I like the idea of simply making Mystic Arcanum a feature instead of an invocation choice, using that to stay on curve 1-20, and keeping the half-casting. How about this for an updated class table? (Sorry, not experienced with making tables on this site, so its copy-pasted from elsewhere.)
Ideally the Mystic Arcanum would be spell slots (so you can use them for upcasting) but I'm fine with them as slotless 1/LR spells too.
EDIT: Is there a tutorial for making class tables here that I can look at to make this easier to read?
Your table looks fine. Might have been a pain in the ass to make it, I have no idea how to d it. What is there is far better than what we have, especially if mystic arcanums are spell slots. I think there needs to be a better way to change spells outside of level up, but 5e lock had that problem as well.
Proviso(I still prefer pact magic, see previous posts etc)
Personally I'd add a 2nd cantrip column, one just for attack cantrips. Attack cantrips taken via those choices would act like eldritch blast, separate bolts, use EB invocations etc, but otherwise retain their cantrip characteristics. Id make hex a class feature and not a spell, bonus action cast duration one minute, no concentration with some invocations that change it into legitimate curse level effects. IF EB and Hex was more flexible, that at least would be a avenue for warlocks to carve out a more unique style.
I think strategies and their availability need to be taken into account. With the shove action, repelling blast and now the new push mastery forced movement is widely available.
If wall of fire was super good on its own and then you could add this forced movement thing on top and the entire party has easy access to forced movement than this spell and those like it become the premier spells in the game overshadowing all other strategies.
This is why I gave the nod to Blight. It is extremely situational, but it does have a niche where it becomes the best option.
I don't want one spell to always be the best option. This is why some spells need a tone down and others need a bump up, but this is also why the strategies+ their ease of use and availability of the strategy need to be taken into account.
I can see that but I was using spells like that at 7th level with repelling etc(3rd on my dao lock) and nothing felt over powered from it. Delaying until 13th just does not seem worth it. blight im even less hip on as while yeah having access to situational effects can come in handy, that is extremely situational, like probably once every other campaign situational I expect. I can't remember the last time a plant was a enemy in our games.
I think strategies and their availability need to be taken into account. With the shove action, repelling blast and now the new push mastery forced movement is widely available.
If wall of fire was super good on its own and then you could add this forced movement thing on top and the entire party has easy access to forced movement than this spell and those like it become the premier spells in the game overshadowing all other strategies.
This is why I gave the nod to Blight. It is extremely situational, but it does have a niche where it becomes the best option.
I don't want one spell to always be the best option. This is why some spells need a tone down and others need a bump up, but this is also why the strategies+ their ease of use and availability of the strategy need to be taken into account.
I can see that but I was using spells like that at 7th level with repelling etc(3rd on my dao lock) and nothing felt over powered from it. Delaying until 13th just does not seem worth it. blight im even less hip on as while yeah having access to situational effects can come in handy, that is extremely situational, like probably once every other campaign situational I expect. I can't remember the last time a plant was a enemy in our games.
Ya, but there is definitely more movement effects now. And you can still do it at 7 with arcanum. Mostly the look at here was to see if they really did fall off or if they stayed relevant.
And my findings were, for the most part, they do remain relevant if they were a good spell all the way back at 5,7 or 9.
Which I am realizing shouldn't surprise me since old warlock topped out at 5th level before minus their Arcanums and no full caster ever gets many higher level slots so their 4th and 5th still need to be relevant.
I think strategies and their availability need to be taken into account. With the shove action, repelling blast and now the new push mastery forced movement is widely available.
If wall of fire was super good on its own and then you could add this forced movement thing on top and the entire party has easy access to forced movement than this spell and those like it become the premier spells in the game overshadowing all other strategies.
This is why I gave the nod to Blight. It is extremely situational, but it does have a niche where it becomes the best option.
I don't want one spell to always be the best option. This is why some spells need a tone down and others need a bump up, but this is also why the strategies+ their ease of use and availability of the strategy need to be taken into account.
I can see that but I was using spells like that at 7th level with repelling etc(3rd on my dao lock) and nothing felt over powered from it. Delaying until 13th just does not seem worth it. blight im even less hip on as while yeah having access to situational effects can come in handy, that is extremely situational, like probably once every other campaign situational I expect. I can't remember the last time a plant was a enemy in our games.
Ya, but there is definitely more movement effects now. And you can still do it at 7 with arcanum. Mostly the look at here was to see if they really did fall off or if they stayed relevant.
And my findings were, for the most part, they do remain relevant if they were a good spell all the way back at 5,7 or 9.
Which I am realizing shouldn't surprise me since old warlock topped out at 5th level before minus their Arcanums and no full caster ever gets many higher level slots so their 4th and 5th still need to be relevant.
If invocations get baked in I'd put it in the maybe category for me. Unfortunately there is a pretty narrow range of sustained spells that stay relevant at high levels. Sickening radiance is another, the wall spells, bigbys, animate object(I expect a nerf) and a couple others, but a lot of those don't mesh well with the various sub class options. But cone of cold like flame strike just does not look great at 17th level.(at least unlike flame strike it feels okay for 9th)
The core problem is that standard action spells are rarely worth using for a half caster, so you're going to wind up cherrypicking reactions and bonus actions.
Another option would be something like
Potent Spellcasting: when you cast a spell with a spell slot, it counts as if cast at 1 level higher (this does not allow casting a higher level spell). This increases to 2 levels at level 7, 3 at 11, 4 at 15.
That works a lot more like classic warlock, in that you're inclined to find the spells with strong level scaling; it's still not full caster potency, but your insect plague (gained at level 17) goes from 4d10 to 8d10, which is at least semi-competitive.
The core problem is that standard action spells are rarely worth using for a half caster, so you're going to wind up cherrypicking reactions and bonus actions.
Another option would be something like
Potent Spellcasting: when you cast a spell with a spell slot, it counts as if cast at 1 level higher (this does not allow casting a higher level spell). This increases to 2 levels at level 7, 3 at 11, 4 at 15.
That works a lot more like classic warlock, in that you're inclined to find the spells with strong level scaling; it's still not full caster potency, but your insect plague (gained at level 17) goes from 4d10 to 8d10, which is at least semi-competitive.
That might be an option as well if they want to keep Warlock at 1/2 caster progression - adding effective upcasts. It would go a long ways to restoring a unique identity to the class.
A Youtuber put the changes to the Warlock into perspective for me this morning. WotC has asked all the right questions, but they came up with poor answers to most of them.
So fireball and flame strike aren't both AoE damage spells that have about the same area effect size that do the same amount of damage with flame strike just costing a much more precious resource?
Show me where in the post I responded to you mentioned fireball. You were comparing AoE spells to EB
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The core problem is that standard action spells are rarely worth using for a half caster, so you're going to wind up cherrypicking reactions and bonus actions.
Another option would be something like
Potent Spellcasting: when you cast a spell with a spell slot, it counts as if cast at 1 level higher (this does not allow casting a higher level spell). This increases to 2 levels at level 7, 3 at 11, 4 at 15.
That works a lot more like classic warlock, in that you're inclined to find the spells with strong level scaling; it's still not full caster potency, but your insect plague (gained at level 17) goes from 4d10 to 8d10, which is at least semi-competitive.
That would be horrible or rather absolutely a must have dip feature. A wizard could get the new hex and this for a 2 level dip. Unless this doesn’t come online until lvl 3 or later. Also it’s a little over powered late game. Your two 4th level spell slots cast like 8th level spell slots. That is nothing like the current warlock. Also none of your spell slots are lower than 5th level power which I believe was your design intent, but the problem is this is too strong because you have access to all this power all the time.
That would be horrible or rather absolutely a must have dip feature. A wizard could get the new hex and this for a 2 level dip. Unless this doesn’t come online until lvl 3 or later. Also it’s a little over powered late game. Your two 4th level spell slots cast like 8th level spell slots. That is nothing like the current warlock. Also none of your spell slots are lower than 5th level power which I believe was your design intent, but the problem is this is too strong because you have access to all this power all the time.
It would come online at level 3. And no, it's not overpowered in late game, because most spells don't have very good level scaling; a 4th level spell cast with an 8th level slot just isn't an 8th level spell.
That would be horrible or rather absolutely a must have dip feature. A wizard could get the new hex and this for a 2 level dip. Unless this doesn’t come online until lvl 3 or later. Also it’s a little over powered late game. Your two 4th level spell slots cast like 8th level spell slots. That is nothing like the current warlock. Also none of your spell slots are lower than 5th level power which I believe was your design intent, but the problem is this is too strong because you have access to all this power all the time.
It would come online at level 3. And no, it's not overpowered in late game, because most spells don't have very good level scaling; a 4th level spell cast with an 8th level slot just isn't an 8th level spell.
Yeah it is overpowered because that still gives the warlock the equivalent of 3 8th level slots at the 15th level because they also have their MA at that level. Banishment targets an additional 4 people, Confusion radius grows by 20ft, Conjure Minor Elemental grant 3 times the creatures, the Tasha’s Summon spells all scale very well, Summon Greater Demon would be a CR 9 creature, and all the damage spells add 4dX to the damage. It’s really strong. Too strong by comparison to other casters at the same level. It can be fixed by simply adding this increase can not raise the spells level above 5th. Then it is completely in line with 5e warlock.
I like the idea of simply making Mystic Arcanum a feature instead of an invocation choice, using that to stay on curve 1-20, and keeping the half-casting. How about this for an updated class table? (Sorry, not experienced with making tables on this site, so its copy-pasted from elsewhere.)
Ideally the Mystic Arcanum would be spell slots (so you can use them for upcasting) but I'm fine with them as slotless 1/LR spells too.
EDIT: Is there a tutorial for making class tables here that I can look at to make this easier to read?
Your table looks fine. Might have been a pain in the ass to make it, I have no idea how to d it. What is there is far better than what we have, especially if mystic arcanums are spell slots. I think there needs to be a better way to change spells outside of level up, but 5e lock had that problem as well.
Proviso(I still prefer pact magic, see previous posts etc)
Personally I'd add a 2nd cantrip column, one just for attack cantrips. Attack cantrips taken via those choices would act like eldritch blast, separate bolts, use EB invocations etc, but otherwise retain their cantrip characteristics. Id make hex a class feature and not a spell, bonus action cast duration one minute, no concentration with some invocations that change it into legitimate curse level effects. IF EB and Hex was more flexible, that at least would be a avenue for warlocks to carve out a more unique style.
Thanks, I'll keep digging for a formatting guide.
What I posted is not that far off from what we currently have. The only differences are:
- MA is a feature instead of an Invocation, so you have all 9 invocations free to use on whatever now.
- You're still half-casting but get MA slots on curve, so 2nd-level spells at 3, 3rd-level spells at 5 etc. all the way up to 9th-level spells at 17 with those slots.
They would likely need to reduce the invocation count if they go this route, particularly the level 11 one since that level is so crowded now (you get an invocation, Contact Patron, AND 6th-level MA at that level.) But I think just the optics of the table going up to 9th level would help the marketing of this, even if you're only getting one slot per spell level from 6+.
What I posted is not that far off from what we currently have. The only differences are:
- MA is a feature instead of an Invocation, so you have all 9 invocations free to use on whatever now.
- You're still half-casting but get MA slots on curve, so 2nd-level spells at 3, 3rd-level spells at 5 etc. all the way up to 9th-level spells at 17 with those slots.
They would likely need to reduce the invocation count if they go this route, particularly the level 11 one since that level is so crowded now (you get an invocation, Contact Patron, AND 6th-level MA at that level.) But I think just the optics of the table going up to 9th level would help the marketing of this, even if you're only getting one slot per spell level from 6+.
Not having to blow 7 invocations on mystic arcanums is pretty big most suggestions going this route then knock invocations down to like 4 or 5 which I don't get the point of. This is mechanically better by a long shot. I still don't like it and want a fix for pact magic, but I can recognize this is better mechanically than what 1e gave us.
I like the idea of simply making Mystic Arcanum a feature instead of an invocation choice, using that to stay on curve 1-20, and keeping the half-casting. How about this for an updated class table? (Sorry, not experienced with making tables on this site, so its copy-pasted from elsewhere.)
Ideally the Mystic Arcanum would be spell slots (so you can use them for upcasting) but I'm fine with them as slotless 1/LR spells too.
EDIT: Is there a tutorial for making class tables here that I can look at to make this easier to read?
Your table looks fine. Might have been a pain in the ass to make it, I have no idea how to d it. What is there is far better than what we have, especially if mystic arcanums are spell slots. I think there needs to be a better way to change spells outside of level up, but 5e lock had that problem as well.
Proviso(I still prefer pact magic, see previous posts etc)
Personally I'd add a 2nd cantrip column, one just for attack cantrips. Attack cantrips taken via those choices would act like eldritch blast, separate bolts, use EB invocations etc, but otherwise retain their cantrip characteristics. Id make hex a class feature and not a spell, bonus action cast duration one minute, no concentration with some invocations that change it into legitimate curse level effects. IF EB and Hex was more flexible, that at least would be a avenue for warlocks to carve out a more unique style.
Thanks, I'll keep digging for a formatting guide.
What I posted is not that far off from what we currently have. The only differences are:
- MA is a feature instead of an Invocation, so you have all 9 invocations free to use on whatever now.
- You're still half-casting but get MA slots on curve, so 2nd-level spells at 3, 3rd-level spells at 5 etc. all the way up to 9th-level spells at 17 with those slots.
They would likely need to reduce the invocation count if they go this route, particularly the level 11 one since that level is so crowded now (you get an invocation, Contact Patron, AND 6th-level MA at that level.) But I think just the optics of the table going up to 9th level would help the marketing of this, even if you're only getting one slot per spell level from 6+.
I rather like this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
It's just html with some limits on what you can do. The easiest way of doing it is to either use preformmated text, or use something that can output as html (like google docs) and just paste a table from there into here. You can also open up the source code and directly paste html.
They would likely need to reduce the invocation count if they go this route, particularly the level 11 one since that level is so crowded now (you get an invocation, Contact Patron, AND 6th-level MA at that level.) But I think just the optics of the table going up to 9th level would help the marketing of this, even if you're only getting one slot per spell level from 6+.
There's no real need to have MA at every level -- just levels where you don't have spell slots. If you just preallocate MA in the way a rational player would almost certainly do anyway, you wind up with
Inv 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 - 2 2 2 2 3-4 2 3 5-6 2 4 2 M 7-8 2 4 3 M M 9-10 3 4 3 2 M M 11-12 3 4 3 3 M M M 13-14 4 4 3 3 1 M M M 15-16 4 4 3 3 2 M M M M 17-18 5 4 3 3 3 1 M M M M 19-20 5 4 3 3 3 2 M M M M
There is obvious room for rebalancing by adding additional invocations, or by making them available at level 3, the above is just automatically giving you the MA you would almost certainly take anyway.
I do like the idea of spells getting upcast at higher lock levels when using a standard spell slot. Probably not as much as was suggested, but one level after 10, and maybe another after 15 might be a good use in conjunction with the limited invocations. I think this might be a welcome compromise for having invocations shared with mystic arcanum.
I feel even getting a single level upcast is a pretty wonderful supplement to a half caster.
"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."
It's just html with some limits on what you can do. The easiest way of doing it is to either use preformmated text, or use something that can output as html (like google docs) and just paste a table from there into here. You can also open up the source code and directly paste html.
Docs is indeed where I was copy-pasting from, but at least on my end the column widths are very narrow. I'll keep playing with it.
There's no real need to have MA at every level -- just levels where you don't have spell slots. If you just preallocate MA in the way a rational player would almost certainly do anyway, you wind up with
Inv 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 - 2 2 2 2 3-4 2 3 5-6 2 4 2 M 7-8 2 4 3 M M 9-10 3 4 3 2 M M 11-12 3 4 3 3 M M M 13-14 4 4 3 3 1 M M M 15-16 4 4 3 3 2 M M M M 17-18 5 4 3 3 3 1 M M M M 19-20 5 4 3 3 3 2 M M M M
There is obvious room for rebalancing by adding additional invocations, or by making them available at level 3, the above is just automatically giving you the MA you would almost certainly take anyway.
Being available at 3 is definitely a primary goal for me, I think that would go a long way toward making this palatable for people (and it would still put them behind full casters, who are getting two 2nd-level slots at 3 instead of 1.)
I like the idea of simply making Mystic Arcanum a feature instead of an invocation choice, using that to stay on curve 1-20, and keeping the half-casting. How about this for an updated class table? (Sorry, not experienced with making tables on this site, so its copy-pasted from elsewhere.)
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.
The table indicates what level SPELL you can pick. It says nothing about what level you CAST that spell at. The table is simply a limiter of the list you can pick from.
"Choose one spell from the Arcane spell list that has a level for which you qualify, as shown on the Mystic Arcanum table. Look for your Warlock level on the table to see the maximum level that the spell can have. You can cast the chosen spell once without expending a Spell Slot."
It says nothing about casting the spell at its base level, it simply talks about what list of spells you can pick from and the table is the highest level spell you can pick from.
Solid case of "rules don't say I can't." They have clarified multiple times even with tasha's that any time you get a spell that you can cast without using a spell slot that spell is always cast at its base level.
They have a whole rules glossary where they are changing every little rule and even re-wording how two-weapon fighting/the light property works. If they intended to change how casting spells without a spell slot worked it would be in the rule glossary and it would have been a highlight. It isn't, and the rule hasn't changed.
The level of the spell is the level you cast. If you cast Fireball using a 5th level slot, it is a level 5 spell, even for counterspell it. If there is an exception, is indicated, like in Globe of Invulneravility.
Also, MA does not grant the spell, only gives you to replicate the effect at the level indicated at the table when acquired the invocation. Notice that you can't use your own slots to cast it. I.e. if you were multiclass with Wizard, you couldn't write into your spellbook, as is not one of your prepared spells.
Then we can see that is all indicated at the rules.
I think sometimes the problem is really how each one interpret the rules.
The core problem is that standard action spells are rarely worth using for a half caster, so you're going to wind up cherrypicking reactions and bonus actions.
Another option would be something like
Potent Spellcasting: when you cast a spell with a spell slot, it counts as if cast at 1 level higher (this does not allow casting a higher level spell). This increases to 2 levels at level 7, 3 at 11, 4 at 15.
That works a lot more like classic warlock, in that you're inclined to find the spells with strong level scaling; it's still not full caster potency, but your insect plague (gained at level 17) goes from 4d10 to 8d10, which is at least semi-competitive.
That would be horrible or rather absolutely a must have dip feature. A wizard could get the new hex and this for a 2 level dip. Unless this doesn’t come online until lvl 3 or later. Also it’s a little over powered late game. Your two 4th level spell slots cast like 8th level spell slots. That is nothing like the current warlock. Also none of your spell slots are lower than 5th level power which I believe was your design intent, but the problem is this is too strong because you have access to all this power all the time.
Sorry haven’t been able to read all the other responses, I’m at work, but would it be better if it applied only to MA spells, up to a certain level? Or “when you cast a spell using a warlock spell slot? To help keep multiclass issues?
A Youtuber put the changes to the Warlock into perspective for me this morning. WotC has asked all the right questions, but they came up with poor answers to most of them.
I stopped watching that video during the intro, when I saw a comment that mentioned how he missed the fact that Warlocks are still Spells Known casters even though the document uses the word "prepare."
Your table looks fine. Might have been a pain in the ass to make it, I have no idea how to d it. What is there is far better than what we have, especially if mystic arcanums are spell slots. I think there needs to be a better way to change spells outside of level up, but 5e lock had that problem as well.
Proviso(I still prefer pact magic, see previous posts etc)
Personally I'd add a 2nd cantrip column, one just for attack cantrips. Attack cantrips taken via those choices would act like eldritch blast, separate bolts, use EB invocations etc, but otherwise retain their cantrip characteristics. Id make hex a class feature and not a spell, bonus action cast duration one minute, no concentration with some invocations that change it into legitimate curse level effects. IF EB and Hex was more flexible, that at least would be a avenue for warlocks to carve out a more unique style.
I can see that but I was using spells like that at 7th level with repelling etc(3rd on my dao lock) and nothing felt over powered from it. Delaying until 13th just does not seem worth it. blight im even less hip on as while yeah having access to situational effects can come in handy, that is extremely situational, like probably once every other campaign situational I expect. I can't remember the last time a plant was a enemy in our games.
Ya, but there is definitely more movement effects now. And you can still do it at 7 with arcanum. Mostly the look at here was to see if they really did fall off or if they stayed relevant.
And my findings were, for the most part, they do remain relevant if they were a good spell all the way back at 5,7 or 9.
Which I am realizing shouldn't surprise me since old warlock topped out at 5th level before minus their Arcanums and no full caster ever gets many higher level slots so their 4th and 5th still need to be relevant.
If invocations get baked in I'd put it in the maybe category for me. Unfortunately there is a pretty narrow range of sustained spells that stay relevant at high levels. Sickening radiance is another, the wall spells, bigbys, animate object(I expect a nerf) and a couple others, but a lot of those don't mesh well with the various sub class options. But cone of cold like flame strike just does not look great at 17th level.(at least unlike flame strike it feels okay for 9th)
The core problem is that standard action spells are rarely worth using for a half caster, so you're going to wind up cherrypicking reactions and bonus actions.
Another option would be something like
That works a lot more like classic warlock, in that you're inclined to find the spells with strong level scaling; it's still not full caster potency, but your insect plague (gained at level 17) goes from 4d10 to 8d10, which is at least semi-competitive.
That might be an option as well if they want to keep Warlock at 1/2 caster progression - adding effective upcasts. It would go a long ways to restoring a unique identity to the class.
A Youtuber put the changes to the Warlock into perspective for me this morning. WotC has asked all the right questions, but they came up with poor answers to most of them.
Show me where in the post I responded to you mentioned fireball. You were comparing AoE spells to EB
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
That would be horrible or rather absolutely a must have dip feature. A wizard could get the new hex and this for a 2 level dip. Unless this doesn’t come online until lvl 3 or later. Also it’s a little over powered late game. Your two 4th level spell slots cast like 8th level spell slots. That is nothing like the current warlock. Also none of your spell slots are lower than 5th level power which I believe was your design intent, but the problem is this is too strong because you have access to all this power all the time.
It would come online at level 3. And no, it's not overpowered in late game, because most spells don't have very good level scaling; a 4th level spell cast with an 8th level slot just isn't an 8th level spell.
Yeah it is overpowered because that still gives the warlock the equivalent of 3 8th level slots at the 15th level because they also have their MA at that level. Banishment targets an additional 4 people, Confusion radius grows by 20ft, Conjure Minor Elemental grant 3 times the creatures, the Tasha’s Summon spells all scale very well, Summon Greater Demon would be a CR 9 creature, and all the damage spells add 4dX to the damage. It’s really strong. Too strong by comparison to other casters at the same level. It can be fixed by simply adding this increase can not raise the spells level above 5th. Then it is completely in line with 5e warlock.
Thanks, I'll keep digging for a formatting guide.
What I posted is not that far off from what we currently have. The only differences are:
- MA is a feature instead of an Invocation, so you have all 9 invocations free to use on whatever now.
- You're still half-casting but get MA slots on curve, so 2nd-level spells at 3, 3rd-level spells at 5 etc. all the way up to 9th-level spells at 17 with those slots.
They would likely need to reduce the invocation count if they go this route, particularly the level 11 one since that level is so crowded now (you get an invocation, Contact Patron, AND 6th-level MA at that level.) But I think just the optics of the table going up to 9th level would help the marketing of this, even if you're only getting one slot per spell level from 6+.
Not having to blow 7 invocations on mystic arcanums is pretty big most suggestions going this route then knock invocations down to like 4 or 5 which I don't get the point of. This is mechanically better by a long shot. I still don't like it and want a fix for pact magic, but I can recognize this is better mechanically than what 1e gave us.
I rather like this.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
It's just html with some limits on what you can do. The easiest way of doing it is to either use preformmated text, or use something that can output as html (like google docs) and just paste a table from there into here. You can also open up the source code and directly paste html.
There's no real need to have MA at every level -- just levels where you don't have spell slots. If you just preallocate MA in the way a rational player would almost certainly do anyway, you wind up with
There is obvious room for rebalancing by adding additional invocations, or by making them available at level 3, the above is just automatically giving you the MA you would almost certainly take anyway.
I do like the idea of spells getting upcast at higher lock levels when using a standard spell slot. Probably not as much as was suggested, but one level after 10, and maybe another after 15 might be a good use in conjunction with the limited invocations. I think this might be a welcome compromise for having invocations shared with mystic arcanum.
I feel even getting a single level upcast is a pretty wonderful supplement to a half caster.
"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."
Docs is indeed where I was copy-pasting from, but at least on my end the column widths are very narrow. I'll keep playing with it.
Being available at 3 is definitely a primary goal for me, I think that would go a long way toward making this palatable for people (and it would still put them behind full casters, who are getting two 2nd-level slots at 3 instead of 1.)
You could just do the table in Homebrewery, screencap it, and then post the image.
The level of the spell is the level you cast. If you cast Fireball using a 5th level slot, it is a level 5 spell, even for counterspell it. If there is an exception, is indicated, like in Globe of Invulneravility.
Also, MA does not grant the spell, only gives you to replicate the effect at the level indicated at the table when acquired the invocation. Notice that you can't use your own slots to cast it. I.e. if you were multiclass with Wizard, you couldn't write into your spellbook, as is not one of your prepared spells.
Then we can see that is all indicated at the rules.
I think sometimes the problem is really how each one interpret the rules.
Sorry haven’t been able to read all the other responses, I’m at work, but would it be better if it applied only to MA spells, up to a certain level? Or “when you cast a spell using a warlock spell slot? To help keep multiclass issues?
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I stopped watching that video during the intro, when I saw a comment that mentioned how he missed the fact that Warlocks are still Spells Known casters even though the document uses the word "prepare."