Agreed that 9 5th level spell slots might be overpowered....but it's a very good start and I like that FAR better than what we get in the UA.
Forget the nine 5ths at high levels, even four 5th-level slots at level 9 is pretty busted. And two levels after that they'd not only have that, they'd also have a 6th-level slot on-curve. It also doesn't solve the feels-bad problem whenever you need to use one of those 5ths to cast Shield or Absorb Elements or Earthbind or Misty Step or Vortex Warp etc.
They'd be the most powerful casters at the levels most people play at, while simultaneously feeing bad due to lacking the lower level spell utility except for what they can scrape together via the odd racial, 1/LR feat or invocation. I'd rather have an actual 1-9 progression with much fewer slots at the top end, which is exactly what the proposed half-casting + MA design gives us.
In a non-dysfunctional game, a warlock is already typically getting at least four 5th-level slots at 9th level in the currently published version of the game. You're freaking out over a non-issue.
You're not able to nova all four of those slots in a single encounter though. In fact, in a "non-dysfunctional game" as you eloquently put it, you might have to stretch those four slots across multiple encounters rather than getting the other two back after a single one. So I stand by my statement (which is not "freaking out" either.)
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time. A sorcerer at 9th can have 2 5th 3, 4th, 3, 3rd. And with twin spell at 10th can drop 4 non concentration 5th level spells, or 1 concentration ans 2 non concentration 5ths, still having 3 4th and 3 3rd.
That being said I still prefer short rest with eldritch master as a 5th level ability and using the old progression with maybe after play testing a 3rd coming in around 7th or something and ending with 5 at 17th. They get the 4 or 6 pretty much on demand but not in one encounter.
I want to give a couple of minor thoughts that may or may not have been been discussed because I'm going sifting through the whole thread.
One thing I would like to see is more focus on increasing the strength of Blade, Chain, and Tome as you level (either as a warlock, through your patron, or with an invocation) and you should be able to pick between INT, WIS, or CHA for any of them (I also want Pact of the Talisman in here). I also want Weapon Mastery as an invocation (yes, there should be more invocation slots if they keep Mystic Arcanum as one).
Pact Familiar I don't understand why elemental isn't one of the options for your familiar. I also don't agree with having specific damage types associated with each creature type. I think you should be able to choose between aberration, celestial, dragon, elemental, fey, fiend, monstrosity (maybe), ooze (maybe), plant (maybe), and undead and then select the damage type (acid, cold, fire, lightning, necrotic, poison, psychic, radiant, or thunder) when you summon it. Also, why can't I cast through the familiar like the wizard can?
Pact Weapon Why can't I pick a Heavy weapon? Did you not want me to use any of the reach weapons? I just wanted to flavor a glaive or a halberd as a scythe.
While I'm not sure about the UA spell progression, I do want to have some way for the warlock to boost their summons. Even current warlocks can't upcast their summons as well as druids, sorcerers, or wizards can.
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time.
I honestly disagree with that. Spell scaling by level is not linear, for the same reason that an upcast Burning Hands doesn't really compete with a Fireball of the same level, so the novas are not equivalent.
Moreover, it doesn't address the second issue that I raised (the dissonance between pact slots and lower-level utility spells) - even if they somehow magically balanced pact slots perfectly so that lacking the latter felt perfectly compensated for at the outset, splat creep would eventually dismantle that. Because the reality about low level slots, is that there will always be cool stuff created for them as an edition goes on - if for no other reason than that cool stuff will always be made available for Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters, Paladins, Rangers etc. Keeping Pact Magic autoscaling will mean it keeps missing out on this design, just like it did in 5e.
Pact Weapon Why can't I pick a Heavy weapon? Did you not want me to use any of the reach weapons? I just wanted to flavor a glaive or a halberd as a scythe.
My hunch is they're saving some weapon types for the Hexblade.
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time.
I honestly disagree with that. Spell scaling by level is not linear, for the same reason that an upcast Burning Hands doesn't really compete with a Fireball of the same level, so the novas are not equivalent.
Moreover, it doesn't address the second issue that I raised (the dissonance between pact slots and lower-level utility spells) - even if they somehow magically balanced pact slots perfectly so that lacking the latter felt perfectly compensated for at the outset, splat creep would eventually dismantle that. Because the reality about low level slots, is that there will always be cool stuff created for them as an edition goes on - if for no other reason than that cool stuff will always be made available for Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters, Paladins, Rangers etc. Keeping Pact Magic autoscaling will mean it keeps missing out on this design, just like it did in 5e.
Pact Weapon Why can't I pick a Heavy weapon? Did you not want me to use any of the reach weapons? I just wanted to flavor a glaive or a halberd as a scythe.
My hunch is they're saving some weapon types for the Hexblade.
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time.
I honestly disagree with that. Spell scaling by level is not linear, for the same reason that an upcast Burning Hands doesn't really compete with a Fireball of the same level, so the novas are not equivalent.
Moreover, it doesn't address the second issue that I raised (the dissonance between pact slots and lower-level utility spells) - even if they somehow magically balanced pact slots perfectly so that lacking the latter felt perfectly compensated for at the outset, splat creep would eventually dismantle that. Because the reality about low level slots, is that there will always be cool stuff created for them as an edition goes on - if for no other reason than that cool stuff will always be made available for Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters, Paladins, Rangers etc. Keeping Pact Magic autoscaling will mean it keeps missing out on this design, just like it did in 5e.
Pact Weapon Why can't I pick a Heavy weapon? Did you not want me to use any of the reach weapons? I just wanted to flavor a glaive or a halberd as a scythe.
My hunch is they're saving some weapon types for the Hexblade.
Thats the answer.
Which brings the same old problem where hexblade is really the only true pact of the blade option.
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time.
I honestly disagree with that. Spell scaling by level is not linear, for the same reason that an upcast Burning Hands doesn't really compete with a Fireball of the same level, so the novas are not equivalent.
Moreover, it doesn't address the second issue that I raised (the dissonance between pact slots and lower-level utility spells) - even if they somehow magically balanced pact slots perfectly so that lacking the latter felt perfectly compensated for at the outset, splat creep would eventually dismantle that. Because the reality about low level slots, is that there will always be cool stuff created for them as an edition goes on - if for no other reason than that cool stuff will always be made available for Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters, Paladins, Rangers etc. Keeping Pact Magic autoscaling will mean it keeps missing out on this design, just like it did in 5e.
You can disagree with it, but I don't think you'd be right. There are some spell levels where spells jump ridiculously in power, the difference between 3rd and 5th isn't one of those spots in combat. For damage 8d6 vs 8d8, that is 8 damage per target, its not massive. For crowd control is hold monster really that much better than hypnotic pattern or fear. 5th and 3rd has a couple spells which I fully expect to get a rewrite, like if wall of force does not give a save this time around i will be shocked, and I expect a save every round on fear/hypnotic pattern. but otherwise the gap is pretty small. Is a wizard going with animate objects and tossing 6 fireballs, 3 upcast to 4 really worse of than a warlock going with animate object and 3 cones of cold. I kind of doubt it. In fact assuming the fight lasted more than 4 rounds the wizard is better off imo. Out of combat 5th is where the arcane spells starts popping off with some really big effects like teleportation circle etc. But somehow I don't think that is a issue for having 4 of them.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time.
I honestly disagree with that. Spell scaling by level is not linear, for the same reason that an upcast Burning Hands doesn't really compete with a Fireball of the same level, so the novas are not equivalent.
Moreover, it doesn't address the second issue that I raised (the dissonance between pact slots and lower-level utility spells) - even if they somehow magically balanced pact slots perfectly so that lacking the latter felt perfectly compensated for at the outset, splat creep would eventually dismantle that. Because the reality about low level slots, is that there will always be cool stuff created for them as an edition goes on - if for no other reason than that cool stuff will always be made available for Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters, Paladins, Rangers etc. Keeping Pact Magic autoscaling will mean it keeps missing out on this design, just like it did in 5e.
You can disagree with it, but I don't think you'd be right. There are some spell levels where spells jump ridiculously in power, the difference between 3rd and 5th isn't one of those spots in combat. For damage 8d6 vs 8d8, that is 8 damage per target, its not massive. For crowd control is hold monster really that much better than hypnotic pattern or fear. 5th and 3rd has a couple spells which I fully expect to get a rewrite, like if wall of force does not give a save this time around i will be shocked, and I expect a save every round on fear/hypnotic pattern. but otherwise the gap is pretty small. Is a wizard going with animate objects and tossing 6 fireballs, 3 upcast to 4 really worse of than a warlock going with animate object and 3 cones of cold. I kind of doubt it. In fact assuming the fight lasted more than 4 rounds the wizard is better off imo. Out of combat 5th is where the arcane spells starts popping off with some really big effects like teleportation circle etc. But somehow I don't think that is a issue for having 4 of them.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
The problem is a bunch of warlock fans complained they wanted to cast more spells. That means WotC has to find a way to balance that by their standard. I’ve come up with a bunch of different ways that feel unique and fun by my standard, but that’s not going to matter to WotC unless a bunch of players also voiced that same opinion. Which isn’t going to happen. We all have very different opinions on how to fix it and in that variance is people who love the new half caster version. What we will end up with in the final print I have no clue. These forums are a small sample size and I’ve seen so many different opinions here I can’t imagine the variety of opinions that will get posted in the play test survey. Then WotC will run with what they believe will satisfy the most people without breaking the game they want to design.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
As a Warlock fan, please don't speak for me. I happen to like the direction WotC has taken. It certainly isn't perfect, but I don't want to go back to 5e Pact Magic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
BESEECH PATRON: After a Warlock casts their final spell slot, they may enter the Dazed condition until the end of their next turn and roll a d6. On a 5-6, they regain a spell slot. This would represent the Warlock attempting to persuade their patron to give them more power while in some form of trance or possessed state. Usable once per long rest.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
As a Warlock fan, please don't speak for me. I happen to like the direction WotC has taken. It certainly isn't perfect, but I don't want to go back to 5e Pact Magic.
I don’t believe they are suggesting to move back to 5e Pact Magic, but instead to move forward with my idea for converting pack magic to a long rest feature.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
As a Warlock fan, please don't speak for me. I happen to like the direction WotC has taken. It certainly isn't perfect, but I don't want to go back to 5e Pact Magic.
The ranger and paladin are right there for you to play. You took an oath to a eldritch beings ideals. We had one different class, you don't like it play the ones they are modeling this crap show after.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
As a Warlock fan, please don't speak for me. I happen to like the direction WotC has taken. It certainly isn't perfect, but I don't want to go back to 5e Pact Magic.
I don’t believe they are suggesting to move back to 5e Pact Magic, but instead to move forward with my idea for converting pack magic to a long rest feature.
My ideal is remain short rest with eldritch master turned into a 5th level feature. But I'm willing to roll with a long rest pact magic as a compromise. 1/2 magic, go play a paladin don't turn the warlock into a knock off version.
Edit to tryt and clarify this stance. You can change the flavor on a ranger or paladin to give a warlock vibe. the mechanics of pact magic were unique I can't change the mechanics on 1.2 magic to make it pact magic. No matter how much I reflavor it, its not pact magic. Seriously one unique class and its fans get left in the dust to be just like a ranger but with invocations instead of nature warrior stuff.
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time.
I honestly disagree with that. Spell scaling by level is not linear, for the same reason that an upcast Burning Hands doesn't really compete with a Fireball of the same level, so the novas are not equivalent.
Moreover, it doesn't address the second issue that I raised (the dissonance between pact slots and lower-level utility spells) - even if they somehow magically balanced pact slots perfectly so that lacking the latter felt perfectly compensated for at the outset, splat creep would eventually dismantle that. Because the reality about low level slots, is that there will always be cool stuff created for them as an edition goes on - if for no other reason than that cool stuff will always be made available for Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters, Paladins, Rangers etc. Keeping Pact Magic autoscaling will mean it keeps missing out on this design, just like it did in 5e.
You can disagree with it, but I don't think you'd be right. There are some spell levels where spells jump ridiculously in power, the difference between 3rd and 5th isn't one of those spots in combat. For damage 8d6 vs 8d8, that is 8 damage per target, its not massive. For crowd control is hold monster really that much better than hypnotic pattern or fear. 5th and 3rd has a couple spells which I fully expect to get a rewrite, like if wall of force does not give a save this time around i will be shocked, and I expect a save every round on fear/hypnotic pattern. but otherwise the gap is pretty small. Is a wizard going with animate objects and tossing 6 fireballs, 3 upcast to 4 really worse of than a warlock going with animate object and 3 cones of cold. I kind of doubt it. In fact assuming the fight lasted more than 4 rounds the wizard is better off imo. Out of combat 5th is where the arcane spells starts popping off with some really big effects like teleportation circle etc. But somehow I don't think that is a issue for having 4 of them.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
The problem is a bunch of warlock fans complained they wanted to cast more spells. That means WotC has to find a way to balance that by their standard. I’ve come up with a bunch of different ways that feel unique and fun by my standard, but that’s not going to matter to WotC unless a bunch of players also voiced that same opinion. Which isn’t going to happen. We all have very different opinions on how to fix it and in that variance is people who love the new half caster version. What we will end up with in the final print I have no clue. These forums are a small sample size and I’ve seen so many different opinions here I can’t imagine the variety of opinions that will get posted in the play test survey. Then WotC will run with what they believe will satisfy the most people without breaking the game they want to design.
The thing is those of us who don't like the goth ranger model would be happier with any of your options than the 1/2 magic model. We all have different ideas on the best fix sure. My hope is that even if 1/2 the fans like the 1/2 magic, if the other 1/2 hate it, it will be enough to get them off this track. If the warlock tracks at a 5 out of 10, i don't think they will stick with it. It is like they chose the worst possible solution, homogenization of the one unique caster class.
Which brings the same old problem where hexblade is really the only true pact of the blade option.
I think it will create a situation where, if sheer martial prowess is the thing you want most out of your Warlock, then Hexblade will be the ideal choice - just like if sheer martial prowess is what you want most out of your druid, then Moon will be the ideal choice. But that doesn't mean you won't be able to make viable gish using something like Fiend or Undead instead, just like you can make a viable gish using Spores, and get something in exchange for the martial power you give up. In short, Hexblade will be the best at it that role in some, maybe even most scenarios, but it won't be the "only true option."
You can disagree with it, but I don't think you'd be right. There are some spell levels where spells jump ridiculously in power, the difference between 3rd and 5th isn't one of those spots in combat. For damage 8d6 vs 8d8, that is 8 damage per target, its not massive. For crowd control is hold monster really that much better than hypnotic pattern or fear. 5th and 3rd has a couple spells which I fully expect to get a rewrite, like if wall of force does not give a save this time around i will be shocked, and I expect a save every round on fear/hypnotic pattern. but otherwise the gap is pretty small. Is a wizard going with animate objects and tossing 6 fireballs, 3 upcast to 4 really worse of than a warlock going with animate object and 3 cones of cold. I kind of doubt it. In fact assuming the fight lasted more than 4 rounds the wizard is better off imo. Out of combat 5th is where the arcane spells starts popping off with some really big effects like teleportation circle etc. But somehow I don't think that is a issue for having 4 of them.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
I think just comparing dice is too limited a dimension here. Is a fireball that much higher damage than a Cone of Cold or Synaptic Static in terms of the number in the spell entry, no. Is the total damage higher when you're hitting 3x as many targets, or targeting a much weaker save not to mention adding a rider? I think that's a lot less clear-cut.
And I don't get the complaint that the new Warlock doesn't have a different feel to its spellcasting. No other class in the game has Mystic Arcanum, which forces you to be a lot more thoughtful in your spell choice on both versions - moreso on the second one, since you have to consider those differences at much lower levels, but since you get actual low-level spell slots now that you don't have to beg for SRs for, they retain that uniqueness while being a lot more forgiving in play.
BESEECH PATRON: After a Warlock casts their final spell slot, they may enter the Dazed condition until the end of their next turn and roll a d6. On a 5-6, they regain a spell slot. This would represent the Warlock attempting to persuade their patron to give them more power while in some form of trance or possessed state. Usable once per long rest.
I conceptually like the idea, but it would need some kind of limit per day otherwise they go dazed out of combat for 20 seconds and have their spells back on repeat.
And I don't get the complaint that the new Warlock doesn't have a different feel to its spellcasting. No other class in the game has Mystic Arcanum, which forces you to be a lot more thoughtful in your spell choice on both versions - moreso on the second one, since you have to consider those differences at much lower levels, but since you get actual low-level spell slots now that you don't have to beg for SRs for, they retain that uniqueness while being a lot more forgiving in play.
Mystic Arcanum is literally a tax on something we used to get for free, and one or two once-a-day free casts slightly above half-casting level is not markedly different from simply being a half caster, which then segues into the part where Warlocks lack a definitive other half: Bladelock is a SAD gish but has less HP, no shields, and no fighting style; tomelock is a slightly better cantrip blaster but still ultimately just a weaker wizard knock-off; and the chainlock familiar is a pinprick damager so fragile you'll have to resummon it after every second fight- with the one hour casting time defeating the point of not refreshing slots on short rest- and is taxed an additional invocation compared to tomelock to have the same attack performance.
Every option is clunky, done better elsewhere, and in no way worth losing fullcasting spell level progression. If I want spell utility, I can be a Wizard; if I want to gish I can be a sword Bard, bladesinger, Paladin, Ranger, one of two flavors of Artificer, or martial Cleric; if I want to summon/use a pet I can either go beastmaster or just be a full caster and use the summon spells and Find Familiar. The concept of the Warlock is compelling, but the core class itself is painfully underperforming in areas other classes already cover now because its primary niche was the unique casting mechanic, and without that there's no role it fills that another class doesn't do better because it's built around it rather than being tacked on.
It’s still the best cantrip damage dealer, which is what it was always meant to be. That’s really boring so I understand your gripes, the most unique thing they have done with warlock is allow you to use different ability scores to cast. Now they need to fix its Spellcasting to something that actually works. I also understand WotC problem. They need to give the people who want more spells per day what they want without increasing the power of the overall class.
It was meant to be a class that blended cantrip blasting, quick refreshing spell slots on full caster progression, and modular invocations. Now the spell slots are reduced to half caster progression on the standard refresh rate and a bunch of the invocations are earmarked if you want a pale imitation of full caster progression.
Greater Mystic Arcanum, levels 6, 7, 8, 9 as for the 2014 Warlock.
Lesser Mystic Arcanum, levels 1 to 5, as in the UA rules, using invocations, up to two spells per level. Still a half caster using spell slots, but Vancian casting built around them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
A wizard can nova 1 5th, 3 4th and 3 3rd. 4 5th really is not more powerful than that. Especially since you can only have one concentration spell up at a time. A sorcerer at 9th can have 2 5th 3, 4th, 3, 3rd. And with twin spell at 10th can drop 4 non concentration 5th level spells, or 1 concentration ans 2 non concentration 5ths, still having 3 4th and 3 3rd.
That being said I still prefer short rest with eldritch master as a 5th level ability and using the old progression with maybe after play testing a 3rd coming in around 7th or something and ending with 5 at 17th. They get the 4 or 6 pretty much on demand but not in one encounter.
I want to give a couple of minor thoughts that may or may not have been been discussed because I'm going sifting through the whole thread.
One thing I would like to see is more focus on increasing the strength of Blade, Chain, and Tome as you level (either as a warlock, through your patron, or with an invocation) and you should be able to pick between INT, WIS, or CHA for any of them (I also want Pact of the Talisman in here). I also want Weapon Mastery as an invocation (yes, there should be more invocation slots if they keep Mystic Arcanum as one).
Pact Familiar
I don't understand why elemental isn't one of the options for your familiar. I also don't agree with having specific damage types associated with each creature type. I think you should be able to choose between aberration, celestial, dragon, elemental, fey, fiend, monstrosity (maybe), ooze (maybe), plant (maybe), and undead and then select the damage type (acid, cold, fire, lightning, necrotic, poison, psychic, radiant, or thunder) when you summon it. Also, why can't I cast through the familiar like the wizard can?
Pact Weapon
Why can't I pick a Heavy weapon? Did you not want me to use any of the reach weapons? I just wanted to flavor a glaive or a halberd as a scythe.
While I'm not sure about the UA spell progression, I do want to have some way for the warlock to boost their summons. Even current warlocks can't upcast their summons as well as druids, sorcerers, or wizards can.
I honestly disagree with that. Spell scaling by level is not linear, for the same reason that an upcast Burning Hands doesn't really compete with a Fireball of the same level, so the novas are not equivalent.
Moreover, it doesn't address the second issue that I raised (the dissonance between pact slots and lower-level utility spells) - even if they somehow magically balanced pact slots perfectly so that lacking the latter felt perfectly compensated for at the outset, splat creep would eventually dismantle that. Because the reality about low level slots, is that there will always be cool stuff created for them as an edition goes on - if for no other reason than that cool stuff will always be made available for Eldritch Knights, Arcane Tricksters, Paladins, Rangers etc. Keeping Pact Magic autoscaling will mean it keeps missing out on this design, just like it did in 5e.
My hunch is they're saving some weapon types for the Hexblade.
Thats the answer.
Which brings the same old problem where hexblade is really the only true pact of the blade option.
You can disagree with it, but I don't think you'd be right. There are some spell levels where spells jump ridiculously in power, the difference between 3rd and 5th isn't one of those spots in combat. For damage 8d6 vs 8d8, that is 8 damage per target, its not massive. For crowd control is hold monster really that much better than hypnotic pattern or fear. 5th and 3rd has a couple spells which I fully expect to get a rewrite, like if wall of force does not give a save this time around i will be shocked, and I expect a save every round on fear/hypnotic pattern. but otherwise the gap is pretty small. Is a wizard going with animate objects and tossing 6 fireballs, 3 upcast to 4 really worse of than a warlock going with animate object and 3 cones of cold. I kind of doubt it. In fact assuming the fight lasted more than 4 rounds the wizard is better off imo. Out of combat 5th is where the arcane spells starts popping off with some really big effects like teleportation circle etc. But somehow I don't think that is a issue for having 4 of them.
As for the 2nd point, its not a issue, its a feature. You sometimes have to use a pact slot on a "weaker" spell when it fits the situation. If people can't bring themselves to do that, don't play the warlock. Leave us warlock fans one dang class that has a different feel to its spellcasting.
This, all day long.
The problem is a bunch of warlock fans complained they wanted to cast more spells. That means WotC has to find a way to balance that by their standard. I’ve come up with a bunch of different ways that feel unique and fun by my standard, but that’s not going to matter to WotC unless a bunch of players also voiced that same opinion. Which isn’t going to happen. We all have very different opinions on how to fix it and in that variance is people who love the new half caster version. What we will end up with in the final print I have no clue. These forums are a small sample size and I’ve seen so many different opinions here I can’t imagine the variety of opinions that will get posted in the play test survey. Then WotC will run with what they believe will satisfy the most people without breaking the game they want to design.
As a Warlock fan, please don't speak for me. I happen to like the direction WotC has taken. It certainly isn't perfect, but I don't want to go back to 5e Pact Magic.
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
BESEECH PATRON: After a Warlock casts their final spell slot, they may enter the Dazed condition until the end of their next turn and roll a d6. On a 5-6, they regain a spell slot. This would represent the Warlock attempting to persuade their patron to give them more power while in some form of trance or possessed state. Usable once per long rest.
I don’t believe they are suggesting to move back to 5e Pact Magic, but instead to move forward with my idea for converting pack magic to a long rest feature.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The ranger and paladin are right there for you to play. You took an oath to a eldritch beings ideals. We had one different class, you don't like it play the ones they are modeling this crap show after.
My ideal is remain short rest with eldritch master turned into a 5th level feature. But I'm willing to roll with a long rest pact magic as a compromise. 1/2 magic, go play a paladin don't turn the warlock into a knock off version.
Edit to tryt and clarify this stance. You can change the flavor on a ranger or paladin to give a warlock vibe. the mechanics of pact magic were unique I can't change the mechanics on 1.2 magic to make it pact magic. No matter how much I reflavor it, its not pact magic. Seriously one unique class and its fans get left in the dust to be just like a ranger but with invocations instead of nature warrior stuff.
The thing is those of us who don't like the goth ranger model would be happier with any of your options than the 1/2 magic model. We all have different ideas on the best fix sure. My hope is that even if 1/2 the fans like the 1/2 magic, if the other 1/2 hate it, it will be enough to get them off this track. If the warlock tracks at a 5 out of 10, i don't think they will stick with it. It is like they chose the worst possible solution, homogenization of the one unique caster class.
I think it will create a situation where, if sheer martial prowess is the thing you want most out of your Warlock, then Hexblade will be the ideal choice - just like if sheer martial prowess is what you want most out of your druid, then Moon will be the ideal choice. But that doesn't mean you won't be able to make viable gish using something like Fiend or Undead instead, just like you can make a viable gish using Spores, and get something in exchange for the martial power you give up. In short, Hexblade will be the best at it that role in some, maybe even most scenarios, but it won't be the "only true option."
I think just comparing dice is too limited a dimension here. Is a fireball that much higher damage than a Cone of Cold or Synaptic Static in terms of the number in the spell entry, no. Is the total damage higher when you're hitting 3x as many targets, or targeting a much weaker save not to mention adding a rider? I think that's a lot less clear-cut.
And I don't get the complaint that the new Warlock doesn't have a different feel to its spellcasting. No other class in the game has Mystic Arcanum, which forces you to be a lot more thoughtful in your spell choice on both versions - moreso on the second one, since you have to consider those differences at much lower levels, but since you get actual low-level spell slots now that you don't have to beg for SRs for, they retain that uniqueness while being a lot more forgiving in play.
I conceptually like the idea, but it would need some kind of limit per day otherwise they go dazed out of combat for 20 seconds and have their spells back on repeat.
Mystic Arcanum is literally a tax on something we used to get for free, and one or two once-a-day free casts slightly above half-casting level is not markedly different from simply being a half caster, which then segues into the part where Warlocks lack a definitive other half: Bladelock is a SAD gish but has less HP, no shields, and no fighting style; tomelock is a slightly better cantrip blaster but still ultimately just a weaker wizard knock-off; and the chainlock familiar is a pinprick damager so fragile you'll have to resummon it after every second fight- with the one hour casting time defeating the point of not refreshing slots on short rest- and is taxed an additional invocation compared to tomelock to have the same attack performance.
Every option is clunky, done better elsewhere, and in no way worth losing fullcasting spell level progression. If I want spell utility, I can be a Wizard; if I want to gish I can be a sword Bard, bladesinger, Paladin, Ranger, one of two flavors of Artificer, or martial Cleric; if I want to summon/use a pet I can either go beastmaster or just be a full caster and use the summon spells and Find Familiar. The concept of the Warlock is compelling, but the core class itself is painfully underperforming in areas other classes already cover now because its primary niche was the unique casting mechanic, and without that there's no role it fills that another class doesn't do better because it's built around it rather than being tacked on.
It’s still the best cantrip damage dealer, which is what it was always meant to be. That’s really boring so I understand your gripes, the most unique thing they have done with warlock is allow you to use different ability scores to cast. Now they need to fix its Spellcasting to something that actually works. I also understand WotC problem. They need to give the people who want more spells per day what they want without increasing the power of the overall class.
It was meant to be a class that blended cantrip blasting, quick refreshing spell slots on full caster progression, and modular invocations. Now the spell slots are reduced to half caster progression on the standard refresh rate and a bunch of the invocations are earmarked if you want a pale imitation of full caster progression.
Suggestion:
Greater Mystic Arcanum, levels 6, 7, 8, 9 as for the 2014 Warlock.
Lesser Mystic Arcanum, levels 1 to 5, as in the UA rules, using invocations, up to two spells per level. Still a half caster using spell slots, but Vancian casting built around them.