For Warlocks having to use higher level slots is a feature, not a bug. That's why we get a handful of on demand spells as invocations to compensate.
Something of note, most who do play pathfinder have said that the Magus and Summoner don't feel like they have enough slots either. However, also of note is that the 6th-9th level spells are really toned down and most casters still have 3 of each of those spells as well.
Still not a bad model, and personally I think the "bounded" spell caster concept could still work in dnd as well.
Edit: I have another new warlock game lined up for myself at a table that generally did not like warlocks and made me playing one a pain in the rear. Going to play my favorite type of warlock Fey Chain to see if the table dependency really is lowered with the changes.
I'm seeing that this new warlock is hardly going to survive. And it's a shame, because I've really had a lot of fun playing tomelock. And beyond philias or phobias, what cannot be said is that it does not work. But okay, let's move on. This merciless burial that you are promoting also opens up new opportunities.
According to Jeremy Crawford, when a design is loved by some and hated by others, what the design team tries to do is find a middle ground between the two. In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Would it work for you if the warlock's spell slots scaled like a fullcaster up to level 10, and then it stopped gaining spell slots? (and leave Mystic Arcanum for level 6+ spells as before).
Would it work to be a half caster, but have two spell slots always at max level based on the old warlock's advancement? I don't like this option, but it's the closest thing I can think of to a middle ground. And obviously more things would have to be adjusted, so that it was not excessively powerful.
Would it work to be a half caster, but have an arcane recovery feature to recover up to a level 5 mystic arcanum on short rest?
Can you think of another way to make this work, other than an overall amendment to the whole new design?
I'm seeing that this new warlock is hardly going to survive. And it's a shame, because I've really had a lot of fun playing tomelock. And beyond philias or phobias, what cannot be said is that it does not work. But okay, let's move on. This merciless burial that you are promoting also opens up new opportunities.
According to Jeremy Crawford, when a design is loved by some and hated by others, what the design team tries to do is find a middle ground between the two. In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Would it work for you if the warlock's spell slots scaled like a fullcaster up to level 10, and then it stopped gaining spell slots? (and leave Mystic Arcanum for level 6+ spells as before).
Would it work to be a half caster, but have two spell slots always at max level based on the old warlock's advancement? I don't like this option, but it's the closest thing I can think of to a middle ground. And obviously more things would have to be adjusted, so that it was not excessively powerful.
Would it work to be a half caster, but have an arcane recovery feature to recover up to a level 5 mystic arcanum on short rest?
Can you think of another way to make this work, other than an overall amendment to the whole new design?
I made a proposal a while back that they keep the half caster thing, They keep the Mystic arcanum on invocations, But at level 3 you unlock "pact magic" you gain 1 spell slot of second level. This spell slot recovers on a short rest. As you level up this spell slot gets stronger, becoming a 3rd at 5, a 4th at 7 and a 5th at 9. At 13 You gain a feature that gives you a second one of these slots, maybe 18 one of the slots becomes 6th level (your patron spells return to the 1,3,5,7,9 but technically more like 3,3,5,7,9) You lose the one free cast of the patron spells in favor of this new spell slot.
The easiest solution would be to just extend Mystic Arcanum down to include 2nd level spells at 3rd Warlock level, and make 2nd-5th level Mystic Arcanum "slot" level scale with the highest level Mystic Arcanum available to the Warlock (up to 5th level "slot"), and allowing taking 2nd-5th level spells as Mystic Arcanum multiple times.
I made a proposal a while back that they keep the half caster thing, They keep the Mystic arcanum on invocations, But at level 3 you unlock "pact magic" you gain 1 spell slot of second level. This spell slot recovers on a short rest.
Yeah, that's exactly what's not going to happen. They really don't want short rest magic.
I noticed that some new version abilities scales with level. If we take a look at Hex Master, it says that you can cast Hex at-will, not expending a spell slot, but it does says nothing about casting it at level 1. The same with the invocation FIENDISH VIGOR, which in the original PH manual specifies that is level 1, but the new one says nothing. We have many other abilities and feats indicating you can cast for free as base level, then can use your own spell slots for upcasting, but is not the case of new Warlock abilities and invocations.
Then, now is made for them to scale with a half-caster spell progression, being able to cast them with your greater spell level slot obtained. As MA does not grant spell slots, this cannot be cheated by that way.
I'm seeing that this new warlock is hardly going to survive. And it's a shame, because I've really had a lot of fun playing tomelock. And beyond philias or phobias, what cannot be said is that it does not work. But okay, let's move on. This merciless burial that you are promoting also opens up new opportunities.
According to Jeremy Crawford, when a design is loved by some and hated by others, what the design team tries to do is find a middle ground between the two. In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Would it work for you if the warlock's spell slots scaled like a fullcaster up to level 10, and then it stopped gaining spell slots? (and leave Mystic Arcanum for level 6+ spells as before).
Would it work to be a half caster, but have two spell slots always at max level based on the old warlock's advancement? I don't like this option, but it's the closest thing I can think of to a middle ground. And obviously more things would have to be adjusted, so that it was not excessively powerful.
Would it work to be a half caster, but have an arcane recovery feature to recover up to a level 5 mystic arcanum on short rest?
Can you think of another way to make this work, other than an overall amendment to the whole new design?
I expect they know how to distinguish between reasonable arguing and merely arguing. If not, we will have to homebrew the Warlock, again, which is a mess, because is not the same modifying something by your sole criteria than supposedly tested by a large amount of players to look for balance. But if they yield to the arguing pack only to avoid disgusting to those "I want to do everything while the others look at me", then we will have to fix it and test playing, that is what it should be made.
About short rest magic, forget it, any source of unlimited resources must be directly banned from the game. Partial recover (i.e. using proficiency bonus) is fine, unlimited version, no thanks. I have to ask, really someone thinks that the current Warlock, with Fiend patron (some powerfull spells), Hexblade (so you are also a good combatant), and unlimited short rests is balanced at all? At level 5 can spam 2 fireballs at max level "per hour", and few after when getting the 3rd slot can spam up to 3 fireballs per hour, nice, very well balanced, sure. I put "per hour" because is theoretical, as exploring time extends it, but is not fixed. But in those 16 hours between long rests, what prevents you from resting. Short rest magic should never had existed.
So the character creation was completed. I am Playing a halfling Warlock/Fortune teller. Learned fortune telling as part of a nomadic circus act from a mentor, believed it to be all non-sense and largely tricks, even as they practice it unknowingly opening themselves up to eldritch beings. After a time their charlatan practices of fortune telling got them and one of their great friends a young Satyr in trouble. Fleeing people trying to hurt the Satyr my character promised the young girl that everything would be alright and they would do everything in their power to protect them. In so doing they unwittingly created a pact, now the lessons learned from the old mentor and through adventures with the young Satyr have continued to grow his abilities.
Starting at level 6, Took Magic initiate Primal for Guidance, Message and Speak with animals (though I considered Divine for Guidance, light and Protection from good an evil for even more "fortune teller" flavor) invocations are Mask of many faces to stay on the run easier, Agonizing blast, and Mystic arcanum Slow.
Auto gained spells from fey are Sleep, Faerie Fire, Calm Emotions and Phantasmal Force. Looking at these auto gains +EB and Hex basically would be all I really needed for combat so the 6 other spells I could go for flavor and utility. I went with Detect thoughts, Locate Object, Invisibility, Charm Person, Silent Image and Shield. There are a plethora of other casters in the game so leaving detect magic and comprehend languages to them on this one.
One thing that stood out to me is how many spells the new warlock gets. Before there was a pretty sizable gap between the number of slots you had and the number of spells you can prepare. I am happy to say that in all of these experiments that has still been the case.
Edit: ALso this has shed light on how poor the Fiend Patrons list is. There are a lot of blasting spells on that list, which does not work at the progression it is on. The spells like Command, Suggestion, and fear are still solid at the levels you get them, but the damage of the others has fallen to far behind for them to feel good at those levels.
I noticed that some new version abilities scales with level. If we take a look at Hex Master, it says that you can cast Hex at-will, not expending a spell slot, but it does says nothing about casting it at level 1. The same with the invocation FIENDISH VIGOR, which in the original PH manual specifies that is level 1, but the new one says nothing. We have many other abilities and feats indicating you can cast for free as base level, then can use your own spell slots for upcasting, but is not the case of new Warlock abilities and invocations.
Then, now is made for them to scale with a half-caster spell progression, being able to cast them with your greater spell level slot obtained. As MA does not grant spell slots, this cannot be cheated by that way.
I'm seeing that this new warlock is hardly going to survive. And it's a shame, because I've really had a lot of fun playing tomelock. And beyond philias or phobias, what cannot be said is that it does not work. But okay, let's move on. This merciless burial that you are promoting also opens up new opportunities.
According to Jeremy Crawford, when a design is loved by some and hated by others, what the design team tries to do is find a middle ground between the two. In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Would it work for you if the warlock's spell slots scaled like a fullcaster up to level 10, and then it stopped gaining spell slots? (and leave Mystic Arcanum for level 6+ spells as before).
Would it work to be a half caster, but have two spell slots always at max level based on the old warlock's advancement? I don't like this option, but it's the closest thing I can think of to a middle ground. And obviously more things would have to be adjusted, so that it was not excessively powerful.
Would it work to be a half caster, but have an arcane recovery feature to recover up to a level 5 mystic arcanum on short rest?
Can you think of another way to make this work, other than an overall amendment to the whole new design?
I expect they know how to distinguish between reasonable arguing and merely arguing. If not, we will have to homebrew the Warlock, again, which is a mess, because is not the same modifying something by your sole criteria than supposedly tested by a large amount of players to look for balance. But if they yield to the arguing pack only to avoid disgusting to those "I want to do everything while the others look at me", then we will have to fix it and test playing, that is what it should be made.
About short rest magic, forget it, any source of unlimited resources must be directly banned from the game. Partial recover (i.e. using proficiency bonus) is fine, unlimited version, no thanks. I have to ask, really someone thinks that the current Warlock, with Fiend patron (some powerfull spells), Hexblade (so you are also a good combatant), and unlimited short rests is balanced at all? At level 5 can spam 2 fireballs at max level "per hour", and few after when getting the 3rd slot can spam up to 3 fireballs per hour, nice, very well balanced, sure. I put "per hour" because is theoretical, as exploring time extends it, but is not fixed. But in those 16 hours between long rests, what prevents you from resting. Short rest magic should never had existed.
So just some clarity, according to all sage advice and according to current rules as written and as intended any time you gain a spell that you can cast without expending a spell slot that spell is ALWAYS cast at its lowest/base level.
So just some clarity, according to all sage advice and according to current rules as written and as intended any time you gain a spell that you can cast without expending a spell slot that spell is ALWAYS cast at its lowest/base level.
Could be, but that is for 5E. Now and from a time (Tasha's Cauldron is partially "One" type) I see that descriptions are more explicit in those definitions. Take a look at the original and new FIENDISH VIGOR. Also a 18th level ability to cast a level 1 spell...that is what made me to watch it more in detail. If not take a look at all the Tasha's Cauldron feats and how it specifies it.
A fix I could see is that the Pact of the Blade Warlock, being the most combatant half-caster version, should be able to get combat styles and (probably when revised) weapon mastery just like the Ranger or Paladin.
So just some clarity, according to all sage advice and according to current rules as written and as intended any time you gain a spell that you can cast without expending a spell slot that spell is ALWAYS cast at its lowest/base level.
Could be, but that is for 5E. Now and from a time (Tasha's Cauldron is partially "One" type) I see that descriptions are more explicit in those definitions. Take a look at the original and new FIENDISH VIGOR. Also a 18th level ability to cast a level 1 spell...that is what made me to watch it more in detail. If not take a look at all the Tasha's Cauldron feats and how it specifies it.
A fix I could see is that the Pact of the Blade Warlock, being the most combatant half-caster version, should be able to get combat styles and (probably when revised) weapon mastery just like the Ranger or Paladin.
Great those are written with more clarity, that doesn't mean that the lack of clarity has changed it so far. If they wanted it changed it would have been specific about it. It has been said already, if you can cast hex as a 5th level spell at 18, then there is nothing stopping someone taking Bestow Curse at level 5 and casting it as a 9th level spell right then and there. The wording is the same about being able to cast them without expending a spell slot.
Do not fall for the fallacy of the "rules don't say I can't", just because the rules don't say you can't doesn't mean you can.
So just some clarity, according to all sage advice and according to current rules as written and as intended any time you gain a spell that you can cast without expending a spell slot that spell is ALWAYS cast at its lowest/base level.
Could be, but that is for 5E. Now and from a time (Tasha's Cauldron is partially "One" type) I see that descriptions are more explicit in those definitions. Take a look at the original and new FIENDISH VIGOR. Also a 18th level ability to cast a level 1 spell...that is what made me to watch it more in detail. If not take a look at all the Tasha's Cauldron feats and how it specifies it.
A fix I could see is that the Pact of the Blade Warlock, being the most combatant half-caster version, should be able to get combat styles and (probably when revised) weapon mastery just like the Ranger or Paladin.
Great those are written with more clarity, that doesn't mean that the lack of clarity has changed it so far. If they wanted it changed it would have been specific about it. It has been said already, if you can cast hex as a 5th level spell at 18, then there is nothing stopping someone taking Bestow Curse at level 5 and casting it as a 9th level spell right then and there. The wording is the same about being able to cast them without expending a spell slot.
Do not fall for the fallacy of the "rules don't say I can't", just because the rules don't say you can't doesn't mean you can.
Not, the level is indicated just in the table. At greater levels, you can upgrade it (as you can change an invocation by another) to get it at the new indicated level in the table. That is really written, so is RAW. But using the base level if not specified, is a consensus to fix some glitches in old manuals, as they could omit or simply forget about writing it.
Also, how can be so sure for a 100%? If they wanted to fix it, then it should be a paragraph in already published content saying it, then would not be need to specify on each description they intentionally want to apply. I mean they are in time to set it as RAW, but didn't, and instead they are more clear on each description.
Probably asking on Twitter could clarify, as not fixing it by rule could be unintentional, but not sure if will respond.
Edit: ALso this has shed light on how poor the Fiend Patrons list is. There are a lot of blasting spells on that list, which does not work at the progression it is on. The spells like Command, Suggestion, and fear are still solid at the levels you get them, but the damage of the others has fallen to far behind for them to feel good at those levels.
Exactly. Warlock is not meant for blasting, they emulate martial single-target damage output with Eldritch Blast. However, devs have to tread carefully, because they have to somehow spread control spells over Fiend, Great Old One, Archfey, and Undead, and find enough spells to find ten for each list of bonus spells. Fear definitely fits Archfey or Undead more than Fiend.
i'm more concerned with "Remove the restriction on Heavy weapons." save the oversized anime swords for hexblade subclass!
The whole point of hexblade was to make bladelock functional. Hexblade subclass should not exist.
sure, but they didn't overlap any other lore so now it's canonically the shadowfell patron (see page 27) and it's not going away. devs seem to think heavy weapons aren't for mages, yet hexblade seems like a niche ripe for exception. shrug. for everyone else, flavor is free.
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 don’t think there is a thing in the world that you can get everyone to agree on. Someone will always dislike something. And forums like this one tend to attract players who are passionate about the hobby. But they are a small fraction of the community which is why WotC relies on the surveys instead of forum threads/polls. JC even said it in on of the 1D&D interviews with Todd that on forums you get maybe a hundred voices where the surveys they get thousands or tens of thousands.
So, yes there are some in this thread who don’t want change and some that like the UA and some that like some things and not others.
But if everyone in this thread trashed this entire UA in the survey it will probably amount to 1% of the responses WotC receives. So I don’t think anyone here will be ruining the next edition/revision.
So maybe the tension, aggravation, and vitriol needs to be brought down a notch on all sides.
In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Remove Spellcasting, remove Pact Magic. Add Pact Spellcasting: "[The default text for "you can cast the spells you can cast.] You get your spells from Mystic Arcanum and/or Magical Obscura." Now, half the casting invocations are MA, giving you one powerful-for-the-level-at-which-you-can-get-it spell that recharges on a short rest, and the other half are MO, giving you two or more weaker spells that you can cast, or one spell you can cast multiple times, per long rest. Fix it yourself! Lol.
In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Remove Spellcasting, remove Pact Magic. Add Pact Spellcasting: "[The default text for "you can cast the spells you can cast.] You get your spells from Mystic Arcanum and/or Magical Obscura." Now, half the casting invocations are MA, giving you one powerful-for-the-level-at-which-you-can-get-it spell that recharges on a short rest, and the other half are MO, giving you two or more weaker spells that you can cast, or one spell you can cast multiple times, per long rest. Fix it yourself! Lol.
Pineapple, pepperoni and jalapenos is the top tier pizza topping choice.
And I don't think I understand your Mystic Obscurua idea. If you are suggesting no spell casting and its all picked through invocations some short rest, some long rest mechanics, it could work if the warlock got something like a invocation at every level.
In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Remove Spellcasting, remove Pact Magic. Add Pact Spellcasting: "[The default text for "you can cast the spells you can cast.] You get your spells from Mystic Arcanum and/or Magical Obscura." Now, half the casting invocations are MA, giving you one powerful-for-the-level-at-which-you-can-get-it spell that recharges on a short rest, and the other half are MO, giving you two or more weaker spells that you can cast, or one spell you can cast multiple times, per long rest. Fix it yourself! Lol.
Pineapple, pepperoni and jalapenos is the top tier pizza topping choice.
And I don't think I understand your Mystic Obscurua idea. If you are suggesting no spell casting and its all picked through invocations some short rest, some long rest mechanics, it could work if the warlock got something like a invocation at every level.
The first Warlock class in 3rd edition didn't get ANY spells, just eldritch blast and invocations, plus a second set of invocations that were specific to eldritch blast. Most invocations were only capable of mimicking low level spells, but they had no limit on how many times per day they could be cast, and the eldritch blast boosts could add rider effects (like dispelling a spell on the target) or change the effect of the blast, such as to a cone or a chain effect, enabling eldritch blast to hit multiple targets. However, eldritch blast back then did 1d6 per 2 levels of the Warlock, so it was never going to compete directly with the mainline blasting magic - the gimmick was being able to spam it without limit, something no other spellcasting class had at the time.
The class identity was that they had a notably lower ceiling than traditional casters, but were at 100% ALL THE TIME. And I think a similar idea was what the 5th edition warlock was going for - a lower ceiling than the sorcerer and wizard, but a higher floor. Which might get to the core point of my dislike over the changes in the playtest - they reduce both the ceiling AND the floor the Warlock operates between.
I don’t think there is a thing in the world that you can get everyone to agree on. Someone will always dislike something. And forums like this one tend to attract players who are passionate about the hobby. But they are a small fraction of the community which is why WotC relies on the surveys instead of forum threads/polls. JC even said it in on of the 1D&D interviews with Todd that on forums you get maybe a hundred voices where the surveys they get thousands or tens of thousands.
So, yes there are some in this thread who don’t want change and some that like the UA and some that like some things and not others.
But if everyone in this thread trashed this entire UA in the survey it will probably amount to 1% of the responses WotC receives. So I don’t think anyone here will be ruining the next edition/revision.
So maybe the tension, aggravation, and vitriol needs to be brought down a notch on all sides.
While it may be a biassed sample, 1% is a solid sample size. So far I think only 1 of reported poll %s didn't really mesh with the forums opinions as I roughly saw them so I suspect the general gaming populace is just as divided on the new warlock as the forums. Though it could be the one only super passionate forum people care category.
Not saying vitriol shouldn't go down. It should, as vitriol is never productive. But us being 1% does not mean what we are talking about is all that different than what other groups are.
Tension, I get though. For some of us Warlock is our favorite class by a large margin. It is for me, in class based games the 5e version is my favorite class across the dozen+ of systems I've played. This would not be the only reason as due to recent WOTC actions a system change was up for debate as is at my table, but a unsatisfactory Warlock might be what tips me over to a different system. So, yeah it matters and that can create tension as gaming is my core outlet(I can only bake/cook so much before my household is overloaded). I'm sure others are in the same boat even if they are on the other side of the argument of where they want the Warlock to end up. Some seem to do this in every thread about every change, which seems a bit much. But if warlock/fighter/bard is your passion in the game I expect to see a great deal of tension in the arguments around those changes. I totally was cool about the bard changes as bard isn't my passion and I recognized they needed a bit of a nerf as they are probably tied with wizard for top class(and here they buffed the wizard, sigh). But people who wanted their darker bards with easy access to bestow curse and other spells lost in the changes, or the changes to inspiration etc. were passionate about it and it brought tension to their arguments. I get that, and gaming is a hobby, something people get passionate about so that is a good thing imo.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I used the Magus from Pathfinder as a model.
For Warlocks having to use higher level slots is a feature, not a bug. That's why we get a handful of on demand spells as invocations to compensate.
Something of note, most who do play pathfinder have said that the Magus and Summoner don't feel like they have enough slots either. However, also of note is that the 6th-9th level spells are really toned down and most casters still have 3 of each of those spells as well.
Still not a bad model, and personally I think the "bounded" spell caster concept could still work in dnd as well.
Edit: I have another new warlock game lined up for myself at a table that generally did not like warlocks and made me playing one a pain in the rear. Going to play my favorite type of warlock Fey Chain to see if the table dependency really is lowered with the changes.
I'm seeing that this new warlock is hardly going to survive. And it's a shame, because I've really had a lot of fun playing tomelock. And beyond philias or phobias, what cannot be said is that it does not work. But okay, let's move on. This merciless burial that you are promoting also opens up new opportunities.
According to Jeremy Crawford, when a design is loved by some and hated by others, what the design team tries to do is find a middle ground between the two. In this case, what do you think could be that hypothetical midpoint between pact magic and the half caster system? I've been thinking about it and I can't find a satisfactory model that could satisfy both lovers of the warlock halfcaster and those nostalgic for pact magic.
Would it work for you if the warlock's spell slots scaled like a fullcaster up to level 10, and then it stopped gaining spell slots? (and leave Mystic Arcanum for level 6+ spells as before).
Would it work to be a half caster, but have two spell slots always at max level based on the old warlock's advancement? I don't like this option, but it's the closest thing I can think of to a middle ground. And obviously more things would have to be adjusted, so that it was not excessively powerful.
Would it work to be a half caster, but have an arcane recovery feature to recover up to a level 5 mystic arcanum on short rest?
Can you think of another way to make this work, other than an overall amendment to the whole new design?
I made a proposal a while back that they keep the half caster thing, They keep the Mystic arcanum on invocations, But at level 3 you unlock "pact magic" you gain 1 spell slot of second level. This spell slot recovers on a short rest. As you level up this spell slot gets stronger, becoming a 3rd at 5, a 4th at 7 and a 5th at 9. At 13 You gain a feature that gives you a second one of these slots, maybe 18 one of the slots becomes 6th level (your patron spells return to the 1,3,5,7,9 but technically more like 3,3,5,7,9) You lose the one free cast of the patron spells in favor of this new spell slot.
The easiest solution would be to just extend Mystic Arcanum down to include 2nd level spells at 3rd Warlock level, and make 2nd-5th level Mystic Arcanum "slot" level scale with the highest level Mystic Arcanum available to the Warlock (up to 5th level "slot"), and allowing taking 2nd-5th level spells as Mystic Arcanum multiple times.
Yeah, that's exactly what's not going to happen. They really don't want short rest magic.
I noticed that some new version abilities scales with level. If we take a look at Hex Master, it says that you can cast Hex at-will, not expending a spell slot, but it does says nothing about casting it at level 1. The same with the invocation FIENDISH VIGOR, which in the original PH manual specifies that is level 1, but the new one says nothing. We have many other abilities and feats indicating you can cast for free as base level, then can use your own spell slots for upcasting, but is not the case of new Warlock abilities and invocations.
Then, now is made for them to scale with a half-caster spell progression, being able to cast them with your greater spell level slot obtained. As MA does not grant spell slots, this cannot be cheated by that way.
I expect they know how to distinguish between reasonable arguing and merely arguing. If not, we will have to homebrew the Warlock, again, which is a mess, because is not the same modifying something by your sole criteria than supposedly tested by a large amount of players to look for balance. But if they yield to the arguing pack only to avoid disgusting to those "I want to do everything while the others look at me", then we will have to fix it and test playing, that is what it should be made.
About short rest magic, forget it, any source of unlimited resources must be directly banned from the game. Partial recover (i.e. using proficiency bonus) is fine, unlimited version, no thanks. I have to ask, really someone thinks that the current Warlock, with Fiend patron (some powerfull spells), Hexblade (so you are also a good combatant), and unlimited short rests is balanced at all? At level 5 can spam 2 fireballs at max level "per hour", and few after when getting the 3rd slot can spam up to 3 fireballs per hour, nice, very well balanced, sure. I put "per hour" because is theoretical, as exploring time extends it, but is not fixed. But in those 16 hours between long rests, what prevents you from resting. Short rest magic should never had existed.
So the character creation was completed. I am Playing a halfling Warlock/Fortune teller. Learned fortune telling as part of a nomadic circus act from a mentor, believed it to be all non-sense and largely tricks, even as they practice it unknowingly opening themselves up to eldritch beings. After a time their charlatan practices of fortune telling got them and one of their great friends a young Satyr in trouble. Fleeing people trying to hurt the Satyr my character promised the young girl that everything would be alright and they would do everything in their power to protect them. In so doing they unwittingly created a pact, now the lessons learned from the old mentor and through adventures with the young Satyr have continued to grow his abilities.
Starting at level 6, Took Magic initiate Primal for Guidance, Message and Speak with animals (though I considered Divine for Guidance, light and Protection from good an evil for even more "fortune teller" flavor)
invocations are Mask of many faces to stay on the run easier, Agonizing blast, and Mystic arcanum Slow.
Auto gained spells from fey are Sleep, Faerie Fire, Calm Emotions and Phantasmal Force. Looking at these auto gains +EB and Hex basically would be all I really needed for combat so the 6 other spells I could go for flavor and utility. I went with Detect thoughts, Locate Object, Invisibility, Charm Person, Silent Image and Shield. There are a plethora of other casters in the game so leaving detect magic and comprehend languages to them on this one.
One thing that stood out to me is how many spells the new warlock gets. Before there was a pretty sizable gap between the number of slots you had and the number of spells you can prepare. I am happy to say that in all of these experiments that has still been the case.
Edit: ALso this has shed light on how poor the Fiend Patrons list is. There are a lot of blasting spells on that list, which does not work at the progression it is on. The spells like Command, Suggestion, and fear are still solid at the levels you get them, but the damage of the others has fallen to far behind for them to feel good at those levels.
So just some clarity, according to all sage advice and according to current rules as written and as intended any time you gain a spell that you can cast without expending a spell slot that spell is ALWAYS cast at its lowest/base level.
Could be, but that is for 5E. Now and from a time (Tasha's Cauldron is partially "One" type) I see that descriptions are more explicit in those definitions. Take a look at the original and new FIENDISH VIGOR. Also a 18th level ability to cast a level 1 spell...that is what made me to watch it more in detail. If not take a look at all the Tasha's Cauldron feats and how it specifies it.
A fix I could see is that the Pact of the Blade Warlock, being the most combatant half-caster version, should be able to get combat styles and (probably when revised) weapon mastery just like the Ranger or Paladin.
Great those are written with more clarity, that doesn't mean that the lack of clarity has changed it so far. If they wanted it changed it would have been specific about it. It has been said already, if you can cast hex as a 5th level spell at 18, then there is nothing stopping someone taking Bestow Curse at level 5 and casting it as a 9th level spell right then and there. The wording is the same about being able to cast them without expending a spell slot.
Do not fall for the fallacy of the "rules don't say I can't", just because the rules don't say you can't doesn't mean you can.
It is 100% meant to cast it as 1st level.
Not, the level is indicated just in the table. At greater levels, you can upgrade it (as you can change an invocation by another) to get it at the new indicated level in the table. That is really written, so is RAW. But using the base level if not specified, is a consensus to fix some glitches in old manuals, as they could omit or simply forget about writing it.
Also, how can be so sure for a 100%? If they wanted to fix it, then it should be a paragraph in already published content saying it, then would not be need to specify on each description they intentionally want to apply. I mean they are in time to set it as RAW, but didn't, and instead they are more clear on each description.
Probably asking on Twitter could clarify, as not fixing it by rule could be unintentional, but not sure if will respond.
Exactly. Warlock is not meant for blasting, they emulate martial single-target damage output with Eldritch Blast. However, devs have to tread carefully, because they have to somehow spread control spells over Fiend, Great Old One, Archfey, and Undead, and find enough spells to find ten for each list of bonus spells. Fear definitely fits Archfey or Undead more than Fiend.
sure, but they didn't overlap any other lore so now it's canonically the shadowfell patron (see page 27) and it's not going away. devs seem to think heavy weapons aren't for mages, yet hexblade seems like a niche ripe for exception. shrug. for everyone else, flavor is free.
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 don’t think there is a thing in the world that you can get everyone to agree on. Someone will always dislike something. And forums like this one tend to attract players who are passionate about the hobby. But they are a small fraction of the community which is why WotC relies on the surveys instead of forum threads/polls. JC even said it in on of the 1D&D interviews with Todd that on forums you get maybe a hundred voices where the surveys they get thousands or tens of thousands.
So, yes there are some in this thread who don’t want change and some that like the UA and some that like some things and not others.
But if everyone in this thread trashed this entire UA in the survey it will probably amount to 1% of the responses WotC receives. So I don’t think anyone here will be ruining the next edition/revision.
So maybe the tension, aggravation, and vitriol needs to be brought down a notch on all sides.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
That's not true! We all like pineapple on pizza, right?
Remove Spellcasting, remove Pact Magic. Add Pact Spellcasting: "[The default text for "you can cast the spells you can cast.] You get your spells from Mystic Arcanum and/or Magical Obscura." Now, half the casting invocations are MA, giving you one powerful-for-the-level-at-which-you-can-get-it spell that recharges on a short rest, and the other half are MO, giving you two or more weaker spells that you can cast, or one spell you can cast multiple times, per long rest. Fix it yourself! Lol.
Pineapple, pepperoni and jalapenos is the top tier pizza topping choice.
And I don't think I understand your Mystic Obscurua idea. If you are suggesting no spell casting and its all picked through invocations some short rest, some long rest mechanics, it could work if the warlock got something like a invocation at every level.
The first Warlock class in 3rd edition didn't get ANY spells, just eldritch blast and invocations, plus a second set of invocations that were specific to eldritch blast. Most invocations were only capable of mimicking low level spells, but they had no limit on how many times per day they could be cast, and the eldritch blast boosts could add rider effects (like dispelling a spell on the target) or change the effect of the blast, such as to a cone or a chain effect, enabling eldritch blast to hit multiple targets. However, eldritch blast back then did 1d6 per 2 levels of the Warlock, so it was never going to compete directly with the mainline blasting magic - the gimmick was being able to spam it without limit, something no other spellcasting class had at the time.
The class identity was that they had a notably lower ceiling than traditional casters, but were at 100% ALL THE TIME. And I think a similar idea was what the 5th edition warlock was going for - a lower ceiling than the sorcerer and wizard, but a higher floor. Which might get to the core point of my dislike over the changes in the playtest - they reduce both the ceiling AND the floor the Warlock operates between.
While it may be a biassed sample, 1% is a solid sample size. So far I think only 1 of reported poll %s didn't really mesh with the forums opinions as I roughly saw them so I suspect the general gaming populace is just as divided on the new warlock as the forums. Though it could be the one only super passionate forum people care category.
Not saying vitriol shouldn't go down. It should, as vitriol is never productive. But us being 1% does not mean what we are talking about is all that different than what other groups are.
Tension, I get though. For some of us Warlock is our favorite class by a large margin. It is for me, in class based games the 5e version is my favorite class across the dozen+ of systems I've played. This would not be the only reason as due to recent WOTC actions a system change was up for debate as is at my table, but a unsatisfactory Warlock might be what tips me over to a different system. So, yeah it matters and that can create tension as gaming is my core outlet(I can only bake/cook so much before my household is overloaded). I'm sure others are in the same boat even if they are on the other side of the argument of where they want the Warlock to end up. Some seem to do this in every thread about every change, which seems a bit much. But if warlock/fighter/bard is your passion in the game I expect to see a great deal of tension in the arguments around those changes. I totally was cool about the bard changes as bard isn't my passion and I recognized they needed a bit of a nerf as they are probably tied with wizard for top class(and here they buffed the wizard, sigh). But people who wanted their darker bards with easy access to bestow curse and other spells lost in the changes, or the changes to inspiration etc. were passionate about it and it brought tension to their arguments. I get that, and gaming is a hobby, something people get passionate about so that is a good thing imo.