is roughly adhered to by your DM and group.

Where it gets out of whack, is when DMs dont understand the balance point of 5E and fail to meet this 6/2 median (or if they fail to adjust rest/ resource recovery rules around a different median in their campaigns, via gritty realism or similar).

The problemof sub-par Warlocks compared to other 'long rest' dependent classes isnt with the Warlock. It's with the DM, by not adequately managing the adventuring day and resource management/ recovery.

[OverLordOcelot]

Then you have your ones focused around EB. Which to me isn't an appealing style of play. The idea of running around casting EB and hex nonstop (or no hex) is boring.

IMO the biggest problem with Warlocks is that a lot of people play them who find the basic playstyle boring. And for some reason more people find "Hex then EB" boring than find "Hunter's Mark then bow" or "Polearm over and over" or "bow with sneak attack" to get tedious, and even "Hex plus pact/hexblade weapon" seems more popular. I really don't get it, I don't find 'do EB attacks most of the time' any worse than playing a martial character who 'spams' a physical attack with only occasional deviations.

[thrdeye]

Here we go with this disingenuous bulldust again.

2 slots per short rest (both 5th level) = 6 x 5th level slots per long rest (on average; somedays more and somedays less, but that is the expected median average).

As opposed to the Wizards 3 x 5th level slots per long rest, 3 x 4ths, and a bunch of 1sts and 2nds that dont really do much at this level.

Warlocks are fine and I have no intention of joining their pity party, but "spells per day" only tells part of the story. That Wizard has much more control over his spell slots. He can pool them up or burn through them as needed. He's not in danger of wasting spell slots if the short rest comes too early or running out if the short rest comes too late. He doesn't have those ten lower level spell slots at all and if you don't think they're valuable, consider for a moment a feat requiring 10 full caster levels that would add four 1st, 3 2nd, and 3 3rd level spell slots. That's four Shields, three Misty Steps, and three Fireballs. It would be all but mandatory, with people creating builds around it and calling it the new coffeelock.

Yes, these drawbacks are compensated for by things like invocations and high at will damage but they're still drawbacks. Warlocks don't have anything close to parity with full casters when it comes to leveled spells (nor should they).

[Malifice]

Warlocks are fine and I have no intention of joining their pity party, but "spells per day" only tells part of the story. That Wizard has much more control over his spell slots. He can pool them up or burn through them as needed. He's not in danger of wasting spell slots if the short rest comes too early or running out if the short rest comes too late. He doesn't have those ten lower level spell slots at all and if you don't think they're valuable, consider for a moment a feat requiring 10 full caster levels that would add four 1st, 3 2nd, and 3 3rd level spell slots. That's four Shields, three Misty Steps, and three Fireballs. It would be all but mandatory, with people creating builds around it and calling it the new coffeelock.

Yes, these drawbacks are compensated for by things like invocations and high at will damage but they're still drawbacks. Warlocks don't have anything close to parity with full casters when it comes to leveled spells (nor should they).

The flip side of that argument (the wizard can Nova better) is that the Warlock has more staying power. Hes only a short rest away from recovering his slots, plus his 'at will' options (invocations) and damage is better than that of his Wizard buddy (plus he has better HP and HD, and generally speaking better class features outside of spells).

On shorter adventuring days the Wizard shines no doubt, but the situation reverses on longer days.

The issue of imbalance only rears its head when the DM doesnt ardress the rest/ resource nature of 5e.

Same thing happens with Paladins and Fighters if the rest system isnt policed by the DM.

[Solusek]

Some other people in this thread have already said it, but I will repeat.

Warlocks aren't like Wizards with a crappy spell system. Comparing them to a Wizard or a Sorcerer isn't quite fair. They are more like fighters with some spells. At high levels (11+) they start to feel a bit more like a full fledged arcane class, but still always do lag behind in spell availability.

Sure, they don't have as high of a DPS output as the fighter does, but even at lower levels they do have spells and utility invocations that a fighter could only dream of. They walk that line of being partially about repeated solid dps, and partially being a arcane caster. Plus they are a charisma class which opens up a lot of skills and social opportunities that neither fighters nor wizards typically get.

I think the class is a lot of fun, and I appreciate how different they feel mechanically from other spell casters. Variety is the spice of life (and of game systems). The more variety in character game mechanics the better!

[Malifice]

Im a big advocate for the class, but I can see how they would suck in a campaign where the DM doesnt manage the adventuring day, and give them a chance to really shine (the occasional Adventuring day with 3+ short rests, and several encounters between long rests) and instead just does rookie DM mistake 101 (dials up encounter difficulty and forces the 5MWD on the party).

It always pays to chat with a new (or existing DM) about his management (and understanding) of 5E's rest/ resource paradigm and how he intents to manage and police it.

[Astofel]

IMO the biggest problem with Warlocks is that a lot of people play them who find the basic playstyle boring. And for some reason more people find "Hex then EB" boring than find "Hunter's Mark then bow" or "Polearm over and over" or "bow with sneak attack" to get tedious, and even "Hex plus pact/hexblade weapon" seems more popular. I really don't get it, I don't find 'do EB attacks most of the time' any worse than playing a martial character who 'spams' a physical attack with only occasional deviations.

I think this is because of the expectations set by the warlock being a caster that gets 9th level spells (not a full caster, warlocks definitely aren't that). When people play a ranger, they expect to be mostly shooting their bow. When they play a fighter, they expect to be swinging their sword. When people play a full caster they expect to be able to sling a different spell each round, maybe dropping a big damage spell one turn, maybe next a control spell to spend their concentration on. And because at first glance the warlock looks like a full caster, they expect that from the warlock too.

But that's not what the warlock is designed for. It's designed to mostly use EB (or a weapon if you're playing a dedicated bladelock), and drop a leveled spell maybe once an encounter. In that way the warlock is more similar in function to an eldritch knight than any full caster. You have an attack routine you'll be doing most of the time (extra attack/EB) and you can sometimes augment that with a spell or two, or use your spells to deal area damage or control the battlefield a little.

[Rallek25]

IMO the biggest problem with Warlocks is that a lot of people play them who find the basic playstyle boring. And for some reason more people find "Hex then EB" boring than find "Hunter's Mark then bow" or "Polearm over and over" or "bow with sneak attack" to get tedious, and even "Hex plus pact/hexblade weapon" seems more popular. I really don't get it, I don't find 'do EB attacks most of the time' any worse than playing a martial character who 'spams' a physical attack with only occasional deviations.

I will gladly explain how Hex then EB is boring and why the other stuff is not. Starting with your first example. Hunter's mark and bow is the same thing at Hex and EB but it only uses 1 spell slot out of my many spell slots. So I can cast lightning arrow and still have spell slots. I have flexibility and I'm not one dimensional. I have options! Warlocks don't have options with 2 spell slots. Also, there's sharpshooter and maybe one on shot I picture myself taking a deep aim and blame headshot. Maybe I picture myself hold my bow sideways and just volleying arrow after arrow. Maybe I picture myself doing some Legolas maneuvers.
Polearm mastery because imagine you doing flourishes with a polearm. One attack you make a big side swipe then next attack comes over the top and then I swing the end around. Or I take an attack and then swing my polearm behind my neck and throw my other arm out as my pole arm hits from the other side.
Basically it's all about picturing how your character is attacking and using these skills. If you're just casting the same cantrip over and over again that's lame. How can you theater of mind how you're attacking? You make a gun with your fingers and say bang bang?? You hold out one arm and hold it with your other arm? If I'm a caster then let me cast. Don't hold back my creativity by making me HAVE to take EB when I don't want to. If that's the case then just tell me I start with the EB cantrip.
It's different with a hexblade and hex because well that's how melee characters fight. They swing a sword over and over. You're dueling with someone which is awesome to think about. The Hex is just extra damage.
People also want to say to think of Warlock as a fighter with some casting. Ok I will, and i get an EK, although an EK has more spell slots, more attacks, can use a cantrip and attack or cast a spell and attack. Theres flexibility and options. I'm not limited.

[Rallek25]

Another thought about Warlocks is where you play it. I'm taking a guess here but I think it's safe to say we are thinking about Warlock in the sense of homebrew games. Warlock in AL is different as well. In AL there are time sensitive modules where short rest just ain't going to happen which hurts a Warlock. In an Epic warlocks are screwed. Too many things need to go right for the Warlock to get it's full potential.
It just sucks that you can really be a full on warlock. The best thing to do with this class is multiclass.

[Rallek25]

I think this is because of the expectations set by the warlock being a caster that gets 9th level spells (not a full caster, warlocks definitely aren't that). When people play a ranger, they expect to be mostly shooting their bow. When they play a fighter, they expect to be swinging their sword. When people play a full caster they expect to be able to sling a different spell each round, maybe dropping a big damage spell one turn, maybe next a control spell to spend their concentration on. And because at first glance the warlock looks like a full caster, they expect that from the warlock too.

^ This!

But that's not what the warlock is designed for. It's designed to mostly use EB (or a weapon if you're playing a dedicated bladelock), and drop a leveled spell maybe once an encounter. In that way the warlock is more similar in function to an eldritch knight than any full caster. You have an attack routine you'll be doing most of the time (extra attack/EB) and you can sometimes augment that with a spell or two, or use your spells to deal area damage or control the battlefield a little.

Though they are similar I still argue that even an EK can do more. More spell slots and the better action economy. I can cast Booming blade, GFB, or some other cantrip and be able to attack. I can cast fireball and still attack. Maybe I feel casting isn't the best option so instead I attack with all my extra attacks and action surge. EK has those options available. Warlock just says "I've got EB".

[Asmotherion]

No, you cast it as a bonus action on Round 1 of your first encounter in the dungeon.

It then lasts all day long (persisting through short rests) unless you lose concentration due to taking damage or casting another concentration spell.

For a blastlock, you're in the backline spamming [EB+AB+RB+Hex] most rounds. At levels 2-10 that leaves you 1 slot for encounters 1-2, 2 slots for encounters 3-4 and 2 slots for encounters 5-6 (presuming a default 6 encounter/ 2 short rest AD).

In your standard dungeon level [6 encounters/ 2 short rests], for a 'archetypical' Warlock [Fiend lock/ blast lock/ Tome lock of 5th level or higher] its expected to go something like this:

Encounter 1: Cast Hex. Spam Hex + EB.
Encounter 2: Use your other slot on [Fireball?]. Spam Hex + EB.
[short rest]: Maintain concentration on Hex, recover slots.
Encounter 3: Spam Hex and EB. Expend slot on Fireball.
Encounter 4: Spam Hex and EB. Expend slot on Fireball.
[short rest] Maintain concetration on Hex, recover slots.
Encounter 5: Spam Hex and EB, expend slot on Fireball
Encounter 6: Spam Hex and EB, expend slot on Fireball.

You have enough juice in a standard median adventuring day (starting at 5th level) to have Hex running all day long (as long as you dont cast another concetration spell, or drop concetration due to damage) and blast away, plus drop a max level Fireball in every single encounter of the day (other than the 1st encounter).

Grab yourself a RoTPK and you can fireball in every single encounter of a 6 encounter/ short rest adventuring day, while also maintaining concentration on Hex.

For non combat encounters you have at will invocations, plus cantrips, plus rituals (and skills etc).

6 max level Fireballs in an adventuring day, plus the ritual power of a Wizard, plus the excellent at will damage of EB + Hex + AB and you're at least on par with your average wizard, presuming the median of 6 encounters/ 2 short rests per long rest is roughly adhered to by your DM and group.

Where it gets out of whack, is when DMs dont understand the balance point of 5E and fail to meet this 6/2 median (or if they fail to adjust rest/ resource recovery rules around a different median in their campaigns, via gritty realism or similar).

The problemof sub-par Warlocks compared to other 'long rest' dependent classes isnt with the Warlock. It's with the DM, by not adequately managing the adventuring day and resource management/ recovery.

i just want to adress and emphasise this point. The Warlock class functions just fine as long as:

A) Your DM doesn't hate short rests or doesn't have some misrepresented idea of what "Gritty Realism" is. Or just pretends to want to play his homebrew version of "hardcore rules" and his system doesn't add up.
B) You remember to actively short rest; That one is not on your DM to remind you it's actually your role. You will be the guy who tells the party "can we rest a bit? i'm exhausted" all the time.
C) Your party is fine with it; You optimally want a party that replenishes some resourses on short rests as well.

[Solusek]

I will gladly explain how Hex then EB is boring and why the other stuff is not. Starting with your first example. Hunter's mark and bow is the same thing at Hex and EB but it only uses 1 spell slot out of my many spell slots. So I can cast lightning arrow and still have spell slots. I have flexibility and I'm not one dimensional. I have options! Warlocks don't have options with 2 spell slots.

As someone playing a Hexblade (8th level currently) I find the options my Warlock gives me are quite good, and combat effectiveness is quite good. I love spell casters, so playing a Wizard or a Sorcerer would be just as fun, but I did that last campaign and wanted to switch it up. I consider the Hexblade A LOT better than being stuck as the fighter or the barbarian or even the ranger. It's so boring being limited to "swing a sword" or "shoot an arrow" every round and having zero non-combat utility.

I've use beast speech to chat with forest animals for information. I've used major image to help the party escape from pursuing monsters. I've use dimension door/misty step numerous times to bypass obstacles or get into advantageous positions during combat. I've used suggestion to diffuse a combat that was looking unavoidable "why don't you cool down and hear us out before doing anything drastic". I've cast Shadow of Moil and 1v1'd an opponent who offered up single combat rather than sending the whole tribe at us - the party was shocked how powerful my character actually was in 1v1 combat.

A Eldritch Knight could have done some of those things at 8th level. A Wizard could have done some of them as well, though would handle combat very differently - misty stepping into melee with the opponents back line or 1v1'ing a lycanthrope barbarian probably isn't the best strategy for a Wizard. But the Hexblade gave a unique set of options that covered all those situations and felt awesome to do.

[thrdeye]

The flip side of that argument (the wizard can Nova better) is that the Warlock has more staying power. Hes only a short rest away from recovering his slots, plus his 'at will' options (invocations) and damage is better than that of his Wizard buddy (plus he has better HP and HD, and generally speaking better class features outside of spells).

On shorter adventuring days the Wizard shines no doubt, but the situation reverses on longer days.

The issue of imbalance only rears its head when the DM doesnt ardress the rest/ resource nature of 5e.

Same thing happens with Paladins and Fighters if the rest system isnt policed by the DM.

I'm not addressing class balance, I'm addressing your idea of tallying daily spell slots available to classes that access those spells in very different ways--one with significantly more limitation than the other. It just isn't accurate, nor is it relevant in reponse to a post with concerns about the Warlock's available spell slots during a single fight. The overall balance is fine. Different classes have different strengths and weaknesses and that's the way it should be.

[sithlordnergal]

The flip side of that argument (the wizard can Nova better) is that the Warlock has more staying power. Hes only a short rest away from recovering his slots, plus his 'at will' options (invocations) and damage is better than that of his Wizard buddy (plus he has better HP and HD, and generally speaking better class features outside of spells).

On shorter adventuring days the Wizard shines no doubt, but the situation reverses on longer days.

The issue of imbalance only rears its head when the DM doesnt ardress the rest/ resource nature of 5e.

Same thing happens with Paladins and Fighters if the rest system isnt policed by the DM.

Imbalance issues do become more prominent if the DM fails to use resting rules properly...however even if you follow the suggested Short Rest rules in the DMG of 2 encounters per short rest, the Warlock still lacks per-encounter resources. As a Warlock, from levels 2 to 10, you get 2 spell slots per short rest. So, following the DMG suggestions, you get 1 spell per encounter. That seems nice on paper, but if your spell ends up having no effect, then you essentially wasted it, and won't be able to do much else outside of cantrips. I mean, you can always cast your second spell, but outside of Hex there are few spells that will last multiple encounters, and if your second spell fails to have an effect then you'll have been better off doing nothing that round. Increasing the slots a warlock gets, even by one, fixes that resource issue.

As I said in a previous post, once I got to level 11 and had that third level spell slot and the 5th invocation, it became far more enjoyable to play. Because even if a spell fell flat, I knew I wasn't stuck with just a single spell slot until the next short rest. However, levels 5 to 10 were a nightmare simply due to a lack of resources outside of Eldritch Blast.

[KyleG]

And it shouldnt be forgotten that encounters dont always equate to battles. The warlock has uses here too.

[Tanarii]

(not a full caster, warlocks definitely aren't that).

Warlocks are definitely full casters. They get a new spell level up to level 9 every other level, and they are roughly on par for totally power of their spell slots across the entire span of levels.

They're a short rest full caster. Not a long rest full caster, or full spellcasting caster.

[Willie the Duck]

I think this is because of the expectations set by the warlock being a caster that gets 9th level spells (not a full caster, warlocks definitely aren't that).

Warlocks are definitely full casters. They get a new spell level up to level 9 every other level, and they are roughly on par for totally power of their spell slots across the entire span of levels.
They're a short rest full caster. Not a long rest full caster, or full spellcasting caster.

"Full Caster" is not a game-defined term, with a clear and consistent meaning. There's literally no reason to have this dispute.

If Astofel wants to argue that playing a warlock similar to, and/or having the same expectations of, other classes which get 9th level spell slots by 17th level, that's a perfectly valid avenue of analysis. Choosing to say they 'definitely aren't' some other random thing with no clear definition did not add to that argument, but it also isn't a point against the analysis. Warlocks don't behave like them (the 'other classes which get 9th level spell slots by 17th level'). They don't behave like any other class, really. That's, I think, why they are so hard to pin down.

[Dr. Cliché]

To my mind, Warlocks have to wait a bit too long for their 3rd spell slot.

Also, I really think stuff like Minions of Chaos and Sculptor of Flesh should let you cast those spells 1/Long Rest without using a spell slot.