One suggestion I at least was in favor of was MA being a baseline feature that matches fullcaster progression rather than an invocation. I agree that making it an invocation is functionally illusion of choice, because your choice at least in core would be "either pick the highest MA you can every time, or suck compared to every other warlock that did."
Also, Chain Pact needs a buff. Have it give Gaze of Two Minds for free as the level 5 bump and make it work on the familiar.
I am for MA being baseline OR a massive buff to invocations to make others compete with Mystic Arcanum. But personally I would love to see AB rolled into EB ESPECIALLY if EB is going to be warlock locked AND the whole reason for some of the changes is EB is a trade off. I feel if we are going to remove the invocation taxes and invocations have mostly minor upgrades than doing something like
2, 2 invocations
3 mystic arcanum
5 Invocation
7 Mystic arcanum
9 Invocation
11 Mystic Arcanum
13 Invocation (bumping the level 15 ones down to level 13 requirment)
15 Mystic Arcanum
17 Invocation
would work really well. You would have no invocation taxes at all, and by level 5 you would still have 3, but none of the Pact specific stuff is eating up your invocations and neither is Agonizing blast or Mystic arcanum.
I'm okay with this as long as MA is also still an invocation. Warlock needs to be able to fireball at 5th level.
I think the reason people don't like the goth ranger analogy is not because it is nonsense, but because it actually works to encapsulate the problems people have with the new warlock. Yeah its not 100% a ranger, that isn't the argument, everyone knows that. But too much of the warlocks identity was lost into the half caster mold, changing from a entirely unique if maybe not perfectly balanced class into something that is far more generic.
It's no more generic than it was before; the new warlock still absolutely has a distinctive play style. It's just not the same play style as the 2014 warlock.
People said a monk without Ki is an autoattack bot, a Battlemaster without Superiority was an autoattack bot? Well hey guess what - the warlock is "an autoattack bot" BEFORE it expends its two entire casts of actual magic for the day. A ninth-level warlock needs to get *seven times* the benefit from any one single spellcast as an equivalent level wizard in order for using that Pact slot to be worth it, and hey guess what - that is ALSO mathematically impossible. Because the wizard gets seven spells to the warlock's one, and the two classes pull from the exact same spell pool. Any benefit the warlock can get from a spell, the wizard can also get - and then the wizard gets to benefit six more times while the warlock gets bupkis.
That's just changing the subject. You said that Warlock is the only class that so heavily relies on short rests, people pointed to examples that disproved that, and then you said "but Warlocks are bad." That's not really relevant to that particular line of argument.
Well, that's a tricky question. If you simply want to reaffirm your own opinions and get people that already agree with you to like you, then being angry is a great option. If you want to actually have an argument, there's absolutely no reason for it. It's somewhat reasonable in a real-life discussion, where emotions can sometimes take the wheel (still bad, but understandable). But this is the internet, where you can take all the time in the world to be logical. Every single time you press ctrl+b and start going ham, every single time you call somebody a ****wad, that's a deliberate decision that you're making to damage the integrity of the discussion. And quite frankly, I'm sick of it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
One suggestion I at least was in favor of was MA being a baseline feature that matches fullcaster progression rather than an invocation. I agree that making it an invocation is functionally illusion of choice, because your choice at least in core would be "either pick the highest MA you can every time, or suck compared to every other warlock that did."
Also, Chain Pact needs a buff. Have it give Gaze of Two Minds for free as the level 5 bump and make it work on the familiar.
I am for MA being baseline OR a massive buff to invocations to make others compete with Mystic Arcanum. But personally I would love to see AB rolled into EB ESPECIALLY if EB is going to be warlock locked AND the whole reason for some of the changes is EB is a trade off. I feel if we are going to remove the invocation taxes and invocations have mostly minor upgrades than doing something like
2, 2 invocations
3 mystic arcanum
5 Invocation
7 Mystic arcanum
9 Invocation
11 Mystic Arcanum
13 Invocation (bumping the level 15 ones down to level 13 requirment)
15 Mystic Arcanum
17 Invocation
would work really well. You would have no invocation taxes at all, and by level 5 you would still have 3, but none of the Pact specific stuff is eating up your invocations and neither is Agonizing blast or Mystic arcanum.
I'm okay with this as long as MA is also still an invocation. Warlock needs to be able to fireball at 5th level.
So you would be able to, You could trade out MA just like you do now at level up. This means that the one you gained at level 3, which was a second level at the time can become your third level MA at level 5 when you gained your 2nd level spell slots and didn't need a second level MA anymore.
MA would work exactly as it does now, trade outs and everything.
My one rumination about spell changes mostly revolve around MA. Should there be a level or two with a free mystic Arcanum thrown in the mix or do people feel there enough opportunities as is with being shared with invocations?
To be fair I have never truly considered playing a full warlock, mostly as split class with something else so that does impact my judgement. Never really loved the level dips for 5e, really enjoyed being able to get a little fla or from feats and race to give some side hustle capabilities. The level 1 feats are a great step in that direction with ONE.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
One thing must be clear: new rulebooks will come out. It will no longer be a new edition, in the same way that the play test is no longer called "One D&D". It will be revised 5e or some shit like that. But WoTC will publish new rulebooks. That is unavoidable.
From there you can take the playtest constructively, or you can take it destructively. The second option, which is an overall amendment, leads nowhere.
If you try the new warlock, which I suspect many of the people who criticize it bitterly haven't, and you don't like it, that's fine. That's what the survey is for. Tell WoTC what you didn't like and why. "I don't like the new magic system because my spells felt less powerful than the other caster in the party." "I don't like Mystic Arcanum because it doesn't scale." "I don't like the new pact cantrips for whatever." But answering the survey like a mad dog, saying that everything is crap and nothing works and, even worse, telling WoTC how he should design the game, doesn't help at all.
One suggestion I at least was in favor of was MA being a baseline feature that matches fullcaster progression rather than an invocation. I agree that making it an invocation is functionally illusion of choice, because your choice at least in core would be "either pick the highest MA you can every time, or suck compared to every other warlock that did."
Also, Chain Pact needs a buff. Have it give Gaze of Two Minds for free as the level 5 bump and make it work on the familiar.
I am for MA being baseline OR a massive buff to invocations to make others compete with Mystic Arcanum. But personally I would love to see AB rolled into EB ESPECIALLY if EB is going to be warlock locked AND the whole reason for some of the changes is EB is a trade off. I feel if we are going to remove the invocation taxes and invocations have mostly minor upgrades than doing something like
2, 2 invocations
3 mystic arcanum
5 Invocation
7 Mystic arcanum
9 Invocation
11 Mystic Arcanum
13 Invocation (bumping the level 15 ones down to level 13 requirment)
15 Mystic Arcanum
17 Invocation
would work really well. You would have no invocation taxes at all, and by level 5 you would still have 3, but none of the Pact specific stuff is eating up your invocations and neither is Agonizing blast or Mystic arcanum.
I'm okay with this as long as MA is also still an invocation. Warlock needs to be able to fireball at 5th level.
I think some irony about it also is that if they just added an invocation at level 3 and allow mystic arcanum to be taken as an invocation at 3, and rolled agonizing blast into EB than this would functionally work the exact same with the same number of features. Which that would work for me as well. Make it 10 invocations getting a 3rd at level 3 and bump up some of the more "ribbon" invocations would also be a cool way to really customize the character.
Edit: also I do not know who it was that suggested I just ignore the hyperboles on both sides and just respond to people that are looking to have a meaningful conversation, but I want to thank you. I was able to basically skip and skim this last page of non-sense. I will be taking that advice.
Thank you, Irrelevant. That really encapsulates my whole issue with this morass - the *entire* response to this document has been a purely destructive "OVER MY DEAD BODY" uproar that just scares people who think there might be something worth investigating here even if this precise shape of the rules isn't it - and yes, even I admit this isn't it and I always have - into silence. The whole hooplah is there to try and bully people who want to see where this goes into silence and misery, chasing them away from filling out their surveys in the forlorn hope that bullying enough people means the new books will just go away.
That's not okay. It'll never be okay. And I'll be as nasty and unpopular a grouchy ***** as I have to be in order to be the one single voice in the riot saying "it's Okay to like the new document and think there's a lot of cool ideas in it."
So, considering a revised warlock without any specific invocation taxes, and small upgrades to make all the options more viable
Eldritch Blast
Damage type reduced to a d8, but has agonizing blast built-in.
Pact of the Blade
Remove the restriction on Heavy weapons
Thirsting blade is now automatically granted at level 11 (and is removed from the invocations list), and increases to 2d6 at level 17.
Pact of the Chain
Familiars no longer require the caster to spend his reaction to cause the familiar to attack.
AC: equal to spell save DC
Hit Points: 1 + 4x Warlock Level.
Change Fiend familiar to... an actually useful damage type instead of poison.
Favor the Chain Master automatically granted at 11 (and is removed from the invocations list). Add saves to Beguiling Sting and Whispers of the Grave, they're a bit strong.
Pact of the Tome
Book of Shadows (cantrips): add ability score modifier at level 1, not level 5.
Book of Shadows (cantrip improvement): your eldritch blast becomes a d10.
Book of Shadows (rituals): rituals can be of any level where you have warlock spell slots.
Book of Shadows (cantrip improvement): when you cast a damaging cantrip, you may choose to instead apply the cantrip twice; each one does damage as if cast at level 1. At level 11 that becomes 3x, at level 17 that becomes 4x (thus, every cantrip winds up behaving like eldritch blast).
Invocations and Mystic Arcanum
Gain 1 invocation at 2, 5, 9, 13, and 17
Gain mystic arcanum at 3, 7, 11, and 15. These slots auto-upgrade, no need to use your level-up to change them.
That's not a large increase (mostly, it removes some taxes and false choices), but I think it's a much smoother flow.
But this isn't a new game, and is not fixing most of the biggest problems in the game. The caster-martial divide is worse in One D&D vs 5e, bounded accuracy is broken even worse in One D&D vs 5e, one-level dippability is worse in One D&D than 5e, dominance of range vs melee is still a thing in One D&D, scouting with familiars is still OP and boring.
This is a minor tweak for most of the game, with only a few major changes. The only "fix" is that now SRs are mostly gone and the game is built upon the assumption of a ~3 combats per adventuring day.
PS the reason it seems like people disagree with you (when if you look at the polls they don't) is b/c you are unnecessarily aggressive, mean, insulting and generally unpleasant in your posts. So even those people who agree with your points don't want to be seen to be agreeing with you.
Why should I give any credence to hostile meaningless milksop "suggestions" that amount to "what if Pact Magic worked exactly the same way it currently does except for this one tiny pointless superficial change with no impact that does nothing to address the problem? Maybe this will trick people who don't think the warlock is perfect into letting us keep completely unmodified Pact Magic?"
is that what we've been doing? very early in the thread you'd highlighted the impact of short rests (or lack thereof) on 5E warlocks. many of the suggestions since then have been to put short rest functionality in the hands of the caster rather than gated by the DM's whims and needs. i'm trying not to be snarky so i'll just say that ignoring the solutions to the problem you presented comes across as a bit ...unwilling to engage thoughtfully?
I don't ever recall saying that the UA version hit the mark perfectly. It still needs development. Ruminating on it for a while, I don't think Mystic Arcanum works as an Invocation on a half-caster chassis, it seems a clumsy fit. I'm also not sure why Pact Familiar is an entirely separate spell with significantly less functionality than the base Familiar spell.
for flavor? and because it's a perk to save spell slots on the summon (although i hope it's knocked down to 10-20minutes, or even just 1 minute wouldn't break much). and invisibility. oh, and improved ability checks. and saving throws. plus longer dark vision and some condition immunities. i don't see Deliver Spell in the UA stat block so if that's not an accident, then you win.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
So, considering a revised warlock without any specific invocation taxes, and small upgrades to make all the options more viable
Eldritch Blast
Damage type reduced to a d8, but has agonizing blast built-in.
Pact of the Blade
Remove the restriction on Heavy weapons
Thirsting blade is now automatically granted at level 11 (and is removed from the invocations list), and increases to 2d6 at level 17.
Pact of the Chain
Familiars no longer require the caster to spend his reaction to cause the familiar to attack.
AC: equal to spell save DC
Hit Points: 1 + 4x Warlock Level.
Change Fiend familiar to... an actually useful damage type instead of poison.
Favor the Chain Master automatically granted at 11 (and is removed from the invocations list). Add saves to Beguiling Sting and Whispers of the Grave, they're a bit strong.
Pact of the Tome
Book of Shadows (cantrips): add ability score modifier at level 1, not level 5.
Book of Shadows (cantrip improvement): your eldritch blast becomes a d10.
Book of Shadows (rituals): rituals can be of any level where you have warlock spell slots.
Book of Shadows (cantrip improvement): when you cast a damaging cantrip, you may choose to instead apply the cantrip twice; each one does damage as if cast at level 1. At level 11 that becomes 3x, at level 17 that becomes 4x (thus, every cantrip winds up behaving like eldritch blast).
Invocations and Mystic Arcanum
Gain 1 invocation at 2, 5, 9, 13, and 17
Gain mystic arcanum at 3, 7, 11, and 15. These slots auto-upgrade, no need to use your level-up to change them.
That's not a large increase (mostly, it removes some taxes and false choices), but I think it's a much smoother flow.
I like this, except I don't like that book lock is the only one that gets the EB d10, that feels like an unnecessary change that really punishes chain lock.
But this isn't a new game, and is not fixing most of the biggest problems in the game. The caster-martial divide is worse in One D&D vs 5e, bounded accuracy is broken even worse in One D&D vs 5e, one-level dippability is worse in One D&D than 5e, dominance of range vs melee is still a thing in One D&D, scouting with familiars is still OP and boring.
To be fair
The martial/caster divide is mostly because people reject every options that actually fix it. You simply can't fix it without either making spellcasters much weaker, or by making martials able to do obviously supernatural stuff.
Bounded Accuracy was always a delusion based on false premises (mostly, the idea that the difficulty of a challenge in prior editions varied with the level of the character. Difficulty of challenge varied with the level of the challenge).
Every last single person on this entire website that isn't named "Yurei" shitting on and shutting down every last single proposed change in every last single playtest document that has come out since this whole thing started in August. Every single document, you people scream and shriek and rant and riot over, proclaiming absolutely everything in it to be entirely unsalvageable and an active insult to the playerbase to boot.
We get it. You don't want new books. You don't want new rules. You don't want a new 5e. You want them to abandon the One D&D initiative entirely and continue making content for the increasingly stale and worn out 2014 game, instead. Well (not) sorry to say this, but TOUGH. Shit needs changing. Shit needs addressing. Shit needs fixing. And throwing up a colossal caterwauling every last single time a playtest document drops in the hopes of getting Wizards to stop working on new books makes you part of the problem.
Wizards would not be making sweeping attempts at change like this if they did not have metric ****buckets of data telling them people wanted it. PEOPLE WANT NEW BOOKS. We're GETTING new books.
Stop getting in the way, please.
I don't see how any of this is relevant. To make it clear, I'm not talking about what you're arguing. I'm talking about how you're arguing it.
I'll be as nasty and unpopular a grouchy ***** as I have to be in order to be the one single voice in the riot saying "it's Okay to like the new document and think there's a lot of cool ideas in it."
You wanna know how nasty and unpopular a grouchy ***** you have to be in order to be that voice? None. You don't have to be any of that. You can voice your opinion without doing it the way you always do. It's perfect possible. Many people have done it, and many people are doing it right now. And, quite frankly, I appreciate their inputs much more than I appreciate yours.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
That's not okay. It'll never be okay. And I'll be as nasty and unpopular a grouchy ***** as I have to be in order to be the one single voice in the riot saying "it's Okay to like the new document and think there's a lot of cool ideas in it."
Thing is, being nasty is actively counterproductive. I do think there's good ideas in the new document, and you really need to Tone It Down.
Or only have some minor features recharge on short rest, maybe with initiative rolls at mid to high levels. Sorcerers still get some sorcery points back, for example. The Warlock's issue was the major class feature was returned on a short rest, and it was one of the most limited resources in the game on top of it. A Cleric not having a chance to recharge channel divinity isn't as much of a detriment as a Warlock not being able to recharge their spells.
I was supposed to quote a post with this....Sorry Kaynadin.
A cleric sure, but a monk needs ki points(which maybe they change to a daily mechanic)a battle master fighter without maneuvers is just a dude swinging a sword, rune knights rune effects are on a short rest as well etc. There are very significant class features across a decent number of classes that are short rest based in the game.
Fully leveled up spells may be more significant, but as Saga pointed once either group is out it puts the warlock in the same boat as the monk/fighter without their resources, a basic damage dealer. Fighter will probably do more damage but the warlock will likely add some battlefield control effects in as well.
At level 15 a battlemaster with no maneuver dice gets one back if initiative is rolled, and the current capstone on the monk is to get 4 ki points whenever initiative is rolled. That will likely become level 18 for the monk, and in addition they get ki points equal to their level to begin with. The new sorcerer gets 4 sorcery points whenever initiative is rolled at lvl 15, and the Barbarian gets something similar with rages per day. If pact magic gets kept, I could easily see at a lower level (maybe 7) implementing something similar on a Warlock, with a boost at level 15. Say, at level 7, get one pact slot whenever initiative is rolled if you have none remaining, and at level 15 regain one when initiative is rolled if you have less than the maximum. The designers are free to modify that if they choose to take a look at it.
Or only have some minor features recharge on short rest, maybe with initiative rolls at mid to high levels. Sorcerers still get some sorcery points back, for example. The Warlock's issue was the major class feature was returned on a short rest, and it was one of the most limited resources in the game on top of it. A Cleric not having a chance to recharge channel divinity isn't as much of a detriment as a Warlock not being able to recharge their spells.
I was supposed to quote a post with this....Sorry Kaynadin.
A cleric sure, but a monk needs ki points(which maybe they change to a daily mechanic)a battle master fighter without maneuvers is just a dude swinging a sword, rune knights rune effects are on a short rest as well etc. There are very significant class features across a decent number of classes that are short rest based in the game.
Fully leveled up spells may be more significant, but as Saga pointed once either group is out it puts the warlock in the same boat as the monk/fighter without their resources, a basic damage dealer. Fighter will probably do more damage but the warlock will likely add some battlefield control effects in as well.
At level 15 a battlemaster with no maneuver dice gets one back if initiative is rolled, and the current capstone on the monk is to get 4 ki points whenever initiative is rolled. That will likely become level 18 for the monk, and in addition they get ki points equal to their level to begin with. The new sorcerer gets 4 sorcery points whenever initiative is rolled at lvl 15, and the Barbarian gets something similar with rages per day. If pact magic gets kept, I could easily see at a lower level (maybe 7) implementing something similar on a Warlock, with a boost at level 15. Say, at level 7, get one pact slot whenever initiative is rolled if you have none remaining, and at level 15 regain one when initiative is rolled if you have less than the maximum. The designers are free to modify that if they choose to take a look at it.
Those are at 15th level, features like that need to be in before the last 1/4 of the game, the last 1/4 that most tables seem not to see.(though hopefully they change classes enough end game looks attractive). Like I said roll a warlocks eldritch master down to 5th level. I don't think you'd need more than that but sure give a pact slot when initiative is rolled at level 15 or whatever as well.
That's not okay. It'll never be okay. And I'll be as nasty and unpopular a grouchy ***** as I have to be in order to be the one single voice in the riot saying "it's Okay to like the new document and think there's a lot of cool ideas in it."
Thing is, being nasty is actively counterproductive. I do think there's good ideas in the new document, and you really need to Tone It Down.
There are a lot of good ideas in it. Weapon mastery I think needs refinement but is a good idea. I think the martials still need some high level abilities as I generally don't see much of a reason to stick with them past level 6, but the change to indomitable is solid for example. Warlocks the pacts generally are a decent idea, I think blade needs heavy weapons, tome needs to be able to add any ritual the warlock comes across and chain the familiar needs a solid rework but otherwise how its presented, getting some baked in abilities is a good idea, just needs some tweaking.
But there are some bad ideas as well, like I think the sorcerers capstone removing wish penalties is a mistake, the being able to use it but use a lower level slot on its own is insanely good, and imo half caster was a miss on the warlock. Part of playtesting is calling out misses as you see them. The sorcerer capstone is a miss than can easily be changed to work. Half Casting isn't There may be some way to fix it, but none of the suggestions I've seen in here give the right vibe imo, they may be better balanced or something but that isn't everything. Its just such a different vibe in play that fixing it isn;t something simple like just toning it down a bit. Ain_undos's idea on like page 34 posted below was something that felt more like a compromise position. More spells but it does not feel like a half caster either.
"Far more complicated but offering more castings of spells by changing pact magic functionality. Instead of always casting at your highest level you get 1 slot that stays at each level as your pact magic grows. Also on a short rest you recover expended slots equal to your warlock level. So a level 6 warlock could recover a 1st, 2nd and 3rd level slot, or two 3rd level slots
1st one 1st level pact slot
2nd two 1st level pact slots
3rd one 1st level pact slot, one 2nd level pact slot
4th one 1st lvl slot, two 2nd lvl slots
5th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, one 3rd lvl
6th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, two 3rd lvl
7th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, one 3rd lvl, one 4th lvl
8th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, one 3rd lvl, two 4th lvl
9th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, one 3rd lvl, one 4th lvl, one 5th lvl
10th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, one 3rd lvl, one 4th lvl, two 5th lvl
11th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, one 3rd lvl, one 4th lvl, three 5th lvl
No change until 17
17th one 1st lvl, one 2nd lvl, one 3rd, one 4th, four 5th lvl"
Its not perfect, but I think it does a fairly good job of capturing the warlock spell caster feel while giving more spells. Given the whole no short rests allowed crowd as something that exists some method to once a day gain the benefits of a short rest, or at least the spell recovery on short notice would also likely be needed.
So, considering a revised warlock without any specific invocation taxes, and small upgrades to make all the options more viable
Eldritch Blast
Damage type reduced to a d8, but has agonizing blast built-in.
Pact of the Blade
Remove the restriction on Heavy weapons
Thirsting blade is now automatically granted at level 11 (and is removed from the invocations list), and increases to 2d6 at level 17.
Pact of the Chain
Familiars no longer require the caster to spend his reaction to cause the familiar to attack.
AC: equal to spell save DC
Hit Points: 1 + 4x Warlock Level.
Change Fiend familiar to... an actually useful damage type instead of poison.
Favor the Chain Master automatically granted at 11 (and is removed from the invocations list). Add saves to Beguiling Sting and Whispers of the Grave, they're a bit strong.
Pact of the Tome
Book of Shadows (cantrips): add ability score modifier at level 1, not level 5.
Book of Shadows (cantrip improvement): your eldritch blast becomes a d10.
Book of Shadows (rituals): rituals can be of any level where you have warlock spell slots.
Book of Shadows (cantrip improvement): when you cast a damaging cantrip, you may choose to instead apply the cantrip twice; each one does damage as if cast at level 1. At level 11 that becomes 3x, at level 17 that becomes 4x (thus, every cantrip winds up behaving like eldritch blast).
Invocations and Mystic Arcanum
Gain 1 invocation at 2, 5, 9, 13, and 17
Gain mystic arcanum at 3, 7, 11, and 15. These slots auto-upgrade, no need to use your level-up to change them.
That's not a large increase (mostly, it removes some taxes and false choices), but I think it's a much smoother flow.
I like this, except I don't like that book lock is the only one that gets the EB d10, that feels like an unnecessary change that really punishes chain lock.
the tome lock is acting in a 'gloomy ranger'/'arcane archer'/'cantrip master' role. i figure they get to be better at what they do most. also, "agonizing blast built-in" kinda makes up for that in the beginning.
i'm more concerned with "Remove the restriction on Heavy weapons." save the oversized anime swords for hexblade subclass! also, blade locks need more for survivability than leeching hp (lifedrinker invocation). temp hp (false life, armor of agathys) would be a theme to look into.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
I'm okay with this as long as MA is also still an invocation. Warlock needs to be able to fireball at 5th level.
Hard disagree, but not all tastes are the same.
That's just changing the subject. You said that Warlock is the only class that so heavily relies on short rests, people pointed to examples that disproved that, and then you said "but Warlocks are bad." That's not really relevant to that particular line of argument.
Well, that's a tricky question. If you simply want to reaffirm your own opinions and get people that already agree with you to like you, then being angry is a great option. If you want to actually have an argument, there's absolutely no reason for it. It's somewhat reasonable in a real-life discussion, where emotions can sometimes take the wheel (still bad, but understandable). But this is the internet, where you can take all the time in the world to be logical. Every single time you press ctrl+b and start going ham, every single time you call somebody a ****wad, that's a deliberate decision that you're making to damage the integrity of the discussion. And quite frankly, I'm sick of it.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
So you would be able to, You could trade out MA just like you do now at level up. This means that the one you gained at level 3, which was a second level at the time can become your third level MA at level 5 when you gained your 2nd level spell slots and didn't need a second level MA anymore.
MA would work exactly as it does now, trade outs and everything.
My one rumination about spell changes mostly revolve around MA. Should there be a level or two with a free mystic Arcanum thrown in the mix or do people feel there enough opportunities as is with being shared with invocations?
To be fair I have never truly considered playing a full warlock, mostly as split class with something else so that does impact my judgement. Never really loved the level dips for 5e, really enjoyed being able to get a little fla or from feats and race to give some side hustle capabilities. The level 1 feats are a great step in that direction with ONE.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
One thing must be clear: new rulebooks will come out. It will no longer be a new edition, in the same way that the play test is no longer called "One D&D". It will be revised 5e or some shit like that. But WoTC will publish new rulebooks. That is unavoidable.
From there you can take the playtest constructively, or you can take it destructively. The second option, which is an overall amendment, leads nowhere.
If you try the new warlock, which I suspect many of the people who criticize it bitterly haven't, and you don't like it, that's fine. That's what the survey is for. Tell WoTC what you didn't like and why. "I don't like the new magic system because my spells felt less powerful than the other caster in the party." "I don't like Mystic Arcanum because it doesn't scale." "I don't like the new pact cantrips for whatever." But answering the survey like a mad dog, saying that everything is crap and nothing works and, even worse, telling WoTC how he should design the game, doesn't help at all.
I think some irony about it also is that if they just added an invocation at level 3 and allow mystic arcanum to be taken as an invocation at 3, and rolled agonizing blast into EB than this would functionally work the exact same with the same number of features. Which that would work for me as well. Make it 10 invocations getting a 3rd at level 3 and bump up some of the more "ribbon" invocations would also be a cool way to really customize the character.
Edit: also I do not know who it was that suggested I just ignore the hyperboles on both sides and just respond to people that are looking to have a meaningful conversation, but I want to thank you. I was able to basically skip and skim this last page of non-sense. I will be taking that advice.
Thank you, Irrelevant. That really encapsulates my whole issue with this morass - the *entire* response to this document has been a purely destructive "OVER MY DEAD BODY" uproar that just scares people who think there might be something worth investigating here even if this precise shape of the rules isn't it - and yes, even I admit this isn't it and I always have - into silence. The whole hooplah is there to try and bully people who want to see where this goes into silence and misery, chasing them away from filling out their surveys in the forlorn hope that bullying enough people means the new books will just go away.
That's not okay. It'll never be okay. And I'll be as nasty and unpopular a grouchy ***** as I have to be in order to be the one single voice in the riot saying "it's Okay to like the new document and think there's a lot of cool ideas in it."
Please do not contact or message me.
So, considering a revised warlock without any specific invocation taxes, and small upgrades to make all the options more viable
Eldritch Blast
Pact of the Blade
Pact of the Chain
Pact of the Tome
Invocations and Mystic Arcanum
That's not a large increase (mostly, it removes some taxes and false choices), but I think it's a much smoother flow.
But this isn't a new game, and is not fixing most of the biggest problems in the game. The caster-martial divide is worse in One D&D vs 5e, bounded accuracy is broken even worse in One D&D vs 5e, one-level dippability is worse in One D&D than 5e, dominance of range vs melee is still a thing in One D&D, scouting with familiars is still OP and boring.
This is a minor tweak for most of the game, with only a few major changes. The only "fix" is that now SRs are mostly gone and the game is built upon the assumption of a ~3 combats per adventuring day.
PS the reason it seems like people disagree with you (when if you look at the polls they don't) is b/c you are unnecessarily aggressive, mean, insulting and generally unpleasant in your posts. So even those people who agree with your points don't want to be seen to be agreeing with you.
is that what we've been doing? very early in the thread you'd highlighted the impact of short rests (or lack thereof) on 5E warlocks. many of the suggestions since then have been to put short rest functionality in the hands of the caster rather than gated by the DM's whims and needs. i'm trying not to be snarky so i'll just say that ignoring the solutions to the problem you presented comes across as a bit ...unwilling to engage thoughtfully?
for flavor? and because it's a perk to save spell slots on the summon (although i hope it's knocked down to 10-20minutes, or even just 1 minute wouldn't break much). and invisibility. oh, and improved ability checks. and saving throws. plus longer dark vision and some condition immunities. i don't see Deliver Spell in the UA stat block so if that's not an accident, then you win.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
I like this, except I don't like that book lock is the only one that gets the EB d10, that feels like an unnecessary change that really punishes chain lock.
To be fair
The martial/caster divide is mostly because people reject every options that actually fix it. You simply can't fix it without either making spellcasters much weaker, or by making martials able to do obviously supernatural stuff.
Bounded Accuracy was always a delusion based on false premises (mostly, the idea that the difficulty of a challenge in prior editions varied with the level of the character. Difficulty of challenge varied with the level of the challenge).
I don't see how any of this is relevant. To make it clear, I'm not talking about what you're arguing. I'm talking about how you're arguing it.
You wanna know how nasty and unpopular a grouchy ***** you have to be in order to be that voice? None. You don't have to be any of that. You can voice your opinion without doing it the way you always do. It's perfect possible. Many people have done it, and many people are doing it right now. And, quite frankly, I appreciate their inputs much more than I appreciate yours.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Thing is, being nasty is actively counterproductive. I do think there's good ideas in the new document, and you really need to Tone It Down.
At level 15 a battlemaster with no maneuver dice gets one back if initiative is rolled, and the current capstone on the monk is to get 4 ki points whenever initiative is rolled. That will likely become level 18 for the monk, and in addition they get ki points equal to their level to begin with. The new sorcerer gets 4 sorcery points whenever initiative is rolled at lvl 15, and the Barbarian gets something similar with rages per day. If pact magic gets kept, I could easily see at a lower level (maybe 7) implementing something similar on a Warlock, with a boost at level 15. Say, at level 7, get one pact slot whenever initiative is rolled if you have none remaining, and at level 15 regain one when initiative is rolled if you have less than the maximum. The designers are free to modify that if they choose to take a look at it.
Those are at 15th level, features like that need to be in before the last 1/4 of the game, the last 1/4 that most tables seem not to see.(though hopefully they change classes enough end game looks attractive). Like I said roll a warlocks eldritch master down to 5th level. I don't think you'd need more than that but sure give a pact slot when initiative is rolled at level 15 or whatever as well.
There are a lot of good ideas in it. Weapon mastery I think needs refinement but is a good idea. I think the martials still need some high level abilities as I generally don't see much of a reason to stick with them past level 6, but the change to indomitable is solid for example. Warlocks the pacts generally are a decent idea, I think blade needs heavy weapons, tome needs to be able to add any ritual the warlock comes across and chain the familiar needs a solid rework but otherwise how its presented, getting some baked in abilities is a good idea, just needs some tweaking.
But there are some bad ideas as well, like I think the sorcerers capstone removing wish penalties is a mistake, the being able to use it but use a lower level slot on its own is insanely good, and imo half caster was a miss on the warlock. Part of playtesting is calling out misses as you see them. The sorcerer capstone is a miss than can easily be changed to work. Half Casting isn't There may be some way to fix it, but none of the suggestions I've seen in here give the right vibe imo, they may be better balanced or something but that isn't everything. Its just such a different vibe in play that fixing it isn;t something simple like just toning it down a bit. Ain_undos's idea on like page 34 posted below was something that felt more like a compromise position. More spells but it does not feel like a half caster either.
"Far more complicated but offering more castings of spells by changing pact magic functionality. Instead of always casting at your highest level you get 1 slot that stays at each level as your pact magic grows. Also on a short rest you recover expended slots equal to your warlock level. So a level 6 warlock could recover a 1st, 2nd and 3rd level slot, or two 3rd level slots
Its not perfect, but I think it does a fairly good job of capturing the warlock spell caster feel while giving more spells. Given the whole no short rests allowed crowd as something that exists some method to once a day gain the benefits of a short rest, or at least the spell recovery on short notice would also likely be needed.
the tome lock is acting in a 'gloomy ranger'/'arcane archer'/'cantrip master' role. i figure they get to be better at what they do most. also, "agonizing blast built-in" kinda makes up for that in the beginning.
i'm more concerned with "Remove the restriction on Heavy weapons." save the oversized anime swords for hexblade subclass! also, blade locks need more for survivability than leeching hp (lifedrinker invocation). temp hp (false life, armor of agathys) would be a theme to look into.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
The whole point of hexblade was to make bladelock functional. Hexblade subclass should not exist.