I really don't understand this ridiculous insistence that "all you need to do to fix the Warlock is give them moar pact slots and then make them recharge on a long rest!"
Excuse me: that's exactly what they did. Half-casters have more spell slots than Pact Magic, and those slots recharge on a long rest. What else is there to do?
I really don't understand this ridiculous insistence that "all you need to do to fix the Warlock is give them moar pact slots and then make them recharge on a long rest!"
Excuse me: that's exactly what they did. Half-casters have more spell slots than Pact Magic, and those slots recharge on a long rest. What else is there to do?
Make mystic arcanum into real spell slots instead of garbage pseudo slots, and tone up Pact of the chain a little bit.
I really don't understand this ridiculous insistence that "all you need to do to fix the Warlock is give them moar pact slots and then make them recharge on a long rest!"
Excuse me: that's exactly what they did. Half-casters have more spell slots than Pact Magic, and those slots recharge on a long rest. What else is there to do?
The argument is I think keep them short rest but give them a couple more pact slots.
The argument is I think keep them short rest but give them a couple more pact slots.
That's a garbage argument because it doesn't solve a single goddamn thing, and the people who say "but my table is better than yours and we always get thirteen short rests every adventuring day!" are the exception, not the rule. Short rests don't exist, and continuing to make warlocks critically over-reliant on short rests means warlocks will continue to basically not have any actual spellcasting. There is no reason for it other than nostalgia, and nostalgia's a terrible reason to do anything.
The argument is I think keep them short rest but give them a couple more pact slots.
That's a garbage argument because it doesn't solve a single goddamn thing, and the people who say "but my table is better than yours and we always get thirteen short rests every adventuring day!" are the exception, not the rule. Short rests don't exist, and continuing to make warlocks critically over-reliant on short rests means warlocks will continue to basically not have any actual spellcasting. There is no reason for it other than nostalgia, and nostalgia's a terrible reason to do anything.yU
Yurie do you not take a lunch break at work? no potty breaks? nothing is that normal for you? some one saying 1 short rest is good is not 13. Your arguments would be helped a lot if you would just cut the hyperbole.
The argument is I think keep them short rest but give them a couple more pact slots.
That's a garbage argument because it doesn't solve a single goddamn thing, and the people who say "but my table is better than yours and we always get thirteen short rests every adventuring day!" are the exception, not the rule. Short rests don't exist, and continuing to make warlocks critically over-reliant on short rests means warlocks will continue to basically not have any actual spellcasting. There is no reason for it other than nostalgia, and nostalgia's a terrible reason to do anything.
I find your arguments to be garbage so we seem to be at an impasse.
Yurie do you not take a lunch break at work? no potty breaks? nothing is that normal for you? some one saying 1 short rest is good is not 13. Your arguments would be helped a lot if you would just cut the hyperbole.
She does make a fair point though. Short rests are too unreliable to build a class around. And trust me, you'll start to hate yourself for begging a DM for short rest on every occasion, especially when nobody else needs it. Short rest dependency was warlocks's biggest, most critical problem, and personally, I'm very happy that it's been solved.
Lemme make this argument in terms of a popular and well-regarded Internet webcomic:
Or, in words: the world is going to make [X] progress towards Everything Sucking Forever every day whether the PCs do anything about it or not. A D&D campaign is always sliding towards failure unless the PCs are actively working to stop it. The PCs can take action to combat this constant decay, or they can faff about doing yoga for twelve hours a day instead. The more often they choose to faff about doing yoga, the more the world decays. The more the draugr train. Because all the smart little comments about bio breaks and such entirely miss the point - you have 24 hours in your day, and so do your foes. Obviously the enemy will use some of them eating, sleeping, and whatever-ing, and so will you. Those hours are called Long Rest. The enemy is not obligated to also spend twelve additional hours every day sitting on their ***** waiting around hopelessly while you short rest after every skill check and spend three weeks completing a two-day quest. At some point the gnoll raiders will have eaten their captives, the cultists will have summoned Legally Distinct Cthulhu, the evil princess will have murdered the helpless dragon, or whatever else it is the party is abjectly refusing to deal with by insisting on mass multitudinous constant potty breaks.
One of these things makes for a D&D game. I'm not even sure what the other is called, but it sure ain't playing D&D.
A D&D campaign is always sliding towards failure unless the PCs are actively working to stop it.
Again, this has never been the norm for any D&D campaign I've played for more than 40 years. That it's working for your group is great! But 1) the game is built to have short rests and 2) not every D&D campaign is built around an inflexible storyline about a city/kingdom/world-ending threat that is inexorable and ceaseless.
It sounds kind of exhausting as a player, honestly. Again: there's no wrong way to play and if your group finds this fun and satisfying, it's the way you should be playing! But the 2014 ruleset and many classes are specifically designed to take advantage of short rests, which, to me, seems to be a presumption that the characters will get them at least some of the time.
Lemme make this argument in terms of a popular and well-regarded Internet webcomic:
Or, in words: the world is going to make [X] progress towards Everything Sucking Forever every day whether the PCs do anything about it or not. A D&D campaign is always sliding towards failure unless the PCs are actively working to stop it. The PCs can take action to combat this constant decay, or they can faff about doing yoga for twelve hours a day instead. The more often they choose to faff about doing yoga, the more the world decays. The more the draugr train. Because all the smart little comments about bio breaks and such entirely miss the point - you have 24 hours in your day, and so do your foes. Obviously the enemy will use some of them eating, sleeping, and whatever-ing, and so will you. Those hours are called Long Rest. The enemy is not obligated to also spend twelve additional hours every day sitting on their ***** waiting around hopelessly while you short rest after every skill check and spend three weeks completing a two-day quest. At some point the gnoll raiders will have eaten their captives, the cultists will have summoned Legally Distinct Cthulhu, the evil princess will have murdered the helpless dragon, or whatever else it is the party is abjectly refusing to deal with by insisting on mass multitudinous constant potty breaks.
One of these things makes for a D&D game. I'm not even sure what the other is called, but it sure ain't playing D&D.
Ok so cool while you are taking a potty and lunch break..... the duregar are also having their lunch and potty break, because people eat and sleep and a single short rest is not just something that should happen during an adventuring day it should happen EVERY day, or I guess people just don't do that in your world. Constant work till you die mentality, just sleep, no lunch or potty break. That evil warlord is going to find himself without anyone to help at that rate.
Down time activities are because no one is aware there IS a BBEG they are just going about their days until they hear rumors about what the world is up to. During that time they are making money and trying to get on with life. That is called normal.
Except they do, as evidenced by myself and others. And no, I don't allow half a dozen short rests per game day as the DM (and have never even tried to take that many as a player).
To make a blanket, inflexible claim like this when it's not at all true across the D&D gaming world makes dialogue about this difficult. I get that at your table, the characters never, ever can afford to take one hour during the day. That's fine! But it's clearly not the way EVERYONE plays and more, the rules themselves are more than suggestive that they assume characters will at least sometimes be able to pause during the day for healing, strategizing, and regaining a few abilities.
Yurie do you not take a lunch break at work? no potty breaks? nothing is that normal for you? some one saying 1 short rest is good is not 13. Your arguments would be helped a lot if you would just cut the hyperbole.
She does make a fair point though. Short rests are too unreliable to build a class around. And trust me, you'll start to hate yourself for begging a DM for short rest on every occasion, especially when nobody else needs it. Short rest dependency was warlocks's biggest, most critical problem, and personally, I'm very happy that it's been solved.
And I agree with the base sentiment and made a similar argument to my brother about warlocks vs sorcerers before and why spell casting is better than pact magic. But the way she is going about it if they said hey you have 5 spells and get them back on a short rest and we assumed that AT SOME POINT people would take 1 short rest an adventuring day is not in anyway out of line. There are hit dice to recover health for a reason and people naturally have lunch breaks. At this point my whole thing Warlocks are close to what they need to be now. Mystic arcanum and a few invocations just need a little work, but the means she is using to frame her arguments are not doing her any favors at all.
Look, y'all can keep arguing with me that every single D&D table that's ever played a game of D&D always gets thirty-seven short rests every adventuring day and only an evil vicious murder-hearted DM who hates their table, their players, and the very concept of fun itself would deny someone eighty-three short rests a day, or you can accept the widely held and supported assertion that short rests are not widely or commonly used and short rest-dependent classes often feel constrained and undertuned as a result. Warlocks do not need to be a short rest class. Frankly nothing needs to be a short rest class; short rests should be for recovering HP via hit dice in times of great need or unusual time freedom, not enabling entire freaking classes to function on otherwise shoestring ability budgets.
Half-castering the class is a good start. Now we need to tune everything else up to match that good start.
Look, y'all can keep arguing with me that every single D&D table that's ever played a game of D&D always gets thirty-seven short rests every adventuring day and only an evil vicious murder-hearted DM who hates their table, their players, and the very concept of fun itself would deny someone eighty-three short rests a day,
This is the exact kind of hyperbole that makes your arguments worthless. Not a single person has said this, your framing of arguments this way makes you sound incredibly stupid and all of your arguments in bad faith.
Edit: to your actual point I even have a thread based around tuning up those little things around this half caster base because I ultimately agree that it is not a bad direction or start and could be healthier for the game, but the way you go about your arguments do not help they hurt.
Hey, I'm trying to have a calm, real dialogue. Asking you to maybe, just maybe, cut back on the cutting hyperbole.
Because I seriously cannot envision a campaign in which, over the course of anywhere between 10-20 levels, the characters are never, ever able to afford a short rest. Do the characters not have access to things like Leomund's tiny hut? Does every single foe they encounter have dispel magic or antimagic capabilities?
And I have yet to see these assertions widely made or assumed to be the norm.
If the party is traveling from Module City to the Horrible Ruins of Evildom and have a random encounter that ends up using a lot of resources (spells, healing, etc.) - isn't it reasonable to take a short rest to recover hit dice, fighters can get action surge back, warlocks get their spells back? Because if they encounter something else two hours later, they're fewked without it.
And again: I don't believe in having nice, sanded down edges for the characters. I also don't support the idea of a campaign world that's so dangerous that literally no place, no time is ever, ever safe for even an hour.
Yurie do you not take a lunch break at work? no potty breaks? nothing is that normal for you? some one saying 1 short rest is good is not 13. Your arguments would be helped a lot if you would just cut the hyperbole.
She does make a fair point though. Short rests are too unreliable to build a class around. And trust me, you'll start to hate yourself for begging a DM for short rest on every occasion, especially when nobody else needs it. Short rest dependency was warlocks's biggest, most critical problem, and personally, I'm very happy that it's been solved.
Not really her argument is Stealth sucks because every creature we encounter for the entire campaign had a massive blind sight range or true seeing going at all times.
I've even argued there are ways to improve this, make the short rest actually short, give warlocks and other short rest feature classes so way to trigger them outside of a short rests like a 5 minute ritual once per day. And yes if the slots were increased enough so they could handle a adventuring day better even without a rest it could help. Balancing the good enough with 0 rests but not too good with one might be difficult, but I still think it would be better than the super slow progression long rest method which removes the entire unique feel of the original class and turns it into a ranger. But no matter what they will have a inflexible that is impossible because our campaign is extreme.
because every creature we encounter for the entire campaign had a massive blind sight range or true seeing going at all times.
This sounds like a terrible DM running the campaign.
I'm sure there could be some campaign where it makes sense, but its the same argument as we never get any short rests they are impossible because our enemies are constantly on the move and if we take a seconds break the world ends.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You seem quite paranoid. WotC could fix warlocks by giving them extra pact slots. But instead, they made them half casters. I agree with post 23.
I really don't understand this ridiculous insistence that "all you need to do to fix the Warlock is give them moar pact slots and then make them recharge on a long rest!"
Excuse me: that's exactly what they did. Half-casters have more spell slots than Pact Magic, and those slots recharge on a long rest. What else is there to do?
Please do not contact or message me.
Make mystic arcanum into real spell slots instead of garbage pseudo slots, and tone up Pact of the chain a little bit.
The argument is I think keep them short rest but give them a couple more pact slots.
That's a garbage argument because it doesn't solve a single goddamn thing, and the people who say "but my table is better than yours and we always get thirteen short rests every adventuring day!" are the exception, not the rule. Short rests don't exist, and continuing to make warlocks critically over-reliant on short rests means warlocks will continue to basically not have any actual spellcasting. There is no reason for it other than nostalgia, and nostalgia's a terrible reason to do anything.
Please do not contact or message me.
They could recharge a pact slot every 2 hours they’re not in combat, or get one back when they roll initiative.
Yurie do you not take a lunch break at work? no potty breaks? nothing is that normal for you? some one saying 1 short rest is good is not 13. Your arguments would be helped a lot if you would just cut the hyperbole.
I find your arguments to be garbage so we seem to be at an impasse.
She does make a fair point though. Short rests are too unreliable to build a class around. And trust me, you'll start to hate yourself for begging a DM for short rest on every occasion, especially when nobody else needs it. Short rest dependency was warlocks's biggest, most critical problem, and personally, I'm very happy that it's been solved.
Lemme make this argument in terms of a popular and well-regarded Internet webcomic:
Or, in words: the world is going to make [X] progress towards Everything Sucking Forever every day whether the PCs do anything about it or not. A D&D campaign is always sliding towards failure unless the PCs are actively working to stop it. The PCs can take action to combat this constant decay, or they can faff about doing yoga for twelve hours a day instead. The more often they choose to faff about doing yoga, the more the world decays. The more the draugr train. Because all the smart little comments about bio breaks and such entirely miss the point - you have 24 hours in your day, and so do your foes. Obviously the enemy will use some of them eating, sleeping, and whatever-ing, and so will you. Those hours are called Long Rest. The enemy is not obligated to also spend twelve additional hours every day sitting on their ***** waiting around hopelessly while you short rest after every skill check and spend three weeks completing a two-day quest. At some point the gnoll raiders will have eaten their captives, the cultists will have summoned Legally Distinct Cthulhu, the evil princess will have murdered the helpless dragon, or whatever else it is the party is abjectly refusing to deal with by insisting on mass multitudinous constant potty breaks.
One of these things makes for a D&D game. I'm not even sure what the other is called, but it sure ain't playing D&D.
Please do not contact or message me.
Again, this has never been the norm for any D&D campaign I've played for more than 40 years. That it's working for your group is great! But 1) the game is built to have short rests and 2) not every D&D campaign is built around an inflexible storyline about a city/kingdom/world-ending threat that is inexorable and ceaseless.
It sounds kind of exhausting as a player, honestly. Again: there's no wrong way to play and if your group finds this fun and satisfying, it's the way you should be playing! But the 2014 ruleset and many classes are specifically designed to take advantage of short rests, which, to me, seems to be a presumption that the characters will get them at least some of the time.
Ok so cool while you are taking a potty and lunch break..... the duregar are also having their lunch and potty break, because people eat and sleep and a single short rest is not just something that should happen during an adventuring day it should happen EVERY day, or I guess people just don't do that in your world. Constant work till you die mentality, just sleep, no lunch or potty break. That evil warlord is going to find himself without anyone to help at that rate.
Down time activities are because no one is aware there IS a BBEG they are just going about their days until they hear rumors about what the world is up to. During that time they are making money and trying to get on with life. That is called normal.
Except they do, as evidenced by myself and others. And no, I don't allow half a dozen short rests per game day as the DM (and have never even tried to take that many as a player).
To make a blanket, inflexible claim like this when it's not at all true across the D&D gaming world makes dialogue about this difficult. I get that at your table, the characters never, ever can afford to take one hour during the day. That's fine! But it's clearly not the way EVERYONE plays and more, the rules themselves are more than suggestive that they assume characters will at least sometimes be able to pause during the day for healing, strategizing, and regaining a few abilities.
And I agree with the base sentiment and made a similar argument to my brother about warlocks vs sorcerers before and why spell casting is better than pact magic. But the way she is going about it if they said hey you have 5 spells and get them back on a short rest and we assumed that AT SOME POINT people would take 1 short rest an adventuring day is not in anyway out of line. There are hit dice to recover health for a reason and people naturally have lunch breaks. At this point my whole thing Warlocks are close to what they need to be now. Mystic arcanum and a few invocations just need a little work, but the means she is using to frame her arguments are not doing her any favors at all.
Look, y'all can keep arguing with me that every single D&D table that's ever played a game of D&D always gets thirty-seven short rests every adventuring day and only an evil vicious murder-hearted DM who hates their table, their players, and the very concept of fun itself would deny someone eighty-three short rests a day, or you can accept the widely held and supported assertion that short rests are not widely or commonly used and short rest-dependent classes often feel constrained and undertuned as a result. Warlocks do not need to be a short rest class. Frankly nothing needs to be a short rest class; short rests should be for recovering HP via hit dice in times of great need or unusual time freedom, not enabling entire freaking classes to function on otherwise shoestring ability budgets.
Half-castering the class is a good start. Now we need to tune everything else up to match that good start.
Please do not contact or message me.
This is the exact kind of hyperbole that makes your arguments worthless. Not a single person has said this, your framing of arguments this way makes you sound incredibly stupid and all of your arguments in bad faith.
Edit: to your actual point I even have a thread based around tuning up those little things around this half caster base because I ultimately agree that it is not a bad direction or start and could be healthier for the game, but the way you go about your arguments do not help they hurt.
Hey, I'm trying to have a calm, real dialogue. Asking you to maybe, just maybe, cut back on the cutting hyperbole.
Because I seriously cannot envision a campaign in which, over the course of anywhere between 10-20 levels, the characters are never, ever able to afford a short rest. Do the characters not have access to things like Leomund's tiny hut? Does every single foe they encounter have dispel magic or antimagic capabilities?
And I have yet to see these assertions widely made or assumed to be the norm.
If the party is traveling from Module City to the Horrible Ruins of Evildom and have a random encounter that ends up using a lot of resources (spells, healing, etc.) - isn't it reasonable to take a short rest to recover hit dice, fighters can get action surge back, warlocks get their spells back? Because if they encounter something else two hours later, they're fewked without it.
And again: I don't believe in having nice, sanded down edges for the characters. I also don't support the idea of a campaign world that's so dangerous that literally no place, no time is ever, ever safe for even an hour.
Not really her argument is Stealth sucks because every creature we encounter for the entire campaign had a massive blind sight range or true seeing going at all times.
I've even argued there are ways to improve this, make the short rest actually short, give warlocks and other short rest feature classes so way to trigger them outside of a short rests like a 5 minute ritual once per day. And yes if the slots were increased enough so they could handle a adventuring day better even without a rest it could help. Balancing the good enough with 0 rests but not too good with one might be difficult, but I still think it would be better than the super slow progression long rest method which removes the entire unique feel of the original class and turns it into a ranger. But no matter what they will have a inflexible that is impossible because our campaign is extreme.
This sounds like a terrible DM running the campaign.
I'm sure there could be some campaign where it makes sense, but its the same argument as we never get any short rests they are impossible because our enemies are constantly on the move and if we take a seconds break the world ends.