Nah, they need to bring their spell progression back up to spec as a full caster, at least level-wise. More invocations just breaks Bladelock further since they're far and away the most capable pick right now. The entire point of a "Mage" subset should be that they're all naturally full casters of one flavor or another.
If you want to play a full caster, wizards and sorcerers exist. The tomelock isn't a mage subset, it's a cantrip-based blaster subset. "Full caster, with d8 hit points, medium armor proficiency, and a bunch of extra tricks" is simply not going to happen.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
I've been thinking about this, and I am torn. On the plus side, it addresses the things about warlock that made me dip other classes: namely low level spell slots to use on utility type spells. Now, I'll have plenty to burn with a straight warlock.
Essentially turning it into a half caster though? While that works for my playstyle, I am not sure that it's the right move as a class. Warlock was unique and interesting before. Now, it's an arcane half caster (which I do believe the game needed), but I feel like the niche that Warlock filled was lost. There could be good balance reasons as to why, but meh. Putting the pact boon before the patron...makes sense, but I dislike it. I don't have to like losing my flavor because it makes sense to establish the feel of level 1 characters. Adding wisdom as an option? Gross. Keeping being able to use your caster stat for melee attacks at level 1? Gross. They've just changed how warlock will be abused for dipping.
I suppose my thought is, while the changes have their positives, far too much was paid for level 1 melee warlocks to be comfy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Nah, they need to bring their spell progression back up to spec as a full caster, at least level-wise. More invocations just breaks Bladelock further since they're far and away the most capable pick right now. The entire point of a "Mage" subset should be that they're all naturally full casters of one flavor or another.
If you want to play a full caster, wizards and sorcerers exist. The tomelock isn't a mage subset, it's a cantrip-based blaster subset. "Full caster, with d8 hit points, medium armor proficiency, and a bunch of extra tricks" is simply not going to happen.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
I mean, that is what's happening here though. They're trying to force square peg warlock into the round "Arcane half-caster" hole to go with pally (Divine half-caster) and ranger (Primal half-caster)
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)
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
A competent arcane gish is something the game needs way more than yet another arcane primary spellcaster (the artificer does exist but doesn't tend to fill people's desires for proper gish-ness), and it appears they've decided that the warlock is going to be it. Yes, the new warlock doesn't generally throw quite as *big* spells, but it throws a lot more of them, and it's got a much better spell list than it does in 5e (the 5e warlock spell list is pretty crap).
Now, is it good in its own right? That's a fair question that I'm not sure about. However, complaining that it's not a primary arcane spellcaster is missing the point, because it's not intended to be a primary arcane spellcaster.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
A competent arcane gish is something the game needs way more than yet another arcane primary spellcaster (the artificer does exist but doesn't tend to fill people's desires for proper gish-ness), and it appears they've decided that the warlock is going to be it. Yes, the new warlock doesn't generally throw quite as *big* spells, but it throws a lot more of them, and it's got a much better spell list than it does in 5e (the 5e warlock spell list is pretty crap).
Now, is it good in its own right? That's a fair question that I'm not sure about. However, complaining that it's not a primary arcane spellcaster is missing the point, because it's not intended to be a primary arcane spellcaster.
Nah, they need to bring their spell progression back up to spec as a full caster, at least level-wise. More invocations just breaks Bladelock further since they're far and away the most capable pick right now. The entire point of a "Mage" subset should be that they're all naturally full casters of one flavor or another.
If you want to play a full caster, wizards and sorcerers exist. The tomelock isn't a mage subset, it's a cantrip-based blaster subset. "Full caster, with d8 hit points, medium armor proficiency, and a bunch of extra tricks" is simply not going to happen.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
Druids and clerics dont have a multi-attack that adds their spell casting proficiency bonus to damage.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
A competent arcane gish is something the game needs way more than yet another arcane primary spellcaster (the artificer does exist but doesn't tend to fill people's desires for proper gish-ness), and it appears they've decided that the warlock is going to be it. Yes, the new warlock doesn't generally throw quite as *big* spells, but it throws a lot more of them, and it's got a much better spell list than it does in 5e (the 5e warlock spell list is pretty crap).
Now, is it good in its own right? That's a fair question that I'm not sure about. However, complaining that it's not a primary arcane spellcaster is missing the point, because it's not intended to be a primary arcane spellcaster.
It’s literally In the mage group.
And as a member of the mage group it has full unfettered access to the arcane spell list.
Edit: No but seriously you could take away the built in invocations on the pacts and give them full spell casting and they would be fine.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
A competent arcane gish is something the game needs way more than yet another arcane primary spellcaster (the artificer does exist but doesn't tend to fill people's desires for proper gish-ness), and it appears they've decided that the warlock is going to be it. Yes, the new warlock doesn't generally throw quite as *big* spells, but it throws a lot more of them, and it's got a much better spell list than it does in 5e (the 5e warlock spell list is pretty crap).
Now, is it good in its own right? That's a fair question that I'm not sure about. However, complaining that it's not a primary arcane spellcaster is missing the point, because it's not intended to be a primary arcane spellcaster.
It’s literally In the mage group.
And as a member of the mage group it has full unfettered access to the arcane spell list.
Edit: No but seriously you could take away the built in invocations on the pacts and give them full spell casting and they would be fine.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
A competent arcane gish is something the game needs way more than yet another arcane primary spellcaster (the artificer does exist but doesn't tend to fill people's desires for proper gish-ness), and it appears they've decided that the warlock is going to be it. Yes, the new warlock doesn't generally throw quite as *big* spells, but it throws a lot more of them, and it's got a much better spell list than it does in 5e (the 5e warlock spell list is pretty crap).
Now, is it good in its own right? That's a fair question that I'm not sure about. However, complaining that it's not a primary arcane spellcaster is missing the point, because it's not intended to be a primary arcane spellcaster.
It’s literally In the mage group.
And as a member of the mage group it has full unfettered access to the arcane spell list.
Edit: No but seriously you could take away the built in invocations on the pacts and give them full spell casting and they would be fine.
That’s a good idea.
Hell you could take away the armor too. Lessons of the first gives you access to light medium and shields anyway
Edit: No but seriously you could take away the built in invocations on the pacts and give them full spell casting and they would be fine.
Invocations are really strong. You could probably replace mystic arcanum with "+2 caster level; cannot exceed total warlock level" as an invocation, so you can be a full caster by spending 1 invocation at level 2-5, 2 at level 6-9, 3 at level 10-13, 4 at level 14-17, and 5 at level 18+.
I will let others more motivated than myself run the numbers, but my impression is that as written a tomelock is not a particularly good blaster. Acceptable probably, easy for beginners probably, but not particularly great.
Edit: No but seriously you could take away the built in invocations on the pacts and give them full spell casting and they would be fine.
Invocations are really strong. You could probably replace mystic arcanum with "+2 caster level; cannot exceed total warlock level" as an invocation, so you can be a full caster by spending 1 invocation at level 2-5, 2 at level 6-9, 3 at level 10-13, 4 at level 14-17, and 5 at level 18+.
Nah, they need to bring their spell progression back up to spec as a full caster, at least level-wise. More invocations just breaks Bladelock further since they're far and away the most capable pick right now. The entire point of a "Mage" subset should be that they're all naturally full casters of one flavor or another.
If you want to play a full caster, wizards and sorcerers exist. The tomelock isn't a mage subset, it's a cantrip-based blaster subset. "Full caster, with d8 hit points, medium armor proficiency, and a bunch of extra tricks" is simply not going to happen.
Nah the warlock is a full caster this desire to change them into a goth ranger wrecks the class. Making people pay to get what they should get at default is terrible design even if its hidden behind flexibility as an excuse.
Nah, they need to bring their spell progression back up to spec as a full caster, at least level-wise. More invocations just breaks Bladelock further since they're far and away the most capable pick right now. The entire point of a "Mage" subset should be that they're all naturally full casters of one flavor or another.
If you want to play a full caster, wizards and sorcerers exist. The tomelock isn't a mage subset, it's a cantrip-based blaster subset. "Full caster, with d8 hit points, medium armor proficiency, and a bunch of extra tricks" is simply not going to happen.
Nah the warlock is a full caster this desire to change them into a goth ranger wrecks the class. Making people pay to get what they should get at default is terrible design even if its hidden behind flexibility as an excuse.
So I am going to offer some solutions which is your favorite.
1. Full caster spell casting. Mystic arcanum invocation changed to only level 1 through 5 spells.
2. Old pact magic/ mystic arcanum. Auto prepared patron spells can cast one without a slot once per long. Lower level mystic arcanum invocations available at 5, they work like current ones (pick a spell, cast it once per long, cant do more than one of same level)
3. New warlock set up, auto gain current mystic arcanum at 3,7,11,17 without use of invocation.
Nah, they need to bring their spell progression back up to spec as a full caster, at least level-wise. More invocations just breaks Bladelock further since they're far and away the most capable pick right now. The entire point of a "Mage" subset should be that they're all naturally full casters of one flavor or another.
If you want to play a full caster, wizards and sorcerers exist. The tomelock isn't a mage subset, it's a cantrip-based blaster subset. "Full caster, with d8 hit points, medium armor proficiency, and a bunch of extra tricks" is simply not going to happen.
Nah the warlock is a full caster this desire to change them into a goth ranger wrecks the class. Making people pay to get what they should get at default is terrible design even if its hidden behind flexibility as an excuse.
So I am going to offer some solutions which is your favorite.
1. Full caster spell casting. Mystic arcanum invocation changed to only level 1 through 5 spells.
2. Old pact magic/ mystic arcanum. Auto prepared patron spells can cast one without a slot once per long. Lower level mystic arcanum invocations available at 5, they work like current ones (pick a spell, cast it once per long, cant do more than one of same level)
3. New warlock set up, auto gain current mystic arcanum at 3,7,11,17 without use of invocation.
Which of these would be completely unacceptable.
I really hate half caster so for me 3 is unacceptable. I guess I prefer 2 if i understand what you are saying as I like the pact magic system it is one of the key features that made the warlock different.
Nah, they need to bring their spell progression back up to spec as a full caster, at least level-wise. More invocations just breaks Bladelock further since they're far and away the most capable pick right now. The entire point of a "Mage" subset should be that they're all naturally full casters of one flavor or another.
If you want to play a full caster, wizards and sorcerers exist. The tomelock isn't a mage subset, it's a cantrip-based blaster subset. "Full caster, with d8 hit points, medium armor proficiency, and a bunch of extra tricks" is simply not going to happen.
Nah the warlock is a full caster this desire to change them into a goth ranger wrecks the class. Making people pay to get what they should get at default is terrible design even if its hidden behind flexibility as an excuse.
So I am going to offer some solutions which is your favorite.
1. Full caster spell casting. Mystic arcanum invocation changed to only level 1 through 5 spells.
2. Old pact magic/ mystic arcanum. Auto prepared patron spells can cast one without a slot once per long. Lower level mystic arcanum invocations available at 5, they work like current ones (pick a spell, cast it once per long, cant do more than one of same level)
3. New warlock set up, auto gain current mystic arcanum at 3,7,11,17 without use of invocation.
Which of these would be completely unacceptable.
I really hate half caster so for me 3 is unacceptable. I guess I prefer 2 if i understand what you are saying as I like the pact magic system it is one of the key features that made the warlock different.
Ok cool, yes number two was old pact magic, but gave a couple extra casts per long rest. One through a free cast of patron spells and the other from the optional invocations. Essentially sculpt flesh wouldn't consume a spell slot, but if you took it you couldn't take confusion or compulsion, but you could still take things like slow and bane. Because the new mystic arcanum would get a new name. Like "Eldritch knowledge" or something, but work exactly like the UA mystic arcanum all the way up to level 5 spells. But the old mystic arcanum that kicked in at 11 would still kick in like normal.
So at 3 you would have two second level spells that recover on a short rest, 4 auto known spells and you could cast one of the auto knowns once per long rest. Then you would have invocations of which you could take one as a second level spell that you can cast once per long and one you could take as any first level spell that you could cast once per day in addition to the normal options.
Edit: That also said you said half caster is unacceptable, but even the third one is not technically a half-caster.
To explain, option 3 would look like this At 3 , 3 first, 1 second, at 5, 4 first, 2 second, 1 third, at 7, 4 first, 3 second, 1 third, 1 4th, at 9, 4 first, 3 second, 2 third, 1 4th, 1 5th, at 11, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 1 4th, 1 5th, 1 6th, at 13, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 1 4th, 1 5th, 1 6th, 1 7th at 15 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 2 4th, 1 5th, 6th, 1 7th, 1 8th and at 17, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 2 4th, 1 5th, 1 6th, 1 7th, 1 8th and 1 9th. and finally at 19, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 3 4th, 2 5th, 1 6th, 1 7th, 1 8th, and 1 9th.
Uh, have you seen Druid or Cleric? That's pretty much everything you described, with Shields as well. Something besides the standard number of spell slots would be good, but spell level access really needs to be intrinsic and match full casting progression. Otherwise you don't have a Mage, you've got a weird and weaker iteration of a Paladin or Ranger.
I've been thinking about this, and I am torn. On the plus side, it addresses the things about warlock that made me dip other classes: namely low level spell slots to use on utility type spells. Now, I'll have plenty to burn with a straight warlock.
Essentially turning it into a half caster though? While that works for my playstyle, I am not sure that it's the right move as a class. Warlock was unique and interesting before. Now, it's an arcane half caster (which I do believe the game needed), but I feel like the niche that Warlock filled was lost. There could be good balance reasons as to why, but meh. Putting the pact boon before the patron...makes sense, but I dislike it. I don't have to like losing my flavor because it makes sense to establish the feel of level 1 characters. Adding wisdom as an option? Gross. Keeping being able to use your caster stat for melee attacks at level 1? Gross. They've just changed how warlock will be abused for dipping.
I suppose my thought is, while the changes have their positives, far too much was paid for level 1 melee warlocks to be comfy.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I mean, that is what's happening here though. They're trying to force square peg warlock into the round "Arcane half-caster" hole to go with pally (Divine half-caster) and ranger (Primal half-caster)
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)
We already had one, the Artificer.
A competent arcane gish is something the game needs way more than yet another arcane primary spellcaster (the artificer does exist but doesn't tend to fill people's desires for proper gish-ness), and it appears they've decided that the warlock is going to be it. Yes, the new warlock doesn't generally throw quite as *big* spells, but it throws a lot more of them, and it's got a much better spell list than it does in 5e (the 5e warlock spell list is pretty crap).
Now, is it good in its own right? That's a fair question that I'm not sure about. However, complaining that it's not a primary arcane spellcaster is missing the point, because it's not intended to be a primary arcane spellcaster.
It’s literally In the mage group.
Druids and clerics dont have a multi-attack that adds their spell casting proficiency bonus to damage.
And as a member of the mage group it has full unfettered access to the arcane spell list.
Edit: No but seriously you could take away the built in invocations on the pacts and give them full spell casting and they would be fine.
That’s a good idea.
For the people arguing that warlock should be a half caster, it can cast wish with a level 9 mystic arcanum.
Hell you could take away the armor too. Lessons of the first gives you access to light medium and shields anyway
Another option would be just bring back old pact casting with the short rest thing, but keep the mystic arcanums as Invocations AND the pact casting.
This mean 2 per short rest for most of your carreer with a couple "emergency spells". + hex as a cantrip
Essentially imagine if sculpt flesh DIDN'T cost a spell slot and could be ANY 4th level spell.
My argument has been that this version isn't a true half caster.
Because it can cast wish as a 9th level mystic arcanum.
And the paladin is in the cleric group. It boils down to "we need to put it somewhere".
Invocations are really strong. You could probably replace mystic arcanum with "+2 caster level; cannot exceed total warlock level" as an invocation, so you can be a full caster by spending 1 invocation at level 2-5, 2 at level 6-9, 3 at level 10-13, 4 at level 14-17, and 5 at level 18+.
I will let others more motivated than myself run the numbers, but my impression is that as written a tomelock is not a particularly good blaster. Acceptable probably, easy for beginners probably, but not particularly great.
Paladin is in the priest group.
Nah the warlock is a full caster this desire to change them into a goth ranger wrecks the class. Making people pay to get what they should get at default is terrible design even if its hidden behind flexibility as an excuse.
So I am going to offer some solutions which is your favorite.
1. Full caster spell casting. Mystic arcanum invocation changed to only level 1 through 5 spells.
2. Old pact magic/ mystic arcanum. Auto prepared patron spells can cast one without a slot once per long. Lower level mystic arcanum invocations available at 5, they work like current ones (pick a spell, cast it once per long, cant do more than one of same level)
3. New warlock set up, auto gain current mystic arcanum at 3,7,11,17 without use of invocation.
Which of these would be completely unacceptable.
I really hate half caster so for me 3 is unacceptable. I guess I prefer 2 if i understand what you are saying as I like the pact magic system it is one of the key features that made the warlock different.
Ok cool, yes number two was old pact magic, but gave a couple extra casts per long rest. One through a free cast of patron spells and the other from the optional invocations. Essentially sculpt flesh wouldn't consume a spell slot, but if you took it you couldn't take confusion or compulsion, but you could still take things like slow and bane. Because the new mystic arcanum would get a new name. Like "Eldritch knowledge" or something, but work exactly like the UA mystic arcanum all the way up to level 5 spells. But the old mystic arcanum that kicked in at 11 would still kick in like normal.
So at 3 you would have two second level spells that recover on a short rest, 4 auto known spells and you could cast one of the auto knowns once per long rest. Then you would have invocations of which you could take one as a second level spell that you can cast once per long and one you could take as any first level spell that you could cast once per day in addition to the normal options.
Edit: That also said you said half caster is unacceptable, but even the third one is not technically a half-caster.
To explain, option 3 would look like this
At 3 , 3 first, 1 second, at 5, 4 first, 2 second, 1 third, at 7, 4 first, 3 second, 1 third, 1 4th, at 9, 4 first, 3 second, 2 third, 1 4th, 1 5th, at 11, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 1 4th, 1 5th, 1 6th, at 13, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 1 4th, 1 5th, 1 6th, 1 7th at 15 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 2 4th, 1 5th, 6th, 1 7th, 1 8th and at 17, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 2 4th, 1 5th, 1 6th, 1 7th, 1 8th and 1 9th. and finally at 19, 4 first, 3 second, 3 third, 3 4th, 2 5th, 1 6th, 1 7th, 1 8th, and 1 9th.