And this, ladies and gentlemen is why the old pact magic was toxic for the game. You cant "balance it" because one camp will say "ya this is the intended thing, why else have the duration be x and the rules explicitly allow this." And the other camp going " that is OP munchkin power gaming". Ending these fights is important.
Oh my gosh, nerds disagreeing about rules minutiae on the internet! How completely unprecedented! Obviously the solution is to just take their toy away.
... Or, you know, we could actually have a reasonable discussion of the pros and cons and not appropriate a completely different debate as an excuse to justify the outcome you want.
Except there isnt a middle ground for this. These fights are literally happening at tables everyday reducing the fun for both players AND GM's. This is a barrier of entry for new players and GM's. I have had GM'S consider banning short rests or banning warlocks all together because of stuff like this.
It isn't about arguments online it is about draining the fun of the game. If you have never had this debate at the table you are lucky.
It isn't fun to constantly have the gimmick of your character curtailed and to just fight with other players or the GM every time you want to do bare bones things.
Edit: I mean look how this argument has devolved. There isnt a nuanced discussion going on. One side is saying "if you do that you are a garbage dm" while the other says " if you try that you are a garbage player". There isn't any nuance or real debate here.
Pulling the legs off bugs and cooking squirrels ...sounds like a few boxes ticked for some old very involved Japanese curse. Sounds like a ritual. Imagine Hex was a (2-10 minute?) ritual to create a doll that required concentration to hold prepared. Release the hex as a bonus action, poking an iron nail into the doll. Drop concentration as the target is afflicted. If target dies, choose whether to renew concentration to maintain the doll or allow the curse to dissipate.
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!
And this, ladies and gentlemen is why the old pact magic was toxic for the game. You cant "balance it" because one camp will say "ya this is the intended thing, why else have the duration be x and the rules explicitly allow this." And the other camp going " that is OP munchkin power gaming". Ending these fights is important.
But as a key part of the class Hex should be viable as an upcast. It is currently fine as a first level spell, concentration and all because the slot is so cheap. But for it to be worth the slot at 3rd and higher with current lock it needs to not cost concentration.
Nah, all they need is like one paragraph explaining how these things are supposed to work.
Like the one in the DMG about the adventuring day that most people ignore and don't match so that players and GM'S can ignore that paragraph too thus not solving the issue.
Wizards is trying to change the game to match how people are playing it not to force people into playing it the way they think it should be played.
Your proposal is antithesis to the stated goals of the play test and this update.
The issue is not maintain concentration on short rest, is the short rest itself. That is going to be solved removing the short rest magic, also you can fix it for 5E limiting the number of short rests.
I didn't say "spells", I said "debuff spells". The point of a debuff spell is you apply the effect to a specified target, or in a specified AoE. I'm not saying they could not write a spell that does what you want, I'm saying it is clearly a deliberate design choice that debuffs do not readily migrate. Besides, if you're out of combat then either you'll have a chance to take a short rest soon and using the slot doesn't really matter, or you're in the lead up to combat and resource management is a consideration, thus using a debuff in an attempt to bypass an obstacle should cost something. Also, Hex's other function is mostly a ribbon, same as Hunter's Mark.
The effects of Detect thoughts are basically a debuff since you can attempt things like figuring out a creature's next planned actions, but another spell that is definitely inflicting debuffs that works like this is eyebite. The thing is most debuff spells don't have a way to transfer them at all, like most spells do not, they usually either effect a given target or area, a lot of area ones do have some ability to move but that is usually limited. So you can't talk about how other debuff spells would handle it when the only other one of note is Hunter's Mark, which in a lot of ways is near identical to Hex.
The argument could be made with illusionary spells, that they have a negative effect and a lot "effect" creatures actively looking at them, but those are illusion to begin with, overall, no other classes but Warlock and Ranger have core spells like Hex and Hunter's Mark to begin with, spells that without, the class wouldn't even function. So they do need care in how these spells are handled and implemented. The design of Hunter's Mark and Hex is definitely not up to par for something intended to be an integral part of the class design.
You basic argument is someone wakes up, hits the gym
No, that's not the argument at all. Please
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)
Pulling the legs off bugs and cooking squirrels ...sounds like a few boxes ticked for some old very involved Japanese curse. Sounds like a ritual. Imagine Hex was a (2-10 minute?) ritual to create a doll that required concentration to hold prepared. Release the hex as a bonus action, poking an iron nail into the doll. Drop concentration as the target is afflicted. If target dies, choose whether to renew concentration to maintain the doll or allow the curse to dissipate.
If it were a ritual, nobody would be trying to cheese their way into getting the spell slot back, so sure
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)
Of course there is. The middle ground is for like-minded DMs and players to play together, not for one to force their preferred play style down the other's throat
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 argument could be made with illusionary spells, that they have a negative effect and a lot "effect" creatures actively looking at them, but those are illusion to begin with, overall, no other classes but Warlock and Ranger have core spells like Hex and Hunter's Mark to begin with, spells that without, the class wouldn't even function. So they do need care in how these spells are handled and implemented. The design of Hunter's Mark and Hex is definitely not up to par for something intended to be an integral part of the class design.
Except that isn't at all true? You can have a ranger that functions perfectly fine from level 5+ without using Hunter's Mark - I've seen them played! Same goes for Warlock and Hex, I've seen at least a half dozen blade-locks that never use Hex. Hunter's Mark and Hex have NEVER been the most powerful options for these classes, they are just the easy options that don't require any thinking or strategy. So if you're playing a Warlock or a Ranger and aren't sure what to do in combat using Hex+ EB or Hunter's Mark + longbow is a perfectly fine acceptable option. Optimal? - no, Effective? - yes. They are your standard reliable choices like Spiritual Weapon for clerics, Magic Missile for wizards, or Vicious Mockery for bards.
Of course there is. The middle ground is for like-minded DMs and players to play together, not for one to force their preferred play style down the other's throat
"I don't see why fixing the Warlock is so hard. All you have to do is fix human nature!" ;)
You cant "balance it" because one camp will say "ya this is the intended thing, why else have the duration be x and the rules explicitly allow this." And the other camp going " that is OP munchkin power gaming". Ending these fights is important.
Nah, all they need is like one paragraph explaining how these things are supposed to work.
Wizards is trying to change the game to match how people are playing it not to force people into playing it the way they think it should be played.
Different names for the same thing. But here's the problem:
The way people are playing the game now, everybody has too many spell slots. These resources are designed to be influential enough that it's okay that you only have X of them during a long adventuring day -- but people aren't doing long adventuring days. They're taking those X resources which were meant to last, say, 6 encounters, and using them all in just one or two encounters on a regular basis. The way people are playing the game now, casters are overpowered as hell. It's not enough to have the biggest toolbox, access to unique effects that can't be accomplished without spells, enormous freedom of expression through your choices, and the ability to convince your DM that this should actually entitle you to MORE mechanical wiggle room (say, casting Acid Splash on an object to destroy it, because hey, it's acid! Nevermind the targeting restrictions!) rather than LESS... Casters also need to be able to pop their highest level stuff in just about every encounter without limits.
In order to maintain casters being overpowered as hell, the designers have to decide: is Warlock a caster, or is it some other thing? If it's a caster, then quite simply, it needs to be broken.
Recharging 2 max level slots, say, 7 times a day could be one route to breaking the Warlock, sure. It's true that there's a limit to the number of short rests that people would consider reasonable, and that applied to the designers of Pact Magic too: I don't think they ever intended you to get more than 4 in a day. Let's say 7 because it's a lot. We're trying to break this, remember. They could just make it explicit in the class that this is the number of times you can recharge those slots, and instead of a rest it requires an action of some kind. Make it a tracked resource, like 7 Channel Divinity's that can only be used to recharge both your spell slots. It would be similar to just giving you 14 slots, but the difference would be that you can't cast more than 2 spells in a row without doing whatever you need to do to recharge. Or, another way would just be to give warlocks 14 max level spell slots. Why not?
But if Warlock isn't meant to be a caster -- if the "no short rests" tables are the ones having the intended experience -- then we start having to talk about balance. In this case the Warlock really shouldn't be allowed to exceed, say, the Rogue. It should be designed to have a lower power level in any particular encounter, paid for by the fact that it retains that same power level without losing steam even after the 20th encounter in a day, which nobody actually ever reaches because as I mentioned before, they're only doing one or two. In other words, it should be weak.
But that is not an issue about spell slots, but of how little care have GM about resting. Now seems they are taking more care in rules as now any initiative roll resets your long rest, so probably you would have to use your spell slots for the full dungeon, instead long resting at any corner. But these are only rules, if GMs continue to acting like “you want to long rest? OK you did it 2 hours ago, then we make just pass 22 hours and go on”, well each table play as want, but for that many times cannot blame the rules themselves for how do you use them.
So agree that spell slots must be a more long term resource, and with the new long rest rules and being consequent with resting at gameplay they are. But for that same reason, cantrips should also be improved, as they are the only attack that does not add ability score to damage, a quantity much needed for the average as fix damage, as cantrips are what are you going to use normally in a round-basis out of important fights. Even in that case, multi-attack is better as adds ability score to damage multiple times, while cantrips can only be cast once per turn.
And this, ladies and gentlemen is why the old pact magic was toxic for the game. You cant "balance it" because one camp will say "ya this is the intended thing, why else have the duration be x and the rules explicitly allow this." And the other camp going " that is OP munchkin power gaming". Ending these fights is important.
But as a key part of the class Hex should be viable as an upcast. It is currently fine as a first level spell, concentration and all because the slot is so cheap. But for it to be worth the slot at 3rd and higher with current lock it needs to not cost concentration.
Nah, all they need is like one paragraph explaining how these things are supposed to work.
Like the one in the DMG about the adventuring day that most people ignore and don't match so that players and GM'S can ignore that paragraph too thus not solving the issue.
Wizards is trying to change the game to match how people are playing it not to force people into playing it the way they think it should be played.
Your proposal is antithesis to the stated goals of the play test and this update.
That is because they put it in the DMG, when it should be in the PH and be around the abilities that use them. If they were trying to change the game to match how people are playing they would be changing everyone over to short rest or encounter based powers instead of letting god wizards unload everything every single fight. And their stated goals are freaking stupid and they should be taking another look at them.
Of course there is. The middle ground is for like-minded DMs and players to play together, not for one to force their preferred play style down the other's throat
And the warlock will be broken at one of those tables because the power level will vary wildly from one to the next. And the arguments will simply continue and nothing will be solved. You might as well not change anything. Not the purpose of the 2024 PHB or DMG or MM. The purpose is to make it easier for people to get in and make it easier for developers to create new things for the game as everything has an expected way it will work at the table, without wide variance.
You basic argument is someone wakes up, hits the gym
No, that's not the argument at all. Please
It is your exact argument, you just want to see it as cheese.
The D&D equivalent of going to the gym is called "combat"
If you have combat immediately after a long rest, then by all means, take a short rest. If you just cast hex on a bird before the ranger shoots it down for breakfast, lol no
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)
You basic argument is someone wakes up, hits the gym
No, that's not the argument at all. Please
It is your exact argument, you just want to see it as cheese.
The D&D equivalent of going to the gym is called "combat"
If you have combat immediately after a long rest, then by all means, take a short rest. If you just cast hex on a bird before the ranger shoots it down for breakfast, lol no
Nope any activity that expends energy is going to the gym, and in this case they did. They used half of their magical energy.
You basic argument is someone wakes up, hits the gym
No, that's not the argument at all. Please
It is your exact argument, you just want to see it as cheese.
The D&D equivalent of going to the gym is called "combat"
If you have combat immediately after a long rest, then by all means, take a short rest. If you just cast hex on a bird before the ranger shoots it down for breakfast, lol no
You can do as you like at your table, but it is not RAW. There is no indication that it is RAI. Your ruling is purposefully weakening an already weak tactic among full warlock builds.
The conversation is about how the rules are written and how those rules are going to be changed, not your house rules or interpretation of intent.
You basic argument is someone wakes up, hits the gym
No, that's not the argument at all. Please
It is your exact argument, you just want to see it as cheese.
The D&D equivalent of going to the gym is called "combat"
If you have combat immediately after a long rest, then by all means, take a short rest. If you just cast hex on a bird before the ranger shoots it down for breakfast, lol no
You can do as you like at your table, but it is not RAW. There is no indication that it is RAI. Your ruling is purposefully weakening an already weak tactic among full warlock builds.
The conversation is about how the rules are written and how those rules are going to be changed, not your house rules or interpretation of intent.
The first time we saw this was our first 5e campaign, not on a warlock but on a monk. We were doing the published adventure out of the abyss, the human playing a monk took way of shadow as their subclass so they could get darkvision like the rest of the party. Wakes up, uses it but is like damn now I only have 1 ki point, someone says you just need short rest to get it back and he is like can I take one now, the party says sure we would rather have you at 3 ki points than 1. Boom done.
I think there is some divide where people are unwilling to see magic as an activity or a resource being used. If the party starts a climb right after a long rest, and to avoid a fall the fighter uses an action surge to save the day. Now at the top of the rise they will be like hey I pulled a hammy saving frank, can we take 10 while i walk it off. It has only been 3 minutes since they finished the long rest, but they used resources and feel like they could use a rest. I don't see why casting a spell or two is seen as different to some but it is apparently.
All short rests are is a method to regain resources. Hit Points for some, action surges, ki points, pact magic. All can be seen as some kind of personal energy, it got used up and needs a short time off to get it back. Not sleep, but a break. If a person uses their energy and is worn out and a break will get them back into fighting form, assuming they have the time to do it why wouldn't they take a break. It isn't cheese, its just logical. And that is the entire intent behind short rest mechanics. They have an ability they want to limit the number of uses at a single time, but they want a quick and easy way to get it back so it is available again quickly.
Nope any activity that expends energy is going to the gym
This is getting kind of sad. Every activity expends some energy, my dude. That doesn't make every activity the equivalent of a workout
There's nothing in the game that suggests using a single 1st-level spell slot is draining enough to require a rest afterward. Heck, the entire existence of ritual spells suggests effort/energy expended and spell slots have no correlation at all
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)
Nope any activity that expends energy is going to the gym
This is getting kind of sad. Every activity expends some energy, my dude. That doesn't make every activity the equivalent of a workout
There's nothing in the game that suggests using a single 1st-level spell slot is draining enough to require a rest afterward. Heck, the entire existence of ritual spells suggests effort/energy expended and spell slots have no correlation at all
But it isn't a first level slot. It is a pact slot, which specifically recovers on a short rest. Also please note the things that break a rest. Those are examples of things that expend energy which you can rest to recover after doing.
Again, your table, do what you want, but your interpretation is not RAW. No indication it is RAI. This thread is about previous rules and new rules, not house rules.
Except there isnt a middle ground for this. These fights are literally happening at tables everyday reducing the fun for both players AND GM's. This is a barrier of entry for new players and GM's. I have had GM'S consider banning short rests or banning warlocks all together because of stuff like this.
It isn't about arguments online it is about draining the fun of the game. If you have never had this debate at the table you are lucky.
It isn't fun to constantly have the gimmick of your character curtailed and to just fight with other players or the GM every time you want to do bare bones things.
Edit: I mean look how this argument has devolved. There isnt a nuanced discussion going on. One side is saying "if you do that you are a garbage dm" while the other says " if you try that you are a garbage player". There isn't any nuance or real debate here.
Pulling the legs off bugs and cooking squirrels ...sounds like a few boxes ticked for some old very involved Japanese curse. Sounds like a ritual. Imagine Hex was a (2-10 minute?) ritual to create a doll that required concentration to hold prepared. Release the hex as a bonus action, poking an iron nail into the doll. Drop concentration as the target is afflicted. If target dies, choose whether to renew concentration to maintain the doll or allow the curse to dissipate.
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!
Like the one in the DMG about the adventuring day that most people ignore and don't match so that players and GM'S can ignore that paragraph too thus not solving the issue.
Wizards is trying to change the game to match how people are playing it not to force people into playing it the way they think it should be played.
Your proposal is antithesis to the stated goals of the play test and this update.
The issue is not maintain concentration on short rest, is the short rest itself. That is going to be solved removing the short rest magic, also you can fix it for 5E limiting the number of short rests.
The effects of Detect thoughts are basically a debuff since you can attempt things like figuring out a creature's next planned actions, but another spell that is definitely inflicting debuffs that works like this is eyebite. The thing is most debuff spells don't have a way to transfer them at all, like most spells do not, they usually either effect a given target or area, a lot of area ones do have some ability to move but that is usually limited. So you can't talk about how other debuff spells would handle it when the only other one of note is Hunter's Mark, which in a lot of ways is near identical to Hex.
The argument could be made with illusionary spells, that they have a negative effect and a lot "effect" creatures actively looking at them, but those are illusion to begin with, overall, no other classes but Warlock and Ranger have core spells like Hex and Hunter's Mark to begin with, spells that without, the class wouldn't even function. So they do need care in how these spells are handled and implemented. The design of Hunter's Mark and Hex is definitely not up to par for something intended to be an integral part of the class design.
No, that's not the argument at all. Please
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)
If it were a ritual, nobody would be trying to cheese their way into getting the spell slot back, so sure
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)
Of course there is. The middle ground is for like-minded DMs and players to play together, not for one to force their preferred play style down the other's throat
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)
Except that isn't at all true? You can have a ranger that functions perfectly fine from level 5+ without using Hunter's Mark - I've seen them played! Same goes for Warlock and Hex, I've seen at least a half dozen blade-locks that never use Hex. Hunter's Mark and Hex have NEVER been the most powerful options for these classes, they are just the easy options that don't require any thinking or strategy. So if you're playing a Warlock or a Ranger and aren't sure what to do in combat using Hex+ EB or Hunter's Mark + longbow is a perfectly fine acceptable option. Optimal? - no, Effective? - yes. They are your standard reliable choices like Spiritual Weapon for clerics, Magic Missile for wizards, or Vicious Mockery for bards.
"I don't see why fixing the Warlock is so hard. All you have to do is fix human nature!" ;)
Different names for the same thing. But here's the problem:
The way people are playing the game now, everybody has too many spell slots. These resources are designed to be influential enough that it's okay that you only have X of them during a long adventuring day -- but people aren't doing long adventuring days. They're taking those X resources which were meant to last, say, 6 encounters, and using them all in just one or two encounters on a regular basis. The way people are playing the game now, casters are overpowered as hell. It's not enough to have the biggest toolbox, access to unique effects that can't be accomplished without spells, enormous freedom of expression through your choices, and the ability to convince your DM that this should actually entitle you to MORE mechanical wiggle room (say, casting Acid Splash on an object to destroy it, because hey, it's acid! Nevermind the targeting restrictions!) rather than LESS... Casters also need to be able to pop their highest level stuff in just about every encounter without limits.
In order to maintain casters being overpowered as hell, the designers have to decide: is Warlock a caster, or is it some other thing? If it's a caster, then quite simply, it needs to be broken.
Recharging 2 max level slots, say, 7 times a day could be one route to breaking the Warlock, sure. It's true that there's a limit to the number of short rests that people would consider reasonable, and that applied to the designers of Pact Magic too: I don't think they ever intended you to get more than 4 in a day. Let's say 7 because it's a lot. We're trying to break this, remember. They could just make it explicit in the class that this is the number of times you can recharge those slots, and instead of a rest it requires an action of some kind. Make it a tracked resource, like 7 Channel Divinity's that can only be used to recharge both your spell slots. It would be similar to just giving you 14 slots, but the difference would be that you can't cast more than 2 spells in a row without doing whatever you need to do to recharge. Or, another way would just be to give warlocks 14 max level spell slots. Why not?
But if Warlock isn't meant to be a caster -- if the "no short rests" tables are the ones having the intended experience -- then we start having to talk about balance. In this case the Warlock really shouldn't be allowed to exceed, say, the Rogue. It should be designed to have a lower power level in any particular encounter, paid for by the fact that it retains that same power level without losing steam even after the 20th encounter in a day, which nobody actually ever reaches because as I mentioned before, they're only doing one or two. In other words, it should be weak.
Which direction will they choose? Idk.
But that is not an issue about spell slots, but of how little care have GM about resting. Now seems they are taking more care in rules as now any initiative roll resets your long rest, so probably you would have to use your spell slots for the full dungeon, instead long resting at any corner. But these are only rules, if GMs continue to acting like “you want to long rest? OK you did it 2 hours ago, then we make just pass 22 hours and go on”, well each table play as want, but for that many times cannot blame the rules themselves for how do you use them.
So agree that spell slots must be a more long term resource, and with the new long rest rules and being consequent with resting at gameplay they are. But for that same reason, cantrips should also be improved, as they are the only attack that does not add ability score to damage, a quantity much needed for the average as fix damage, as cantrips are what are you going to use normally in a round-basis out of important fights. Even in that case, multi-attack is better as adds ability score to damage multiple times, while cantrips can only be cast once per turn.
That is because they put it in the DMG, when it should be in the PH and be around the abilities that use them. If they were trying to change the game to match how people are playing they would be changing everyone over to short rest or encounter based powers instead of letting god wizards unload everything every single fight. And their stated goals are freaking stupid and they should be taking another look at them.
It is your exact argument, you just want to see it as cheese.
And the warlock will be broken at one of those tables because the power level will vary wildly from one to the next. And the arguments will simply continue and nothing will be solved. You might as well not change anything. Not the purpose of the 2024 PHB or DMG or MM. The purpose is to make it easier for people to get in and make it easier for developers to create new things for the game as everything has an expected way it will work at the table, without wide variance.
The D&D equivalent of going to the gym is called "combat"
If you have combat immediately after a long rest, then by all means, take a short rest. If you just cast hex on a bird before the ranger shoots it down for breakfast, lol no
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)
Nope any activity that expends energy is going to the gym, and in this case they did. They used half of their magical energy.
You can do as you like at your table, but it is not RAW. There is no indication that it is RAI. Your ruling is purposefully weakening an already weak tactic among full warlock builds.
The conversation is about how the rules are written and how those rules are going to be changed, not your house rules or interpretation of intent.
The first time we saw this was our first 5e campaign, not on a warlock but on a monk. We were doing the published adventure out of the abyss, the human playing a monk took way of shadow as their subclass so they could get darkvision like the rest of the party. Wakes up, uses it but is like damn now I only have 1 ki point, someone says you just need short rest to get it back and he is like can I take one now, the party says sure we would rather have you at 3 ki points than 1. Boom done.
I think there is some divide where people are unwilling to see magic as an activity or a resource being used. If the party starts a climb right after a long rest, and to avoid a fall the fighter uses an action surge to save the day. Now at the top of the rise they will be like hey I pulled a hammy saving frank, can we take 10 while i walk it off. It has only been 3 minutes since they finished the long rest, but they used resources and feel like they could use a rest. I don't see why casting a spell or two is seen as different to some but it is apparently.
All short rests are is a method to regain resources. Hit Points for some, action surges, ki points, pact magic. All can be seen as some kind of personal energy, it got used up and needs a short time off to get it back. Not sleep, but a break. If a person uses their energy and is worn out and a break will get them back into fighting form, assuming they have the time to do it why wouldn't they take a break. It isn't cheese, its just logical. And that is the entire intent behind short rest mechanics. They have an ability they want to limit the number of uses at a single time, but they want a quick and easy way to get it back so it is available again quickly.
This is getting kind of sad. Every activity expends some energy, my dude. That doesn't make every activity the equivalent of a workout
There's nothing in the game that suggests using a single 1st-level spell slot is draining enough to require a rest afterward. Heck, the entire existence of ritual spells suggests effort/energy expended and spell slots have no correlation at all
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)
But it isn't a first level slot. It is a pact slot, which specifically recovers on a short rest. Also please note the things that break a rest. Those are examples of things that expend energy which you can rest to recover after doing.
Again, your table, do what you want, but your interpretation is not RAW. No indication it is RAI. This thread is about previous rules and new rules, not house rules.