That the slots reset on short rests instead of long.
And I stated that they should:
Increase the number of Pact Magic slots.
Make them refresh on a long rest instead of a short rest.
Then what in the 9 hells are you arguing with me for?
Because I think Pact Magic slots are a problem too. They make multiclassing Warlock a pain, which is an even more pronounced issue now that Warlocks can have multiple primary ability scores and will thus be attractive for more multiclass builds. And the autoscaling is at best awkward when combined with spells that augment in nonstandard ways or that scale past 5th level. So no - your solution, which I am quoting so you can see that I'm quoting it and there can be no further confusion about what I'm quoting, is not something I can get behind.
One of my complaints is that they made multi-classing less interesting. I'll weigh in on that one first because I think it's less discussed already, not because it's my biggest issue with the changes.
I'm playing a Warlock with a few levels of Sorcerer (17/3 and yes our party is at level 20) for lower level slots, additional spells, metamagic and Con save proficiency. It's working great.
One of my top want-to-play characters is envisioned as a Sword Bard with a bit of Hexblade. 6 level one slots, two of them on a short rest, for unending Shield because otherwise I'd be too squishy.
Sure, half-caster makes multi-classing easier in some ways, but less interesting.
Also, Tomelocks can no longer use Charisma in the UA, making it hard to multiclass them with Sorcerer. Wizard is thematically appropriate but does a Wizard dip really complement Tomelocks very much?.
I could really get behind an Int-based Tomelock staying pure Warlock, but the level 18 ability is completely useless, strongly incentivizing multi-classing.
Idea: you can choose your casting stat from int wis cha regardless of pact boon, but if you multiclass you have to use pact boon spellcasting ability (int tome, wis chain, cha blade). Or you could just move pact boons to level 3 so multiclass dips are more costly.
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Thinking of bladelocks, maybe make Shield proficiency an Eldritch Invocation requiring 3rd level? Or maybe even give bladelocks a fighting style at 3rd level. I dunno. Actually... that might be the way they are planning on doing the Hexblade subclass.
The proper way imo, to make multiclass dips less appealing, is to just straight up make pure Warlock more enticing.
I'm in favour of fixing Pact Magic in ways that others have already suggested, but I do believe in theory this half-caster model can work. But that requires substantially more/stronger Invocations and other Warlock features both to maintain effectiveness and to ensure Warlocks play differently than other classes, rather than just as weak Wizards.
One way I came up with to fix the scaling issue while keeping the half-caster progression, is to give Warlocks a new ability:
Eldritch Amplifier (because all Warlock abilities need to have the word "Eldritch" in them)
3rd level ability
When you cast a spell, you can choose to expend a charge of Eldritch Amplifier to cast the spell at higher level than the expended spell slot.
Warlock level 3rd-4th, Amplified spell level 2nd.
Warlock level 5th-6th, Amplified spell level 3rd.
Warlock level 7th-8th, Amplified spell level 4th.
Warlock level 9th+, Amplified spell level 5th.
You can use this ability a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus. You regain all expended uses when you finish a Long Rest.
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Mechanically it could work, although it's just begging for one-level multi-class dips, especially into bladelock
Narratively it's a mess. Yes, you can contort a character's story to fit the idea of a warlock making smaller pacts with lesser entities for a couple levels before Signing the Big One, but it's really a huge and sudden change to the way the class has been presented until now. Heck, half my warlocks up to now didn't even consciously make a pact with their patron and instead just kind of stumbled into it by accident -- a story line that this switch basically cuts off completely
At the very least, they need to stop calling them Pact Boons if they're not actually going to be boons from who/whatever you made your main pact with, and are just "products of your eldritch research" or whatever the lore is
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)
I think that the baby pact is largely unnecessary. Why not just make the patron unknown until 3rd level? Or you could simply know who they are and just not have their powers show up until 3rd, if your backstory specifies who they are. The lesser pact idea makes it feel like a Warlock isn't defined by a pact, but pacts are defined by Warlocks. Like a Warlock is a person who just goes around, inexplicably attracting eldritch entities, and the best way for said eldritch entities to expand their reach is to get in with a Warlock. It just doesn't feel right.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Mechanically it could work, although it's just begging for one-level multi-class dips, especially into bladelock
Narratively it's a mess. Yes, you can contort a character's story to fit the idea of a warlock making smaller pacts with lesser entities for a couple levels before Signing the Big One, but it's really a huge and sudden change to the way the class has been presented until now. Heck, half my warlocks up to now didn't even consciously make a pact with their patron and instead just kind of stumbled into it by accident -- a story line that this switch basically cuts off completely
At the very least, they need to stop calling them Pact Boons if they're not actually going to be boons from who/whatever you made your main pact with, and are just "products of your eldritch research" or whatever the lore is
It doesn't actually cut this story off. The entity that gives the pact boon doesn't have to be your patron in the future, but it still can be. You can still stumble into it by accident, get this pact boon garnering greater interest from a patron who claims you for their own moving forward.
But sure take mask of many faces and take silent image. 4 castings of silent image + minor illusion cantrip is more than enough for 95% of games.
And we're back to "every game is just like my game, therefore [opinion]"
Yes please tell me this magial game where the ONLY way forward was to cast silent image a dozen times and where all other illusion based classes are WORTHLESS with no flavor and cant do anything because that poor garbage illusionist wizard or bard or arcane trickster rogue just couldn't cast illusions enough. Please tell me more about this magical straw man game and then explain to me how it is than 5% of all games played are like this.
There ARE times when people make assumptions based on their play experiences alone. This isnt one of them. Save that indignation for the short rest argument crowd.
I haven't read all of the UA material, and what I have read hasn't been super carefully, but there are a couple of things that I don't think I've seen addressed in this discussion which I think might be significant.
the shifting of several of the Invocations to cantrips and free cantrips from pacts combined with the limited number of cantrips available to Warlocks makes cantrip choices much more significant. It looks, to me anyway, that by choosing a Pact and the other two pact cantrips as your Warlock cantrips, you could be a Blade/Chain/Tome Lock. You won't want to replace Pact Weapon when going up a level, because of the duration, but you could the others. And it looks like you could do this with a one level dip. This I am not a fan of.
the language around Combat in the Pact Familiar description is interesting: the familiar "takes the Dodge Action and will move to avoid danger, unless you use your reaction to command it to attack instead." If this explicitly limits the familiar to one of three possible Actions (Dodge, Eldritch Strike and Invisibility) in combat, then Help and Hide are no longer options. I suppose other actions are possible out side of combat. Presumably that would be true as well of non-pact familiars, although the PHB Find Familiar spell would need to change. I would genuinely welcome this as I find familiar/Help cheese very distasteful. This would also make pact familiars vastly better than non-pact familiars, mostly because non-pact familiars would be nerfed.
Warlocks as half-casters instead of Pact Magic users will make multiclassing with other casting classes less interesting as it will slow slot progression. SorcLocks and BardLocks, and I guess WizardLocks and ClericLocks, will see significantly slower slot progression. A Paladin with a Blade dip will likely have fewer slots per day available for smiting than with a PHB Hexblade dip. I can't say I have a problem with that.
It doesn't actually cut this story off. The entity that gives the pact boon doesn't have to be your patron in the future, but it still can be. You can still stumble into it by accident, get this pact boon garnering greater interest from a patron who claims you for their own moving forward.
Yeah, it does. Unless I'm playing a complete idiot who accidentally makes pacts with multiple entities
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)
But sure take mask of many faces and take silent image. 4 castings of silent image + minor illusion cantrip is more than enough for 95% of games.
And we're back to "every game is just like my game, therefore [opinion]"
Yes please tell me this magial game where the ONLY way forward was to cast silent image a dozen times
Someone else already did, and you chose to ignore them
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)
I haven't read all of the UA material, and what I have read hasn't been super carefully, but there are a couple of things that I don't think I've seen addressed in this discussion which I think might be significant.
the shifting of several of the Invocations to cantrips and free cantrips from pacts combined with the limited number of cantrips available to Warlocks makes cantrip choices much more significant. It looks, to me anyway, that by choosing a Pact and the other two pact cantrips as your Warlock cantrips, you could be a Blade/Chain/Tome Lock. You won't want to replace Pact Weapon when going up a level, because of the duration, but you could the others. And it looks like you could do this with a one level dip. This I am not a fan of.
Warlocks cannot freely take the pact boons with their cantrip slots. They choose cantrips from the Arcane spell list, which the pact boons are not on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
It doesn't actually cut this story off. The entity that gives the pact boon doesn't have to be your patron in the future, but it still can be. You can still stumble into it by accident, get this pact boon garnering greater interest from a patron who claims you for their own moving forward.
Yeah, it does. Unless I'm playing a complete idiot who accidentally makes pacts with multiple entities
Your pact boon can be the same entity. Nothing says it has to be multiple.
But sure take mask of many faces and take silent image. 4 castings of silent image + minor illusion cantrip is more than enough for 95% of games.
And we're back to "every game is just like my game, therefore [opinion]"
Yes please tell me this magial game where the ONLY way forward was to cast silent image a dozen times
Someone else already did, and you chose to ignore them
Dont cut off the rest of that post. You are now telling me a significant number of games the illusionist wizard is worthless. Is that what you are saying?
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Mechanically it could work, although it's just begging for one-level multi-class dips, especially into bladelock
Narratively it's a mess. Yes, you can contort a character's story to fit the idea of a warlock making smaller pacts with lesser entities for a couple levels before Signing the Big One, but it's really a huge and sudden change to the way the class has been presented until now. Heck, half my warlocks up to now didn't even consciously make a pact with their patron and instead just kind of stumbled into it by accident -- a story line that this switch basically cuts off completely
At the very least, they need to stop calling them Pact Boons if they're not actually going to be boons from who/whatever you made your main pact with, and are just "products of your eldritch research" or whatever the lore is
I just figured it kind of means that the Warlock got a small taste of the Patron's Power, probably through a middle man, or the real Patron in disguise, and the your-soul-is-gone-lol level of the pact is sealed at 3rd level when the Patron reveals themselves to the Warlock and grants the Patron specific powers.
Kind of like you mentioned your Warlocks doing their pacts lol.
But sure take mask of many faces and take silent image. 4 castings of silent image + minor illusion cantrip is more than enough for 95% of games.
And we're back to "every game is just like my game, therefore [opinion]"
Yes please tell me this magial game where the ONLY way forward was to cast silent image a dozen times
Someone else already did, and you chose to ignore them
Dont cut off the rest of that post. You are now telling me a significant number of games the illusionist wizard is worthless. Is that what you are saying?
I'm saying I try to not to put words in other people's mouths or disregard their experiences, and suggest you do the same
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)
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Mechanically it could work, although it's just begging for one-level multi-class dips, especially into bladelock
Narratively it's a mess. Yes, you can contort a character's story to fit the idea of a warlock making smaller pacts with lesser entities for a couple levels before Signing the Big One, but it's really a huge and sudden change to the way the class has been presented until now. Heck, half my warlocks up to now didn't even consciously make a pact with their patron and instead just kind of stumbled into it by accident -- a story line that this switch basically cuts off completely
At the very least, they need to stop calling them Pact Boons if they're not actually going to be boons from who/whatever you made your main pact with, and are just "products of your eldritch research" or whatever the lore is
I just figured it kind of means that the Warlock got a small taste of the Patron's Power, probably through a middle man, or the real Patron in disguise, and the your-soul-is-gone-lol level of the pact is sealed at 3rd level when the Patron reveals themselves to the Warlock and grants the Patron specific powers.
Kind of like you mentioned your Warlocks doing their pacts lol.
No, the backstories were more like, "I found a wand that turned out to be haunted, and now this dead archmage (who doesn't seem to even realize he's dead) channels his power through me and treats me like his incompetent apprentice" or "A voice led me to a hole in the ground from which I heard a woman crying, saying her children were all dead. When I asked if there was anything I could do for her, she told me to avenge them and boom, I was a warlock"
With this UA version, you're pretty much stuck with either a classic Faustian escalating price/reward structure to the pact, or a 'shopping around for the best deal' kind of thing, neither of which particularly appeals to me
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)
I agree Tomelock should be able to use Charisma too. And I agree the capstone is awful.
I don't understand the bellyaching about no shields on bladelock. Bladelocks were happy to burn an invocation on Thirsting Blade before, now they don't have to, so spend that invocation on Lessons of the First Ones for shield proficiency instead if it's truly important. You can even use your level 1 feat on it, and then refund that feat with LoFO at 2 for whatever else you might want. Or make a thrower build and stay at range, another thing Bladelocks couldn't do before.
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Mechanically it could work, although it's just begging for one-level multi-class dips, especially into bladelock
Narratively it's a mess. Yes, you can contort a character's story to fit the idea of a warlock making smaller pacts with lesser entities for a couple levels before Signing the Big One, but it's really a huge and sudden change to the way the class has been presented until now. Heck, half my warlocks up to now didn't even consciously make a pact with their patron and instead just kind of stumbled into it by accident -- a story line that this switch basically cuts off completely
At the very least, they need to stop calling them Pact Boons if they're not actually going to be boons from who/whatever you made your main pact with, and are just "products of your eldritch research" or whatever the lore is
I just figured it kind of means that the Warlock got a small taste of the Patron's Power, probably through a middle man, or the real Patron in disguise, and the your-soul-is-gone-lol level of the pact is sealed at 3rd level when the Patron reveals themselves to the Warlock and grants the Patron specific powers.
Kind of like you mentioned your Warlocks doing their pacts lol.
No, the backstories were more like, "I found a wand that turned out to be haunted, and now this dead archmage (who doesn't seem to even realize he's dead) channels his power through me and treats me like his incompetent apprentice" or "A voice led me to a hole in the ground from which I heard a woman crying, saying her children were all dead. When I asked if there was anything I could do for her, she told me to avenge them and boom, I was a warlock"
With this UA version, you're pretty much stuck with either a classic Faustian escalating price/reward structure to the pact, or a 'shopping around for the best deal' kind of thing, neither of which particularly appeals to me
How is this different from: "I found a talking sword and didn't think much about it since it made me a better sword fighter, and some time later I found out the one talking to me through the sword was a powerful demon that promised me even more power if I did his bidding"?
The whole issue comes from how the devs worded their vision of how pacts work in the DnD Beyond youtube video.
But sure take mask of many faces and take silent image. 4 castings of silent image + minor illusion cantrip is more than enough for 95% of games.
And we're back to "every game is just like my game, therefore [opinion]"
Yes please tell me this magial game where the ONLY way forward was to cast silent image a dozen times
Someone else already did, and you chose to ignore them
Dont cut off the rest of that post. You are now telling me a significant number of games the illusionist wizard is worthless. Is that what you are saying?
I'm saying I try to not to put words in other people's mouths or disregard their experiences, and suggest you do the same
Then don’t put words in the other's person's mouth either. Because they DIDN'T say that they NEEDED the silent image thing, they ultimately said it was nice to have. And I agreed. But you can still do the illusionist character without it thanks to first level slots. Otherwise these other classes wouldn't work.
There are definitely times where people make assumptions based on their games. That wasn't one of them.
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Mechanically it could work, although it's just begging for one-level multi-class dips, especially into bladelock
Narratively it's a mess. Yes, you can contort a character's story to fit the idea of a warlock making smaller pacts with lesser entities for a couple levels before Signing the Big One, but it's really a huge and sudden change to the way the class has been presented until now. Heck, half my warlocks up to now didn't even consciously make a pact with their patron and instead just kind of stumbled into it by accident -- a story line that this switch basically cuts off completely
At the very least, they need to stop calling them Pact Boons if they're not actually going to be boons from who/whatever you made your main pact with, and are just "products of your eldritch research" or whatever the lore is
I just figured it kind of means that the Warlock got a small taste of the Patron's Power, probably through a middle man, or the real Patron in disguise, and the your-soul-is-gone-lol level of the pact is sealed at 3rd level when the Patron reveals themselves to the Warlock and grants the Patron specific powers.
Kind of like you mentioned your Warlocks doing their pacts lol.
No, the backstories were more like, "I found a wand that turned out to be haunted, and now this dead archmage (who doesn't seem to even realize he's dead) channels his power through me and treats me like his incompetent apprentice" or "A voice led me to a hole in the ground from which I heard a woman crying, saying her children were all dead. When I asked if there was anything I could do for her, she told me to avenge them and boom, I was a warlock"
With this UA version, you're pretty much stuck with either a classic Faustian escalating price/reward structure to the pact, or a 'shopping around for the best deal' kind of thing, neither of which particularly appeals to me
Nope, you can still have those EXACT story. How were you leveling up before? How was your warlock gaining greater power. Works the same way now. Your patron doesn't have to be different or require a different deal than what you did at first level.
Options are not requirements. You CAN make additional deals. You don't have to make additional deals.
I agree Tomelock should be able to use Charisma too. And I agree the capstone is awful.
I don't understand the bellyaching about no shields on bladelock. Bladelocks were happy to burn an invocation on Thirsting Blade before, now they don't have to, so spend that invocation on Lessons of the First Ones for shield proficiency instead if it's truly important. You can even use your level 1 feat on it, and then refund that feat with LoFO at 2 for whatever else you might want. Or make a thrower build and stay at range, another thing Bladelocks couldn't do before.
A crutch is a crutch. Requiring a crutch to measure up to the other gishes is bad design.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think the move to shift pact boons to 1st level is the better choice from purely Warlock perspective.
Thinking of bladelocks, maybe make Shield proficiency an Eldritch Invocation requiring 3rd level? Or maybe even give bladelocks a fighting style at 3rd level. I dunno. Actually... that might be the way they are planning on doing the Hexblade subclass.
The proper way imo, to make multiclass dips less appealing, is to just straight up make pure Warlock more enticing.
One way I came up with to fix the scaling issue while keeping the half-caster progression, is to give Warlocks a new ability:
Mechanically it could work, although it's just begging for one-level multi-class dips, especially into bladelock
Narratively it's a mess. Yes, you can contort a character's story to fit the idea of a warlock making smaller pacts with lesser entities for a couple levels before Signing the Big One, but it's really a huge and sudden change to the way the class has been presented until now. Heck, half my warlocks up to now didn't even consciously make a pact with their patron and instead just kind of stumbled into it by accident -- a story line that this switch basically cuts off completely
At the very least, they need to stop calling them Pact Boons if they're not actually going to be boons from who/whatever you made your main pact with, and are just "products of your eldritch research" or whatever the lore is
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)
I think that the baby pact is largely unnecessary. Why not just make the patron unknown until 3rd level? Or you could simply know who they are and just not have their powers show up until 3rd, if your backstory specifies who they are. The lesser pact idea makes it feel like a Warlock isn't defined by a pact, but pacts are defined by Warlocks. Like a Warlock is a person who just goes around, inexplicably attracting eldritch entities, and the best way for said eldritch entities to expand their reach is to get in with a Warlock. It just doesn't feel right.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
It doesn't actually cut this story off. The entity that gives the pact boon doesn't have to be your patron in the future, but it still can be. You can still stumble into it by accident, get this pact boon garnering greater interest from a patron who claims you for their own moving forward.
Yes please tell me this magial game where the ONLY way forward was to cast silent image a dozen times and where all other illusion based classes are WORTHLESS with no flavor and cant do anything because that poor garbage illusionist wizard or bard or arcane trickster rogue just couldn't cast illusions enough. Please tell me more about this magical straw man game and then explain to me how it is than 5% of all games played are like this.
There ARE times when people make assumptions based on their play experiences alone. This isnt one of them. Save that indignation for the short rest argument crowd.
I haven't read all of the UA material, and what I have read hasn't been super carefully, but there are a couple of things that I don't think I've seen addressed in this discussion which I think might be significant.
Yeah, it does. Unless I'm playing a complete idiot who accidentally makes pacts with multiple entities
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)
Someone else already did, and you chose to ignore them
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)
Warlocks cannot freely take the pact boons with their cantrip slots. They choose cantrips from the Arcane spell list, which the pact boons are not on.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Your pact boon can be the same entity. Nothing says it has to be multiple.
Dont cut off the rest of that post. You are now telling me a significant number of games the illusionist wizard is worthless. Is that what you are saying?
I just figured it kind of means that the Warlock got a small taste of the Patron's Power, probably through a middle man, or the real Patron in disguise, and the your-soul-is-gone-lol level of the pact is sealed at 3rd level when the Patron reveals themselves to the Warlock and grants the Patron specific powers.
Kind of like you mentioned your Warlocks doing their pacts lol.
I'm saying I try to not to put words in other people's mouths or disregard their experiences, and suggest you do the same
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)
No, the backstories were more like, "I found a wand that turned out to be haunted, and now this dead archmage (who doesn't seem to even realize he's dead) channels his power through me and treats me like his incompetent apprentice" or "A voice led me to a hole in the ground from which I heard a woman crying, saying her children were all dead. When I asked if there was anything I could do for her, she told me to avenge them and boom, I was a warlock"
With this UA version, you're pretty much stuck with either a classic Faustian escalating price/reward structure to the pact, or a 'shopping around for the best deal' kind of thing, neither of which particularly appeals to me
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)
I agree Tomelock should be able to use Charisma too. And I agree the capstone is awful.
I don't understand the bellyaching about no shields on bladelock. Bladelocks were happy to burn an invocation on Thirsting Blade before, now they don't have to, so spend that invocation on Lessons of the First Ones for shield proficiency instead if it's truly important. You can even use your level 1 feat on it, and then refund that feat with LoFO at 2 for whatever else you might want. Or make a thrower build and stay at range, another thing Bladelocks couldn't do before.
How is this different from: "I found a talking sword and didn't think much about it since it made me a better sword fighter, and some time later I found out the one talking to me through the sword was a powerful demon that promised me even more power if I did his bidding"?
The whole issue comes from how the devs worded their vision of how pacts work in the DnD Beyond youtube video.
Then don’t put words in the other's person's mouth either. Because they DIDN'T say that they NEEDED the silent image thing, they ultimately said it was nice to have. And I agreed. But you can still do the illusionist character without it thanks to first level slots. Otherwise these other classes wouldn't work.
There are definitely times where people make assumptions based on their games. That wasn't one of them.
Nope, you can still have those EXACT story. How were you leveling up before? How was your warlock gaining greater power. Works the same way now. Your patron doesn't have to be different or require a different deal than what you did at first level.
Options are not requirements. You CAN make additional deals. You don't have to make additional deals.
A crutch is a crutch. Requiring a crutch to measure up to the other gishes is bad design.