Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
Apologies for the newbie question, but Pact of the Tome specifically states that its spells count as warlock spells, but the other invocations that grant spells don't specify that. For example, Silent Image is not normally on the warlock spell list, but it can be obtained via warlock invocation. Does that make it a "warlock spell" for other purposes?
A strict reading of the rules would say no, since there's nothing there saying it makes it a Warlock spell. There's a rule saying that if a feature grants a spell as "always prepared" then it counts as a Warlock spell, but the invocations (kind of pointedly) do not use the term "always prepared".
The problem with this is that technically if they're not Warlock spells, there's no rule telling you which spellcasting ability to use for them, or enabling you to use a spellcasting focus with the ones that have material components, since both of those parts of the Pact Magic feature explicitly only apply to Warlock spells. Thus it seems extremely unlikely that that's the intended interpretation.
In my experience, regardless of what the rules technically say, pretty much everyone just treats them as though they count as Warlock spells and calls it a day.
pronouns: he/she/they
I treat them as Warlock spells.
I count them as Warlock Spells because they specifically call them "Warlock Spells". Normal eldritch invocations such as Armor of Shadows or something gives a spell you can use without expending a spell slot or material components, whereas additional spells from "Pact of the Tome" use your pact slots, unless I'm misinterpreting the rulings.
For example normal Invocations, they work like
featscantrips. If you have "Fey Touched" as well, you can use a spell slot as your warlock spell,cast a bonus action cantrip, use an eldritch invocation, use misty step from fey touched and use the spell from fey touched, all in the same turn, since in the 2024 rules you are only using a single spell slot.No they don't. As noted in the OP, only Pact of the Tome uses that wording, not any of the other Invocations which was the whole reason for the question. These other Invocations do not count as Warlock spells unless the spell appears on the Warlock Spell List.
These Invocations don't say anything about not requiring material components so they do not provide that feature.
No they don't. Feats and Invocations each specify their own methods for casting Spells. Feats generally declare that the spell is always prepared and/or counts as a class spell. Invocations don't do that.
The rest of your example is likely to run into action economy limitations.
It looks like the two spells where this could come into play, assuming that these spells do not appear on the Warlock Spell List, are Disguise Self and Silent Image because you have to be able to calculate your Spell Save DC. We might apply the rule from casting from a magic item without a spellcasting ability by setting the modifier to +0, but it's probably more correct to just say that you don't have a Spell Save DC when casting these spells in this manner, which slightly nerfs these spells, which is fine. If an enemy decides to take the Study action to examine these illusions they just automatically succeed in detecting them.
For the first part of your reply, i didn't word it properly. I meant that warlock invocations from pact of the tome work like that. Normal invocations can be cast without using a spell slots while invocations, like feats that let you cast a once-per-day spell, let you cast them at will without expending a spell slot or material components like cantrips. The extra spells you get from Pact of the Tome act like normal spells you need to expend pact slots to use.
However, i did make a mistake, you would only be able to use a spell slot as an action or bonus action when you use an invocation at will. (Essentially replacing a cantrip with an invocation)
Interesting -- neither the physical book nor the DNDBeyond text for the Warlock class matches with what you are quoting for Armor of Shadows or Misty Visions with respect to bypassing the need for material components. Are you sure you are not accidentally accessing the 2014 version of these rules?
I think this agrees with what you've just said, but just in case . . . even in 2014 the term "at will" did not mean "no action required". For spellcasting, it generally just meant that the spell can be cast without a spell slot and without any special spell preparation procedures, such as how cantrips work. To cast a cantrip, for example, you still have to expend whichever type of action is required by the spell description. In 2024, this term has mostly been eliminated although it does come up often in the Monster Manual as a category of things that a creature can do with its action (whichever action type it's listed under). Again, this generally refers to casting a spell without a spell slot.
Yeah, that screenshot is definitely of a 5e Warlock. You can also tell by how it's listed as a 2nd level feature; Eldritch Invocations is granted at 1st level in 5.5e.
The "without material components" was removed from all the spell-granting invocations in 5.5e, and the character sheet and character builder do reflect that if you're actually using the 5.5e Warlock class.
pronouns: he/she/they
Sorry if I'm late to the party and/or low-key necro'ing this, but I came from a conversation over on Reddit looking for more detailed answers about this myself. The skinny is, the pact magic feature specifies that spell preps that come from Warlock class features count as Warlock spells. Invocations which grant at-will casts fall under this purview, and they count as Warlock spells.
To cast a spell, it must be prepped. That's just how spellcasting works in 5e, regardless of class. 5e has no separate language for spell-like, supernatural, or extraordinary abilities the way previous editions did; they're just all resolved as prepared spells, even though the clear design intent is for them to "replicate" previous editions' spell-like, supernatural, or extraordinary abilities.
My read on the rulebooks' language is that it skips the typical "you always have X spell prepped and can cast it Y number of times per short/long rest, and with any spell slots you have" language because there are no restrictions on how many times that spell can be cast. In that light, it would be redundant to say "you always have X spell prepared and can cast it at-will".
As far as what does and doesn't count in the bigger picture...the "Warlock spells" property isn't transitive. You might take Lessons of the First Ones, but that grants an origin feat; if you pick an origin feat that grants spell preps, the feat is the source of those spells, not the invocation itself. Those don't count as Warlock spells.
The same goes for Ability Score Improvement; ASI is a class feature, but it grants the opportunity to select a feat. If you pick a feat that grants spell preps (like for instance, Fey Touched), the source of those preps is the feat rather than the class feature, and they don't count as Warlock spells.
That's where tome pact's unique language comes in; it has to have an exception carved for it, because the additional spells don't actually come from the invocation itself. The invocation lets you summon the Book of Shadows, and that's it. The invocation's text just happens to go on to explain what the Book of Shadows is and what it does. The additional preps come from the book, so without "...and they function as Warlock spells for you," they wouldn't actually count as Warlock spells.
For the record, this is not true; there are lots of features and abilities in 5e and 5.5e that allow casting spells without having them prepared. A spell doesn't count as "prepared" just because you have the ability to cast it; it's not prepared unless something says it's prepared. The Invocations don't say their spells are prepared, which is why this whole issue exists.
It's perfectly reasonable to treat the Invocation spells as Warlock spells, and it's what pretty much everyone does in practice, but there is nothing in the rules that actually says that.
While this is a common misconception, it is not how "class spells" work in 5.5e. Per Sage Advice here, a spell is a Warlock spell if it's on the Warlock spell list or if a feature says it counts as a Warlock spell. It does not need to be a spell you got from a Warlock class feature to count as a Warlock spell. Spells you get from features like Lessons of the First Ones might or might not be Warlock spells, depending on whether they're on the Warlock spell list.
pronouns: he/she/they
That was the case in 2014/5.0e; not so much in 2024/5.5e. The language was -- for the most part -- cleaned up, including the relevant section under Chapter 10: Spellcasting, which makes it clear spells must be prepped before casting. X/day or X/rest spells are likewise considered prepped, for PC's as well as NPC's, regardless of whether they can be cast with spell slots in addition to fixed-use casts. There is absolutely no reason to infer at-will spells are not, nor should not be considered, prepped.
Sage Advice is not errata.
Moreover, that particular Sage Advice response is a comparatively poorly-written one and something of a spectacular non-answer, because it doesn't fully answer the question, or respond to the clear intent of the question: which actually matters, whether a spell is on a class' spell list, or received by way of a feature that isn't that class' Spellcasting feature? The "class spell list" exists to establish which spells a character can acquire through their Spellcasting feature; the source of a spell is what matters for the purposes of which class or subclass features apply.
Fire bolt may be on the "Sorcerer spell list," but an infernal tiefling cannot use Innate Sorcery to get advantage on attack rolls with it unless they also selected it as a cantrip through the Sorcerer's Spellcasting feature. Fire bolt to that character is a species spell, acquired through the Fiendish Legacy (Infernal) feature.
Or, a more direct example: if I'm playing a sorlock and my Warlock subclass is Great Old One, and I have charm person prepped through my Sorcerer Spellcasting feature, it is not a valid spell for use with Psychic Spells. Charm person is a Sorcerer spell for me, not a Warlock spell, despite the fact charm person is on both classes' "spell lists." I gained it through the Sorcerer's Spellcasting feature, not the Warlock's Pact Magic feature. Chapter 2, under multiclassing: "Each spell you prepare is associated with one of your classes..."
Same reason that same sorlock couldn't benefit from Innate Sorcery and Agonizing Blast on the same true strike. True strike is on both class' spell lists, but can only be prepped or cast as one or the other; if it's prepped as a Warlock cantrip it won't benefit from Innate Sorcery, and if it's prepped as a Sorcerer cantrip it's not a valid target for Agonizing Blast.
Even if I'm an evoker wizard, have Magic Initiate (Wizard), and my spell picks through MI (Wizard) are acid splash, fire bolt, and burning hands...
...acid splash and fire bolt will work with Potent Cantrip, because that feature works with any cantrip.
...Sculpt Spells will work with both acid splash and burning hands, because they're both Evocation spells that incur saving throws to avoid damage.
...none of them work with Empowered Evocation or Overchannel, because they were acquired through a feat, not a Wizard class feature (and the feat does not specify those spells count as class spells for the character). They're feat spells. That they're on the "Wizard class list" has no bearing on the source of those spells.
That is, indeed, a common interpretation of what the "class spell" concept means, and it's definitely how a lot of people (including me) interpreted it in 5e, though I think that Sage Advice answer is pretty clear on that not being how it's actually intended to work in 5.5e. Regardless of whether you feel it's poorly written, it's still the only official ruling on the matter. It's perfectly reasonable to ignore that and house-rule that it works the other way if that's what works at your table, but that doesn't change what the official ruling is.
It's also worth noting that the rules for spellcasting saying you need to have a spell prepared to cast it is an example of a general rule; there are a variety of features and abilities that say you can cast specific spells in specific situations without having them prepared, and these are specific rules that overrides the general rule in these cases. The Eldritch Invocations that allow casting spells without having them prepared are an example of this sort of "specific beats general" structure. The fact that an Invocation says you can cast a spell doesn't mean that spell is prepared; it means you can cast that spell even though you don't have it prepared.
pronouns: he/she/they