Warlocks as half casters doesn't work. Because what is the other "half". Paladins and Rangers are marital classes (Priests and Experts now) but Warlocks are Mage class. So what is the other half? They can be gishy with Blade Pact (although it honestly invites more 1 level dipping from Rangers/Monks/Clerics to be SAD). But other spell-casters will have subclasses to retain that probably. And making Mystic Arcanum burn an Eldritch Invocation just ups the Invocation Tax. Now I only get lvl 5 spells at level 17 and I have to reduce my other customization to do it. And I still don't know what the other "half" of my class is. So here are some proposed fixes"
1. Make Warlocks "2/3" casters just like Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters are "1/3" casters. Have the spell progression somewhere in between half and full casters. Have it top out at level 7 spells. Make it so you take 2/3 Warlock level rounded down when you figure out multiclass spellcasting.
2. Make Warlocks half casters that as the level up they get more and more higher level spell slots but their lower levels reduce. For instance when levelling from 10->11 instead of going from 4-1st, 2-2nd, 2-3rd to 4-1st, 2-2nd, 3-3rd make it transition to 2-1st, 3-2nd, 3-3rd. Fewer number of spell slots, just progressively higher levels. In the end they automatically upcast most spells since they have so few low level spells but more higher level spells than other casters. The trick would be to figure out how to incorporate multiclassing.
3. Increase the number of pact slots gained/progression. Make it match PB for instance (not equal to it since that would be OP for multiclassing). So 5 slots at 13 and 6 at 17.
4. Leave Arcanum alone. They were big spell grenades you lobbed once a day. Making them part of the Invocation tax reduces their likelihood of being picked.
5. Allow some recovery of slots in between rests. "Patrons Favor - As an action restore up to half/PB (rounded down) Pact Magic slots. This resets on a short rest." Or "As an action restore a Pact Magic slot. You can do this up to PB times per long rest."
6. Maybe make #3 or #5 a Pact of the Tome Higher level ability. Or an improved version of #3 or #5 (Book of Shadows should allow you transcribe other rituals (not just 2 level 1 spells) at level 5 instead of adding AS modifier to cantrips. Book of Ancient Secrets was an amazing Invocation to suck up all the rituals). Make the Pacts feel more different. Tomelocks can be more castery
7. Have your Pact Familiar "carry" a pact slot for you. So you get X slots and your familiar has 1 (spell is cast from its position) so you get X+1 slots per rest. Or make the Familiar's spot a once per day thing. Or you Familiar at level 5 gains the an Action Ability to restore one of your slots. Or casting through your familiar increases the level of the spell cast so a 4th level becomes a 5th once per short rest or PB per day.
8. Increase the number of Eldritch Invocations that give free spell casting. Most of the old Invocations that gave a spell but cost a spell slot to cast were garbage. Some low level at will spells or some low level utility spells once long rest/once per short rest/PB times per day. Like make Unseen Servant once per short rest with out a spell slot. Link it to Pact of the Chain. Link other spells to Pact of the Tome.
9. Restore a Pact Slot on a Crit with the Pact Weapon or a spell attack roll. Or if the creature rolls a 1 on a DC save against your spell.
10. Restore a Pact Slot when you land the killing blow.
11. If you have no pacts slots available restore 1 when rolling initiative (make it a level 11ish ability).
I have mixed feelings about the changes, I haven't tested the new material yet, but the biggest thing that stands out to me is getting the pact boon at level one but not forging a pact until level three. Firstly, it just doesn't make sense thematically, I can't see any eldritch entity handing over power like this without having some sort of deal in place, and mechanically it doesn't make sense either since the abilities granted are much more in line with third level abilities from other classes and this will make one level dips into warlock much more powerful and enticing rather than less...
...
first taste is free. but, is it? just because the book might not say you're making increasingly binding promises, your DM might. you might be supplying the blood drop by drop that is revealed to be the ink of your contract on the sign-up date. try "yes, and..." with this particular new rule and see what happens.
hopefully some later splat book comes around to spoon feed everyone some suggestions for how this might make sense so i can stop seeing this argument (no offense to you specifically).
The lore in the UA treats first and second level as the Warlock experimenting/researching to make contact with a patron, with the class features as skills obtained as the results of those researches and experiments.
A slight increase in the Pact slots gained in progression and the number of invocations that give free casting are the simplest and least intrusive way to "fix" the class.
The more I look at this new version, the more I hate it.
Warlocks as Half-casters works fine. Warlock + Hex + EB == Ranger + longbow + Hunter's Mark, and Warlock + Pact of the Blade == Ranger + rapier. If they bring back the Eldritch Smite Invocation then Warlock + Pact of the Blade would be almost identical to a Paladin.
Warlocks always have played like a half-caster, now they are just making that design explicit.
I will say it's strange to have to spend build budget on the ability to use a melee weapon. Usually the assumption is that ranged is better, and more costly.
This isn't new to the Warlock, of course, but I would've thought it would be changed.
Thirded. I've played and DMed with time pressure as a very real thing. But all the time, every time? No.
Any series of encounters that involve intelligent enemies has some kind of pressure. You can not Assault the evil barons castle clear the gatehouse and 2 other rooms, and then expect you can just go take a rest in that place. If you retreat to rest outside the castle you should assume any progress you made has been lost and the whole castle is on nigh alert now.
In the campaigns I played this comes down to that if you have a situation safe enough to take a short rest you might as well take long rest. I only tend to see short rests happening if your ability to long rest has not reset.
So your group is on a journey through the woods, bandits attack at 10 AM, you deal with them and take a long rest at 10:05 AM. It doesn't feel like its the rules that are the issue with that one. And don't get me wrong I do think pact magic could be improved in this regard and I think short rests should probably be 5-10 minutes.
But some of these arguments seem very weird to me.
Edit to add for your first point, sure but not every session is raiding the castle.
well they could not take a long rest at 10:05 as you can only take one in 24 hour period and this means it usually makes sense to combine a long rest with sleep.
But being attacked by bandits is a good indication that the forest is not a place you want to take any kind of rest. So our likely action would be to push on until we can get to some place that is less dangerous. Then depending on recourses spent and the time of day we would decide on taking a long or short rest.
During the DnD next playtest I was also one of the people who thought going from the 5 minute short rest of DnD 4e to a 1 hour short rest was bad idea.
A slight increase in the Pact slots gained in progression and the number of invocations that give free casting are the simplest and least intrusive way to "fix" the class.
The more I look at this new version, the more I hate it.
if they go forward with doing that to Eldritch Blast, I'm going to maliciously refuse to follow it. That's just a shitty thing to do to nerf a cantrip. This is also a terrible nerf to hex. Not only does its damage capacity get limited to once per turn, but you have to spend higher spell slot resources to get a higher roll once per turn out of it, and thats an absurd ask. Part of the benefit of the spell is that its a low budget buff to EACH attack roll you make against a target, and as mentioned, this is just a change to turn it into the Ranger feature you have to spend concentration on AND bigger slots that should go to bigger spells. The two of these sound like changes from people who bare spite about warlocks and their most iconic tool specifically.
Warlock casting: i like the idea of your casting ability being dependent on early choices in the build. I think it could go a long way of making the class feel more varied, especially if you engage in multiclassing.
Warlock slots: if i am reading this right you aren't getting stuck with the pact slot system and actually gain slots like every other casting class (i might be wrong)
I still will not abide the nerfs to EB and Hex. It feels like you're subtracting something from one class to make the others seem better, and I find that to be unfair.
Draconic resilience could be a welcome change in my opinion. Part of the reason i like mixing monk and wisdom classes so much is because i like the idea of a casting class being able to increase their AC according to the improvement of their core stats rather than relying on the availability and proficiency of armor. Wheras otherwise they have to choose "do i wanna be better at my job or better at not dying". Not a fan of it being kept at 3rd level tho.
All in all, i agree that this does great things to GIVE Fighter and Wizard more tools to compare favorably to the other classes. But i don't believe its worth nerfing my favorite cantrip in the game. I know that sounds like a powerplayer complaint, but the appeal of cantrips is that they're supposed to improve with the character level, not the specific class level. Thats part of the reason mage stone is such a spectacular disappointment. You have to rely on getting extra attack and attack roll buffs from your class to make it worthwhile in later levels. I also feel apprehensive about certain features being delayed to 3rd level, making it harder to benefit from multiclassing, which i firmly believe is essential for experienced players to get enjoyment out of the game, and i can't help but feel this UA is somewhat biased against it.
I have mixed feelings about the changes, I haven't tested the new material yet, but the biggest thing that stands out to me is getting the pact boon at level one but not forging a pact until level three. Firstly, it just doesn't make sense thematically, I can't see any eldritch entity handing over power like this without having some sort of deal in place, and mechanically it doesn't make sense either since the abilities granted are much more in line with third level abilities from other classes and this will make one level dips into warlock much more powerful and enticing rather than less...
...
first taste is free. but, is it? just because the book might not say you're making increasingly binding promises, your DM might. you might be supplying the blood drop by drop that is revealed to be the ink of your contract on the sign-up date. try "yes, and..." with this particular new rule and see what happens.
hopefully some later splat book comes around to spoon feed everyone some suggestions for how this might make sense so i can stop seeing this argument (no offense to you specifically).
The lore in the UA treats first and second level as the Warlock experimenting/researching to make contact with a patron, with the class features as skills obtained as the results of those researches and experiments.
right, the lore suggests a template: the old stumble upon a shortcut to power (1) and finding oneself drawn to richer sources (2) leading to the offer of more (3). is that bad? honestly the making of many smaller deals and connections is nothing i'd considered before and sounds awesome. they fail to explore other origins such as being tempted, tricked, or yanked from the jaws of death to be offered service, but i also don't see where this provisional lore cuts any of those out. is a wizard tied to "services as diviners, serve in military forces, or pursue lives of crime" with no deviation? i don't believe they insist on warlocks being greedy nerds any more than barbarians are lawfully bidden to "charge headlong into danger" every time without regard for context.
anyway, the character likely has the option to refuse and just not take any more warlock levels. not every pact is inevitable. that's what a dip is, right? a choice to pause or discontinue one branch to focus on depth in another. in the case of just a dip for power (as with cleric in comment #134), maybe there's conflict with their main class (the bishop strongly disapproves, ancestors making it too hard for the barbarian scholar to concentrate, bard recognizes the beginnings of a fairy tail grim bargain, etc.) explaining why they quit digging before a patron is even revealed. and even then, narrative can bring that patron back even without the warlock levels still going up. it's a story.
i'm just saying: since the individual controls the lore it seems odd to keep hearing that the lore is tied to the wrong level. it's not. if the gripe is about the subclass power bump, then everyone can say that part out loud and quit bemoaning that patrons don't boink on the first date anymore.
I have mixed feelings about the changes, I haven't tested the new material yet, but the biggest thing that stands out to me is getting the pact boon at level one but not forging a pact until level three. Firstly, it just doesn't make sense thematically, I can't see any eldritch entity handing over power like this without having some sort of deal in place, and mechanically it doesn't make sense either since the abilities granted are much more in line with third level abilities from other classes and this will make one level dips into warlock much more powerful and enticing rather than less...
...
first taste is free. but, is it? just because the book might not say you're making increasingly binding promises, your DM might. you might be supplying the blood drop by drop that is revealed to be the ink of your contract on the sign-up date. try "yes, and..." with this particular new rule and see what happens.
hopefully some later splat book comes around to spoon feed everyone some suggestions for how this might make sense so i can stop seeing this argument (no offense to you specifically).
The lore in the UA treats first and second level as the Warlock experimenting/researching to make contact with a patron, with the class features as skills obtained as the results of those researches and experiments.
right, the lore suggests a template: the old stumble upon a shortcut to power (1) and finding oneself drawn to richer sources (2) leading to the offer of more (3). is that bad? honestly the making of many smaller deals and connections is nothing i'd considered before and sounds awesome. they fail to explore other origins such as being tempted, tricked, or yanked from the jaws of death to be offered service, but i also don't see where this provisional lore cuts any of those out. is a wizard tied to "services as diviners, serve in military forces, or pursue lives of crime" with no deviation? i don't believe they insist on warlocks being greedy nerds any more than barbarians are lawfully bidden to "charge headlong into danger" every time without regard for context.
anyway, the character likely has the option to refuse and just not take any more warlock levels. not every pact is inevitable. or, in the case of just a dip (as with cleric in comment #134), maybe there's conflict with their main class (the bishop strongly disapproves, ancestors making it too hard for the barbarian scholar to concentrate, bard recognizes the beginnings of a fairy tail grim bargain, etc.) and they quit digging before a patron is even revealed. actually, now dips would make slightly more sense as opposed to when the character and DM both forget which patron the blast or blade was nominally tied to.
i'm just saying: since the individual controls the lore it seems odd to keep hearing that the lore is tied to the wrong level. it's not. if the gripe is about the subclass power bump, then everyone can say that part out loud and quit bemoaning that patrons don't boink on the first date anymore.
Pact boons are level 1 though. Where is that from?
I have mixed feelings about the changes, I haven't tested the new material yet, but the biggest thing that stands out to me is getting the pact boon at level one but not forging a pact until level three. Firstly, it just doesn't make sense thematically, I can't see any eldritch entity handing over power like this without having some sort of deal in place, and mechanically it doesn't make sense either since the abilities granted are much more in line with third level abilities from other classes and this will make one level dips into warlock much more powerful and enticing rather than less.
If it wasn't a pact boon but something like arcane discoveries it could just represent the journey into forbidden lore.
Pact boons are level 1 though. Where is that from?
"1ST LEVEL: PACT BOON You have formed a pact with an otherworldly entity that has bestowed magical powers upon you... You determine the identity of the entity and choose its plane of existence..."
and then scrolling back up to lore i see "They typically learn their initial spells and boons through bargains with lesser entities or contacting distant planes."
are you asking for suggestions? hmm... fairies, ley lines, shouting at comets and constellations, smooth rocks with a hole in, candles and an ouiji board, albino squirrel that doesn't run when you talk to it, a book that disappears scraps of paper you leave in it, that kind old man with the claw-like fingers, following a very long strand hair into the woods and losing track of time, leaving offerings on an old shrine just like your grandmother did, throwing dice on a grave, etc...
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!
This idea that your early powers come from interactions with lesser entities before you make your pact with a Major Power just feels like it's diluting the essence of what a Warlock is. For me at least, the core of the Warlock's story is the relationship to their Patron. That's why having them pick a Patron at Level 1 made so much sense. So did the Pact Boon at Level 3, a gift from that Patron as they progress("At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service."). Getting that Pact Boon at Level 1 is not only every bit as restrictive a Level 1 choice as picking a Patron, if not more so, it makes less sense from a story perspective. The only, ONLY benefit to putting the Pact Boon at Level 1 is so you can have your choices for spellcasting stat restricted by which Pact Boon you choose. And to me, mechanical convenience isn't enough when it mucks up the story of the character.
This idea that your early powers come from interactions with lesser entities before you make your pact with a Major Power just feels like it's diluting the essence of what a Warlock is. For me at least, the core of the Warlock's story is the relationship to their Patron. That's why having them pick a Patron at Level 1 made so much sense. So did the Pact Boon at Level 3, a gift from that Patron as they progress("At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service."). Getting that Pact Boon at Level 1 is not only every bit as restrictive a Level 1 choice as picking a Patron, if not more so, it makes less sense from a story perspective. The only, ONLY benefit to putting the Pact Boon at Level 1 is so you can have your choices for spellcasting stat restricted by which Pact Boon you choose. And to me, mechanical convenience isn't enough when it mucks up the story of the character.
I dunno. Makes sense to me. You don't generally get to meet the boss right away - gotta prove yourself to their underlings first.
This idea that your early powers come from interactions with lesser entities before you make your pact with a Major Power just feels like it's diluting the essence of what a Warlock is. For me at least, the core of the Warlock's story is the relationship to their Patron. That's why having them pick a Patron at Level 1 made so much sense. So did the Pact Boon at Level 3, a gift from that Patron as they progress("At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service."). Getting that Pact Boon at Level 1 is not only every bit as restrictive a Level 1 choice as picking a Patron, if not more so, it makes less sense from a story perspective. The only, ONLY benefit to putting the Pact Boon at Level 1 is so you can have your choices for spellcasting stat restricted by which Pact Boon you choose. And to me, mechanical convenience isn't enough when it mucks up the story of the character.
I dunno. Makes sense to me. You don't generally get to meet the boss right away - gotta prove yourself to their underlings first.
But go back and read through the text for the Warlock in the current PHB.
"A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being."
"As you make your warlock character, spend some time thinking about your patron and the obligations that your pact imposes upon you. What led you to make the pact, and how did you make contact with your patron? Were you seduced into summoning a devil, or did you seek out the ritual that would allow you to make contact with an alien elder god? Did you search for your patron, or did your patron find and choose you? Do you chafe under the obligations of your pact or serve joyfully in anticipation of the rewards promised to you?"
All of that speaks to the pact with your Patron being part of your origin as a Warlock, not something that happens later. And it's a concept I'm a big fan of, it's part of why I enjoy Warlocks so much. And I've got to back to the idea that waiting to choose a Patron until Level 3 supposedly avoids forcing players into a "subclass" at Level 1 that will help define how their Warlock is played, but now they want to force that Warlock to choose Tome/Blade/Chain at Level 1, which will if anything have an even MORE restrictive effect on how that Warlock is played.
It's fine if you feel differently, but dangit Warlocks are my favorite class and I don't like what they want to do with them.
This idea that your early powers come from interactions with lesser entities before you make your pact with a Major Power just feels like it's diluting the essence of what a Warlock is. For me at least, the core of the Warlock's story is the relationship to their Patron. That's why having them pick a Patron at Level 1 made so much sense. So did the Pact Boon at Level 3, a gift from that Patron as they progress("At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service."). Getting that Pact Boon at Level 1 is not only every bit as restrictive a Level 1 choice as picking a Patron, if not more so, it makes less sense from a story perspective. The only, ONLY benefit to putting the Pact Boon at Level 1 is so you can have your choices for spellcasting stat restricted by which Pact Boon you choose. And to me, mechanical convenience isn't enough when it mucks up the story of the character.
The "lesser entity" and "major entity" can be the same faction, like contracting with an Imp who then leads you to their Archdevil boss. I'd be fine if they more explicitly called out that they can be different aspects of the same entity too, but ultimately it's fine as written.
So having been reading over the feature, here is where I think it is:
The good: Pact of the blade is now usable/useful without having to use a specific patron, more spell slots means Warlocks are less likely to run out of spell slots and makes concentration spells other than Hex a bit more viable. Eldritch Blast is now tied to warlock level. Better ability to multi-class with Wizard, Druid, Ranger & Artificer.
The bad: Pacts aren't equal, Blade is now the strongest while Chain is now the weakest. The familiar scales to level but all warlocks can also get access to find familiar and the new familiar is not giving good enough reward for investment. Tome is mostly unchanged, supposedly it incorporates ancient secrets now but the text of the cantrip (book of shadows) doesn't properly reflect this in regards to learning additional rituals. Warlock is now a half-caster but is lacking a half of something else, except pact of the blade.
The indifferent: Hex has been altered, now only doing damage once per turn but doing more damage with spell slot, it would have been better to scale with warlock level instead. Having to burn one of your limited 5th level slots just for Hex to get 3d6 damage per turn is a bit limiting and actually underwhelming for a 5th level slot. Additionally, except for pact of the blade, Eldritch Blast still dominates both Tome and Chain. Blade can potentially beat eldritch blast damage with magic weapons and life drinker. There is still a few false options and the new Mystic Arcanum is a false choice, you probably need to take it once, if not twice. It should have just remained as it was in 5e. Agonizing Blast is a case of an obviously false choice.
What's needed: Pact of the Chain familiar straight up needs a buff, more tanky, some extra utility. Perhaps a once/long rest dedicated spell I.E. fey could cast Faerie Fire, with familiar maintaining the concentration.
Pact Weapon should have a cast time of instantaneous to keep it inline with the other pact cantrips
Book of Shadows should be updated to specifically say that Warlocks can get more rituals by doing XYZ
Invocations that just add at-will casts of 1st/2nd level arcane spells should be removed
Hexer Invocation should remove concentration from Hex completely
A few invocations should be added to improve levelled spells I.E.
- Expanded Influence - When using a spell slot to cast a spell with a radius, Area of Effect, the radius can be made up to 5 foot larger
- Eldritch Magnet - All non-cantrip single target spells against your current hex target gain a +1 to their accuracy and damage rolls. The effect of Eldritch Magnet does not stack with other warlocks.
- Mindful Surge - when casting a spell of 1st to 5th level, roll a 1d6, if the result matches the level that the spell was cast up, it upcasts an additional spell slot level for free.
Eldritch Blast is great. It's an improvement that it doesn't come with opportunity costs against taking other cantrips. You don't have to use it, though it's hard to be the most effective without it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Warlocks as half casters doesn't work. Because what is the other "half". Paladins and Rangers are marital classes (Priests and Experts now) but Warlocks are Mage class. So what is the other half? They can be gishy with Blade Pact (although it honestly invites more 1 level dipping from Rangers/Monks/Clerics to be SAD). But other spell-casters will have subclasses to retain that probably. And making Mystic Arcanum burn an Eldritch Invocation just ups the Invocation Tax. Now I only get lvl 5 spells at level 17 and I have to reduce my other customization to do it. And I still don't know what the other "half" of my class is. So here are some proposed fixes"
1. Make Warlocks "2/3" casters just like Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters are "1/3" casters. Have the spell progression somewhere in between half and full casters. Have it top out at level 7 spells. Make it so you take 2/3 Warlock level rounded down when you figure out multiclass spellcasting.
2. Make Warlocks half casters that as the level up they get more and more higher level spell slots but their lower levels reduce. For instance when levelling from 10->11 instead of going from 4-1st, 2-2nd, 2-3rd to 4-1st, 2-2nd, 3-3rd make it transition to 2-1st, 3-2nd, 3-3rd. Fewer number of spell slots, just progressively higher levels. In the end they automatically upcast most spells since they have so few low level spells but more higher level spells than other casters. The trick would be to figure out how to incorporate multiclassing.
3. Increase the number of pact slots gained/progression. Make it match PB for instance (not equal to it since that would be OP for multiclassing). So 5 slots at 13 and 6 at 17.
4. Leave Arcanum alone. They were big spell grenades you lobbed once a day. Making them part of the Invocation tax reduces their likelihood of being picked.
5. Allow some recovery of slots in between rests. "Patrons Favor - As an action restore up to half/PB (rounded down) Pact Magic slots. This resets on a short rest." Or "As an action restore a Pact Magic slot. You can do this up to PB times per long rest."
6. Maybe make #3 or #5 a Pact of the Tome Higher level ability. Or an improved version of #3 or #5 (Book of Shadows should allow you transcribe other rituals (not just 2 level 1 spells) at level 5 instead of adding AS modifier to cantrips. Book of Ancient Secrets was an amazing Invocation to suck up all the rituals). Make the Pacts feel more different. Tomelocks can be more castery
7. Have your Pact Familiar "carry" a pact slot for you. So you get X slots and your familiar has 1 (spell is cast from its position) so you get X+1 slots per rest. Or make the Familiar's spot a once per day thing. Or you Familiar at level 5 gains the an Action Ability to restore one of your slots. Or casting through your familiar increases the level of the spell cast so a 4th level becomes a 5th once per short rest or PB per day.
8. Increase the number of Eldritch Invocations that give free spell casting. Most of the old Invocations that gave a spell but cost a spell slot to cast were garbage. Some low level at will spells or some low level utility spells once long rest/once per short rest/PB times per day. Like make Unseen Servant once per short rest with out a spell slot. Link it to Pact of the Chain. Link other spells to Pact of the Tome.
9. Restore a Pact Slot on a Crit with the Pact Weapon or a spell attack roll. Or if the creature rolls a 1 on a DC save against your spell.
10. Restore a Pact Slot when you land the killing blow.
11. If you have no pacts slots available restore 1 when rolling initiative (make it a level 11ish ability).
The lore in the UA treats first and second level as the Warlock experimenting/researching to make contact with a patron, with the class features as skills obtained as the results of those researches and experiments.
A slight increase in the Pact slots gained in progression and the number of invocations that give free casting are the simplest and least intrusive way to "fix" the class.
The more I look at this new version, the more I hate it.
Warlocks as Half-casters works fine. Warlock + Hex + EB == Ranger + longbow + Hunter's Mark, and Warlock + Pact of the Blade == Ranger + rapier. If they bring back the Eldritch Smite Invocation then Warlock + Pact of the Blade would be almost identical to a Paladin.
Warlocks always have played like a half-caster, now they are just making that design explicit.
I will say it's strange to have to spend build budget on the ability to use a melee weapon. Usually the assumption is that ranged is better, and more costly.
This isn't new to the Warlock, of course, but I would've thought it would be changed.
well they could not take a long rest at 10:05 as you can only take one in 24 hour period and this means it usually makes sense to combine a long rest with sleep.
But being attacked by bandits is a good indication that the forest is not a place you want to take any kind of rest.
So our likely action would be to push on until we can get to some place that is less dangerous.
Then depending on recourses spent and the time of day we would decide on taking a long or short rest.
During the DnD next playtest I was also one of the people who thought going from the 5 minute short rest of DnD 4e to a 1 hour short rest was bad idea.
Yeah Man! One D&D Playtest sucks!
Aside from the big stuff which is all awful. I hate not being able to use a 2 hander anymore.
if they go forward with doing that to Eldritch Blast, I'm going to maliciously refuse to follow it. That's just a shitty thing to do to nerf a cantrip. This is also a terrible nerf to hex. Not only does its damage capacity get limited to once per turn, but you have to spend higher spell slot resources to get a higher roll once per turn out of it, and thats an absurd ask. Part of the benefit of the spell is that its a low budget buff to EACH attack roll you make against a target, and as mentioned, this is just a change to turn it into the Ranger feature you have to spend concentration on AND bigger slots that should go to bigger spells. The two of these sound like changes from people who bare spite about warlocks and their most iconic tool specifically.
Warlock casting: i like the idea of your casting ability being dependent on early choices in the build. I think it could go a long way of making the class feel more varied, especially if you engage in multiclassing.
Warlock slots: if i am reading this right you aren't getting stuck with the pact slot system and actually gain slots like every other casting class (i might be wrong)
I still will not abide the nerfs to EB and Hex. It feels like you're subtracting something from one class to make the others seem better, and I find that to be unfair.
Draconic resilience could be a welcome change in my opinion. Part of the reason i like mixing monk and wisdom classes so much is because i like the idea of a casting class being able to increase their AC according to the improvement of their core stats rather than relying on the availability and proficiency of armor. Wheras otherwise they have to choose "do i wanna be better at my job or better at not dying". Not a fan of it being kept at 3rd level tho.
All in all, i agree that this does great things to GIVE Fighter and Wizard more tools to compare favorably to the other classes. But i don't believe its worth nerfing my favorite cantrip in the game. I know that sounds like a powerplayer complaint, but the appeal of cantrips is that they're supposed to improve with the character level, not the specific class level. Thats part of the reason mage stone is such a spectacular disappointment. You have to rely on getting extra attack and attack roll buffs from your class to make it worthwhile in later levels. I also feel apprehensive about certain features being delayed to 3rd level, making it harder to benefit from multiclassing, which i firmly believe is essential for experienced players to get enjoyment out of the game, and i can't help but feel this UA is somewhat biased against it.
right, the lore suggests a template: the old stumble upon a shortcut to power (1) and finding oneself drawn to richer sources (2) leading to the offer of more (3). is that bad? honestly the making of many smaller deals and connections is nothing i'd considered before and sounds awesome. they fail to explore other origins such as being tempted, tricked, or yanked from the jaws of death to be offered service, but i also don't see where this provisional lore cuts any of those out. is a wizard tied to "services as diviners, serve in military forces, or pursue lives of crime" with no deviation? i don't believe they insist on warlocks being greedy nerds any more than barbarians are lawfully bidden to "charge headlong into danger" every time without regard for context.
anyway, the character likely has the option to refuse and just not take any more warlock levels. not every pact is inevitable. that's what a dip is, right? a choice to pause or discontinue one branch to focus on depth in another. in the case of just a dip for power (as with cleric in comment #134), maybe there's conflict with their main class (the bishop strongly disapproves, ancestors making it too hard for the barbarian scholar to concentrate, bard recognizes the beginnings of a fairy tail grim bargain, etc.) explaining why they quit digging before a patron is even revealed. and even then, narrative can bring that patron back even without the warlock levels still going up. it's a story.
i'm just saying: since the individual controls the lore it seems odd to keep hearing that the lore is tied to the wrong level. it's not. if the gripe is about the subclass power bump, then everyone can say that part out loud and quit bemoaning that patrons don't boink on the first date anymore.
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!
Pact boons are level 1 though. Where is that from?
If it wasn't a pact boon but something like arcane discoveries it could just represent the journey into forbidden lore.
"1ST LEVEL: PACT BOON
You have formed a pact with an otherworldly entity that has bestowed magical powers upon you... You determine the identity of the entity and choose its plane of existence..."
and then scrolling back up to lore i see "They typically learn their initial spells and boons through bargains with lesser entities or contacting distant planes."
are you asking for suggestions? hmm... fairies, ley lines, shouting at comets and constellations, smooth rocks with a hole in, candles and an ouiji board, albino squirrel that doesn't run when you talk to it, a book that disappears scraps of paper you leave in it, that kind old man with the claw-like fingers, following a very long strand hair into the woods and losing track of time, leaving offerings on an old shrine just like your grandmother did, throwing dice on a grave, etc...
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!
This idea that your early powers come from interactions with lesser entities before you make your pact with a Major Power just feels like it's diluting the essence of what a Warlock is. For me at least, the core of the Warlock's story is the relationship to their Patron. That's why having them pick a Patron at Level 1 made so much sense. So did the Pact Boon at Level 3, a gift from that Patron as they progress("At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service."). Getting that Pact Boon at Level 1 is not only every bit as restrictive a Level 1 choice as picking a Patron, if not more so, it makes less sense from a story perspective. The only, ONLY benefit to putting the Pact Boon at Level 1 is so you can have your choices for spellcasting stat restricted by which Pact Boon you choose. And to me, mechanical convenience isn't enough when it mucks up the story of the character.
Yep. It feels like a backwards progression for the character.
I dunno. Makes sense to me. You don't generally get to meet the boss right away - gotta prove yourself to their underlings first.
But go back and read through the text for the Warlock in the current PHB.
"A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being."
"As you make your warlock character, spend some time thinking about your patron and the obligations that your pact imposes upon you. What led you to make the pact, and how did you make contact with your patron? Were you seduced into summoning a devil, or did you seek out the ritual that would allow you to make contact with an alien elder god? Did you search for your patron, or did your patron find and choose you? Do you chafe under the obligations of your pact or serve joyfully in anticipation of the rewards promised to you?"
All of that speaks to the pact with your Patron being part of your origin as a Warlock, not something that happens later. And it's a concept I'm a big fan of, it's part of why I enjoy Warlocks so much. And I've got to back to the idea that waiting to choose a Patron until Level 3 supposedly avoids forcing players into a "subclass" at Level 1 that will help define how their Warlock is played, but now they want to force that Warlock to choose Tome/Blade/Chain at Level 1, which will if anything have an even MORE restrictive effect on how that Warlock is played.
It's fine if you feel differently, but dangit Warlocks are my favorite class and I don't like what they want to do with them.
The "lesser entity" and "major entity" can be the same faction, like contracting with an Imp who then leads you to their Archdevil boss. I'd be fine if they more explicitly called out that they can be different aspects of the same entity too, but ultimately it's fine as written.
So having been reading over the feature, here is where I think it is:
The good: Pact of the blade is now usable/useful without having to use a specific patron, more spell slots means Warlocks are less likely to run out of spell slots and makes concentration spells other than Hex a bit more viable. Eldritch Blast is now tied to warlock level. Better ability to multi-class with Wizard, Druid, Ranger & Artificer.
The bad: Pacts aren't equal, Blade is now the strongest while Chain is now the weakest. The familiar scales to level but all warlocks can also get access to find familiar and the new familiar is not giving good enough reward for investment. Tome is mostly unchanged, supposedly it incorporates ancient secrets now but the text of the cantrip (book of shadows) doesn't properly reflect this in regards to learning additional rituals. Warlock is now a half-caster but is lacking a half of something else, except pact of the blade.
The indifferent: Hex has been altered, now only doing damage once per turn but doing more damage with spell slot, it would have been better to scale with warlock level instead. Having to burn one of your limited 5th level slots just for Hex to get 3d6 damage per turn is a bit limiting and actually underwhelming for a 5th level slot. Additionally, except for pact of the blade, Eldritch Blast still dominates both Tome and Chain. Blade can potentially beat eldritch blast damage with magic weapons and life drinker. There is still a few false options and the new Mystic Arcanum is a false choice, you probably need to take it once, if not twice. It should have just remained as it was in 5e. Agonizing Blast is a case of an obviously false choice.
What's needed: Pact of the Chain familiar straight up needs a buff, more tanky, some extra utility. Perhaps a once/long rest dedicated spell I.E. fey could cast Faerie Fire, with familiar maintaining the concentration.
Pact Weapon should have a cast time of instantaneous to keep it inline with the other pact cantrips
Book of Shadows should be updated to specifically say that Warlocks can get more rituals by doing XYZ
Invocations that just add at-will casts of 1st/2nd level arcane spells should be removed
Hexer Invocation should remove concentration from Hex completely
A few invocations should be added to improve levelled spells I.E.
- Expanded Influence - When using a spell slot to cast a spell with a radius, Area of Effect, the radius can be made up to 5 foot larger
- Eldritch Magnet - All non-cantrip single target spells against your current hex target gain a +1 to their accuracy and damage rolls. The effect of Eldritch Magnet does not stack with other warlocks.
- Mindful Surge - when casting a spell of 1st to 5th level, roll a 1d6, if the result matches the level that the spell was cast up, it upcasts an additional spell slot level for free.
Eldritch Blast is great. It's an improvement that it doesn't come with opportunity costs against taking other cantrips. You don't have to use it, though it's hard to be the most effective without it.