Has anyone changed or allowed to be changed the casting stat for a class to fit a specific character concept? Such as an INT based Warlock or INT based scholarly Lore Bard? What, if any, overall impact did it have on the game’s balancing and the characters traditional role? Did it feel like it was overall a good choice or like the player should have just chosen a class that traditionally fit that casting stat they ended up going with?
If a character wanted to do that I'd consider it if there was a good argument for the change but I wouldn't then allow multiclassing to a class that made use of the stat in question.
Is there a mechanical way to do with in DDB? I know it can be done in a custom subclass but what about before the subclass is chosen? Im assuming there isnt.
Is there a mechanical way to do with in DDB? I know it can be done in a custom subclass but what about before the subclass is chosen? Im assuming there isnt.
I let Warlocks choose Int or Cha. And I let Monks choose Int or Wis. The game doesn't have enough Int classes imo.
The effect was fantastic. Monk/Wizard multiclass is awesome.
Warlocks, Sorcerers and Clerics get their subclasses at level 1. You can homebrew a subclass with the desired Patron / Origin / Domain as a template and then in Basic Information, set the Spell Casting Ability to INT. (Be sure you put some text into the Short Description and Description fields!) The Warlock/Sorcerer/Cleric will still say they use Charisma/Wisdom in the feature text, but your spellcasting ability modifier, spell attack, and save DC will all use INT.
Monk will take a little more work since they'll need an alternate Unarmored AC calculation, and it wouldn't work until level 3. You can do the Unarmored AC as a feat to make up for that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
There are complexities, for example if you have an Int based cleric what saving throws do they have proficiency in?
You also need to be aware of player OP shinanigans, though I admit most of these come through multiclass. In a campaign I was in after a player died they asked if they could make an Int based Conquest Paladin. The DM initially agreed but then found out he planned to multiclass into abjuerer wizard, and combine arcane ward with armor of Agathis and everytime something hits him he wouldn't take damage but the enemy would. DM wouldn't allow it and the player quit the campaign.
Monk will take a little more work since they'll need an alternate Unarmored AC calculation, and it wouldn't work until level 3. You can do the Unarmored AC as a feat to make up for that.
Homebrew a feat.
Modifier.
Modifier Type: Set
Modifier Subtype: Unarmored Armor Class
Ability Score: Int
Snippit/description: The save against your Ki is increased to DC {{savedc:int}}
The easiest and safest would be to swap Warlocks from Cha to Int. They originally were Int casters. (Hence why their description and available Skill proficiencies don’t make sense with Cha casting.) It also chops the most problematic source of multiclass shenanigans right off since Warlocks would no longer be an almost auto-dip for every Bard, Sorcerer, and Paladin out there. (No more easy coffeelocking. No more Hexblade 1/Paladin X. Buh-bye.)
While it’s impossible on DDB to remove the Warlock’s base Cha Save proficiency, it may be possible to have a feature apply a scaling “negative bonus” that would essentially negate the bonus they get from that proficiency. And adding proficiency in Int saves to replace Cha is easy.
The easiest and safest would be to swap Warlocks from Cha to Int. They originally were Int casters. (Hence why their description and available Skill proficiencies don’t make sense with Cha casting.) It also chops the most problematic source of multiclass shenanigans right off since Warlocks would no longer be an almost auto-dip for every Bard, Sorcerer, and Paladin out there. (No more easy coffeelocking. No more Hexblade 1/Paladin X. Buh-bye.)
While it’s impossible on DDB to remove the Warlock’s base Cha Save proficiency, it may be possible to have a feature apply a scaling “negative bonus” that would essentially negate the bonus they get from that proficiency. And adding proficiency in Int saves to replace Cha is easy.
It would however make warlock an almost auto dip for every wizard and artificer out there. Arcane ward and armor of Agathis as I mentioned, hexblade dips would now enhance ther int based classes instead of char.
I have not played earlier editions but to me making a pact with a creature far more powerful 5han you and usually of evil intent, is far more likely to be done by those of low intelligence rather than high.
The easiest and safest would be to swap Warlocks from Cha to Int. They originally were Int casters. (Hence why their description and available Skill proficiencies don’t make sense with Cha casting.) It also chops the most problematic source of multiclass shenanigans right off since Warlocks would no longer be an almost auto-dip for every Bard, Sorcerer, and Paladin out there. (No more easy coffeelocking. No more Hexblade 1/Paladin X. Buh-bye.)
While it’s impossible on DDB to remove the Warlock’s base Cha Save proficiency, it may be possible to have a feature apply a scaling “negative bonus” that would essentially negate the bonus they get from that proficiency. And adding proficiency in Int saves to replace Cha is easy.
It would however make warlock an almost auto dip for every wizard and artificer out there. Arcane ward and armor of Agathis as I mentioned, hexblade dips would now enhance ther int based classes instead of char.
A level dip for a wizard is always a mistake. And, artificers already have most of the stuff you'd dip lock for, anyway.
I have not played earlier editions but to me making a pact with a creature far more powerful 5han you and usually of evil intent, is far more likely to be done by those of low intelligence rather than high.
You're thinking of wisdom.
Intelligent people being oblivious of the dangers of their actions is so common in storytelling it is a trope.
.
.
.
Edit: There is very literally nothing wrong with combining arcane ward with armor of agathys, I'd have quit the dude's campaign too. DMs stifling your character choices is a sign of a bad time incoming. If a DM can't trust their player it is generally a combative unhealthy relationship and one that violates the Rule of Fun in the worst way possible. Hard pass.
A single level dip into warlock for the spell. Not that big a deal. But what is even easier? Mark of Warding Dwarf gets it just because. No level dip required. No homebrew required. You just play a Mark of Warding Abjurer and boom, you have Arcane Ward and Armor of Agathys and that's all published material options. Not OP in any way.
The easiest and safest would be to swap Warlocks from Cha to Int. They originally were Int casters. (Hence why their description and available Skill proficiencies don’t make sense with Cha casting.) It also chops the most problematic source of multiclass shenanigans right off since Warlocks would no longer be an almost auto-dip for every Bard, Sorcerer, and Paladin out there. (No more easy coffeelocking. No more Hexblade 1/Paladin X. Buh-bye.)
While it’s impossible on DDB to remove the Warlock’s base Cha Save proficiency, it may be possible to have a feature apply a scaling “negative bonus” that would essentially negate the bonus they get from that proficiency. And adding proficiency in Int saves to replace Cha is easy.
It would however make warlock an almost auto dip for every wizard and artificer out there. Arcane ward and armor of Agathis as I mentioned, hexblade dips would now enhance ther int based classes instead of char.
I have not played earlier editions but to me making a pact with a creature far more powerful 5han you and usually of evil intent, is far more likely to be done by those of low intelligence rather than high.
I think no matter the casting stat anyone with a shared stat would make warlock a huge benefit to dip into warlock. Warlock is just too front loaded. The big thing to me with that is that the dip is thematic for the character thats being played AND the DM enforcing and using the pact as a storytelling item, even for just 1 level. If you're playing a game where youre min-maxing and caring less about RP and character concept then warlock MC will always be a thing no matter its casting stat. If you are more concerned about the character concept and RP than min-max then dipping in warlock might be a thing but it will also more than likely not be. From an RP standpoint you have to REALLY want something specific or have a HUGE need for something to make a deal with an otherworldly being of any kind.
I have not played earlier editions but to me making a pact with a creature far more powerful 5han you and usually of evil intent, is far more likely to be done by those of low intelligence rather than high.
Why? Haven’t you ever met one of those people who is simultaneously really smart and really not-so-smart?!? Someone with an IQ high enough for Mensa but still pees into the wind? That’s the difference between Intelligence and Wisdom. It takes someone with high intelligence to figure out how, and low Wisdom to realize they ought not to. Like Malcolm said “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they never stopped to think if they should.”
Wizards and Artificers would be able to dip, but aside from cases like the Abjurer, honestly they don’t benefit from it long-term. Anything that stands in between a Wizard and 18th level is a travesty, and Wizard players realize they’ve mostly better off mono-classing or they would all already be dipping into Artificer. Artificer has as much going on for them as Warlock, so it would already be the auto-dip if Wizards were gonna. And Artificer has as much going on as Warlocks, so they don’t need it at all.
Has anyone changed or allowed to be changed the casting stat for a class to fit a specific character concept? Such as an INT based Warlock or INT based scholarly Lore Bard? What, if any, overall impact did it have on the game’s balancing and the characters traditional role? Did it feel like it was overall a good choice or like the player should have just chosen a class that traditionally fit that casting stat they ended up going with?
If a character wanted to do that I'd consider it if there was a good argument for the change but I wouldn't then allow multiclassing to a class that made use of the stat in question.
I let Warlocks choose Int or Cha. And I let Monks choose Int or Wis. The game doesn't have enough Int classes imo.
The effect was fantastic. Monk/Wizard multiclass is awesome.
I got quotes!
Is there a mechanical way to do with in DDB? I know it can be done in a custom subclass but what about before the subclass is chosen? Im assuming there isnt.
Warlocks, Sorcerers and Clerics get their subclasses at level 1. You can homebrew a subclass with the desired Patron / Origin / Domain as a template and then in Basic Information, set the Spell Casting Ability to INT. (Be sure you put some text into the Short Description and Description fields!) The Warlock/Sorcerer/Cleric will still say they use Charisma/Wisdom in the feature text, but your spellcasting ability modifier, spell attack, and save DC will all use INT.
Monk will take a little more work since they'll need an alternate Unarmored AC calculation, and it wouldn't work until level 3. You can do the Unarmored AC as a feat to make up for that.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
There are complexities, for example if you have an Int based cleric what saving throws do they have proficiency in?
You also need to be aware of player OP shinanigans, though I admit most of these come through multiclass. In a campaign I was in after a player died they asked if they could make an Int based Conquest Paladin. The DM initially agreed but then found out he planned to multiclass into abjuerer wizard, and combine arcane ward with armor of Agathis and everytime something hits him he wouldn't take damage but the enemy would. DM wouldn't allow it and the player quit the campaign.
Homebrew a feat.
Modifier.
Modifier Type: Set
Modifier Subtype: Unarmored Armor Class
Ability Score: Int
Snippit/description: The save against your Ki is increased to DC {{savedc:int}}
I got quotes!
The easiest and safest would be to swap Warlocks from Cha to Int. They originally were Int casters. (Hence why their description and available Skill proficiencies don’t make sense with Cha casting.) It also chops the most problematic source of multiclass shenanigans right off since Warlocks would no longer be an almost auto-dip for every Bard, Sorcerer, and Paladin out there. (No more easy coffeelocking. No more Hexblade 1/Paladin X. Buh-bye.)
While it’s impossible on DDB to remove the Warlock’s base Cha Save proficiency, it may be possible to have a feature apply a scaling “negative bonus” that would essentially negate the bonus they get from that proficiency. And adding proficiency in Int saves to replace Cha is easy.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
It would however make warlock an almost auto dip for every wizard and artificer out there. Arcane ward and armor of Agathis as I mentioned, hexblade dips would now enhance ther int based classes instead of char.
I have not played earlier editions but to me making a pact with a creature far more powerful 5han you and usually of evil intent, is far more likely to be done by those of low intelligence rather than high.
A level dip for a wizard is always a mistake. And, artificers already have most of the stuff you'd dip lock for, anyway.
You're thinking of wisdom.
Intelligent people being oblivious of the dangers of their actions is so common in storytelling it is a trope.
.
.
.
Edit: There is very literally nothing wrong with combining arcane ward with armor of agathys, I'd have quit the dude's campaign too. DMs stifling your character choices is a sign of a bad time incoming. If a DM can't trust their player it is generally a combative unhealthy relationship and one that violates the Rule of Fun in the worst way possible. Hard pass.
A single level dip into warlock for the spell. Not that big a deal. But what is even easier? Mark of Warding Dwarf gets it just because. No level dip required. No homebrew required. You just play a Mark of Warding Abjurer and boom, you have Arcane Ward and Armor of Agathys and that's all published material options. Not OP in any way.
I got quotes!
I think no matter the casting stat anyone with a shared stat would make warlock a huge benefit to dip into warlock. Warlock is just too front loaded. The big thing to me with that is that the dip is thematic for the character thats being played AND the DM enforcing and using the pact as a storytelling item, even for just 1 level. If you're playing a game where youre min-maxing and caring less about RP and character concept then warlock MC will always be a thing no matter its casting stat. If you are more concerned about the character concept and RP than min-max then dipping in warlock might be a thing but it will also more than likely not be. From an RP standpoint you have to REALLY want something specific or have a HUGE need for something to make a deal with an otherworldly being of any kind.
Ima just leave this here...
https://www.sageadvice.eu/why-are-warlock-charisma-casters/
Ima just leave this here...
https://www.sageadvice.eu/why-are-warlock-charisma-casters/
Why? Haven’t you ever met one of those people who is simultaneously really smart and really not-so-smart?!? Someone with an IQ high enough for Mensa but still pees into the wind? That’s the difference between Intelligence and Wisdom. It takes someone with high intelligence to figure out how, and low Wisdom to realize they ought not to. Like Malcolm said “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they never stopped to think if they should.”
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Wizards and Artificers would be able to dip, but aside from cases like the Abjurer, honestly they don’t benefit from it long-term. Anything that stands in between a Wizard and 18th level is a travesty, and Wizard players realize they’ve mostly better off mono-classing or they would all already be dipping into Artificer. Artificer has as much going on for them as Warlock, so it would already be the auto-dip if Wizards were gonna. And Artificer has as much going on as Warlocks, so they don’t need it at all.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB