Pact Magic is "different from Spellcasting (!)" in precisely two ways: forced maximum casting level, and short rest recharge. Remove either of those things and Pact Magic is no longer "different" enough to satisfy the people who claim warlocks are only playable because they're Different(C) from regular casters.
Problem: we know what warlocks are allowed to have with forced maximum level spellcasting and short rest recharge. Two entire spell slots per day and a bunch of entitled jerks calling anyone who doesn't treat short rests as an unlimited at-will resource 'dysfunctional'.
There. Is. No. Fixing. Pact. Magic. In a way that allows the diehards to keep their short rest abuse intact, and those people will also never permit a long rest based resource economy for warlocks. So we're back to what I said forty pages ago - Wizards has to make a version of Pact Magic that works equally well with both Zero short rests and Unlimited short rests, and that is mathematically impossible.
I've already had people tell me in PM that if my table doesn't use short rests I have no business playing warlocks and should just accept that the class is soft-banned from my table. HOW IS THAT NOT BULLSHIT? How is that remotely fair? Why should ANYONE stand for that?
I've already had people tell me in PM that if my table doesn't use short rests I have no business playing warlocks and should just accept that the class is soft-banned from my table. HOW IS THAT NOT BULLSHIT? How is that remotely fair? Why should ANYONE stand for that?
Because it's not Wizards of the Coast's job to make sure every class is equally playable if an individual table is going to houserule out literally half of the core rest mechanics?
If your GM is going to make a houserule that fundamentally breaks a bunch of classes, your GM can fix it.
That's just it. No unlimited short rests every single day *doesn't* break any class except warlock. Even monk can manage. But warlock spellcasting disappears if you don't get unlimited short rests every day and it's the ONLY class this happens to.
Ultimately WotC will build classes around an assumption of an average number of short rests used at the average table as long as the concept of a short rest remains in the game. If people want classes that work equally well at all tables then we need to remove the short rest idea completely and rework all spells/classes to balance for a full adventure day with no renewing resources. No channel divinity renewal, action surge, ki points, warlock slots, etc....
UA warlocks are half-casters. They use the same spell slot table as other half-casters, and they count half their levels toward spell progression in a multi-class. You may feel that the add-ons make it an interesting and viable half-caster, one that has a different "style" than other half-casters -- which, y'know, I would hope so, since it's a different class and all -- but it's hard to take your arguments seriously while you keep denying what is clearly written in the rules
For 5E, multiclassing a Warlock with any full caster, such as a Wizard, means you get Pact Slots and Invocations appropriate for your Warlock level and Spell Slots appropriate for your Wizard level. Warlock level never enters the calculations for multiclass spells.
For UA, multiclassing a Warlock with any full caster, such as a Wizard, means your get your Invocations for your Warlock level and Spell slots appropriate for your Wizard level and 1/2 your Warlock level.
Aren't the total number of spells you can cast higher with UA than 5E?
That's just it. No unlimited short rests every single day *doesn't* break any class except warlock. Even monk can manage. But warlock spellcasting disappears if you don't get unlimited short rests every day and it's the ONLY class this happens to.
Why is this okay?
You don't need unlimited short rests per day, but you do need to be able to get in one or two most days. My first Warlock was in a game when the DM had our space between encounters as either the 5 minute workday (ONE encounter per day) or back to back without even enough time to bandage wounds. It wasn't much fun, and I wish I had just played a sorcerer or bard for that game. I mean before the game group broke up (people moving) there hadn't been a single short rest in the entire campaign, it was that bad.
When I played a the next 2 Warlocks, the DM for those games reduced short rests to 15 minutes - And I think the most the group needed in an adventure was 3. Hardly game breaking, but I can say that was partly due to a combination of having a Ring of Spell storing and one of the bonus spell feats (I think Shadow Touched).
That's just it. No unlimited short rests every single day *doesn't* break any class except warlock. Even monk can manage. But warlock spellcasting disappears if you don't get unlimited short rests every day and it's the ONLY class this happens to.
Why is this okay?
A monk without ki points is just an auto-attack bot. A battlemaster without superiority dice is just an auto-attack bot. A warlock without spell slots is just an auto-attack bot. If you're suggesting that the first two aren't "broken," then neither is the third.
Or only have some minor features recharge on short rest, maybe with initiative rolls at mid to high levels. Sorcerers still get some sorcery points back, for example. The Warlock's issue was the major class feature was returned on a short rest, and it was one of the most limited resources in the game on top of it. A Cleric not having a chance to recharge channel divinity isn't as much of a detriment as a Warlock not being able to recharge their spells.
I was supposed to quote a post with this....Sorry Kaynadin.
I've already had people tell me in PM that if my table doesn't use short rests I have no business playing warlocks and should just accept that the class is soft-banned from my table. HOW IS THAT NOT BULLSHIT? How is that remotely fair? Why should ANYONE stand for that?
Because it's not Wizards of the Coast's job to make sure every class is equally playable if an individual table is going to houserule out literally half of the core rest mechanics?
If your GM is going to make a houserule that fundamentally breaks a bunch of classes, your GM can fix it.
I think it is important to point out that feedback that WotC has received over the past few years says that the majority of players don't agree with this. That is why they are attempting to move Warlock away from their dependence on Short Rests. WotC stated as much in their video about the UA changes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
That's just it. No unlimited short rests every single day *doesn't* break any class except warlock. Even monk can manage. But warlock spellcasting disappears if you don't get unlimited short rests every day and it's the ONLY class this happens to.
Why is this okay?
You don't need unlimited short rests per day, but you do need to be able to get in one or two most days. My first Warlock was in a game when the DM had our space between encounters as either the 5 minute workday (ONE encounter per day) or back to back without even enough time to bandage wounds. It wasn't much fun, and I wish I had just played a sorcerer or bard for that game. I mean before the game group broke up (people moving) there hadn't been a single short rest in the entire campaign, it was that bad.
When I played a the next 2 Warlocks, the DM for those games reduced short rests to 15 minutes - And I think the most the group needed in an adventure was 3. Hardly game breaking, but I can say that was partly due to a combination of having a Ring of Spell storing and one of the bonus spell feats (I think Shadow Touched).
I'd say in campaigns with just one fight the warlock probably would be fine, and wizards/sorcerers would be vastly over powered. Tossing 2 level 5 spells a fight is pretty solid.
That's just it. No unlimited short rests every single day *doesn't* break any class except warlock. Even monk can manage. But warlock spellcasting disappears if you don't get unlimited short rests every day and it's the ONLY class this happens to.
Why is this okay?
If a DM takes flying out of their game, I don't think that Aarakocra would be very effective.
Why is this okay?
Just because you don't use a mechanic at your table doesn't mean that the mechanic should be ignored across the game. Maybe modifications can be made to make said mechanic more universally applicable. Or maybe the DM that runs your game should pop in an optional or homebrew rule to keep their irregularly timed game on the more-or-less balanced path that the game is supposed to be on. But just because a DM bans flying from my game doesn't mean I'm going to start demanding that the Aarakocra's flight is replaced by something else.
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)
That's just it. No unlimited short rests every single day *doesn't* break any class except warlock. Even monk can manage. But warlock spellcasting disappears if you don't get unlimited short rests every day and it's the ONLY class this happens to.
Why is this okay?
And if Eldritch master became a level 5 ability? Now they have 1 on demand spell slot recharge a day. One short rest is pretty much all they need to be balanced, so in games without them they will be fine. In games with enough encounters per day that one short rest recharge is not enough for their pact magic to cover it the party is taking short rests because the party ran out of hit points. And if people really need multiple low level slots as well, build a lesser arcanum as a invocation. 1/2 caster fans were fine with people having to pay for the higher level slots, turn it around and pay for the low level ones. Make them actual spell slots maybe that can be changed daily but cap them at like X per spell level, recharge on long rest. They become available roughly following the 1/2 caster chart. Don;t give as many per day as the pact caster slots are still baked in.
UA warlocks are half-casters. They use the same spell slot table as other half-casters, and they count half their levels toward spell progression in a multi-class. You may feel that the add-ons make it an interesting and viable half-caster, one that has a different "style" than other half-casters -- which, y'know, I would hope so, since it's a different class and all -- but it's hard to take your arguments seriously while you keep denying what is clearly written in the rules
For 5E, multiclassing a Warlock with any full caster, such as a Wizard, means you get Pact Slots and Invocations appropriate for your Warlock level and Spell Slots appropriate for your Wizard level. Warlock level never enters the calculations for multiclass spells.
For UA, multiclassing a Warlock with any full caster, such as a Wizard, means your get your Invocations for your Warlock level and Spell slots appropriate for your Wizard level and 1/2 your Warlock level.
Aren't the total number of spells you can cast higher with UA than 5E?
I don't understand what point you're trying to make
UA warlock is a half-caster. You might think it's a good half-caster, or a bad half-caster, or better off as a half-caster than the 5e warlock with Pact Magic... but it's still a 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)
Or only have some minor features recharge on short rest, maybe with initiative rolls at mid to high levels. Sorcerers still get some sorcery points back, for example. The Warlock's issue was the major class feature was returned on a short rest, and it was one of the most limited resources in the game on top of it. A Cleric not having a chance to recharge channel divinity isn't as much of a detriment as a Warlock not being able to recharge their spells.
I was supposed to quote a post with this....Sorry Kaynadin.
Yeah, the impact has a variable impact on a class level and even on a subclass level *coughtwilightclericscough*. If the goal is design that does not favor one playstyle over another like it does currently then you need to eliminate the source of the discrepancy is all I was getting at.
I've already had people tell me in PM that if my table doesn't use short rests I have no business playing warlocks and should just accept that the class is soft-banned from my table. HOW IS THAT NOT BULLSHIT? How is that remotely fair? Why should ANYONE stand for that?
Because it's not Wizards of the Coast's job to make sure every class is equally playable if an individual table is going to houserule out literally half of the core rest mechanics?
If your GM is going to make a houserule that fundamentally breaks a bunch of classes, your GM can fix it.
I think it is important to point out that feedback that WotC has received over the past few years says that the majority of players don't agree with this. That is why they are attempting to move Warlock away from their dependence on Short Rests. WotC stated as much in their video about the UA changes.
I don't think that is accurate. They have received feedback from fans that they did not like how short rest worked for some classes. But the majority? highly doubt that. No one is sending in random feedback to say, you know what wizards i think your short rest mechanic works pretty well. You only get complaints, you don't get that many hey i like the way this works. The same issue arises in polls, if its not something that really bothers you, you wont get involved in the poll. Only the invested do.
Which isn't to say they can't be improved, its just there is a difference between this isn't working perfectly and toss it out entirely for those classes.
There. Is. No. Fixing. Pact. Magic. In a way that allows the diehards to keep their short rest abuse intact
I think with the same principle, anything that allows abuse, must be fixed from rules, as it creates imbalance, which destroys the game itself. An unbalanced game is really boring, but maybe for the one taking advantage of the imbalance, that is not even my group case (have fixed things affecting me directly for the sake of a balanced game), with multiple GM with an accord, if detecting something that cause abuse, fix it, no matter who is affected.
So why allowing unlimited short rest or banning them completely? As mentioned what I do is limiting it to 2 short rests between long rests (set your own for your game), and add a healing rest as option for healing that don't count as short rest.
When there is something what you so desperately want to take side of, is a clear sign that needs to be fixed.
I can understand those who want it to be a full spellcaster instead a half-caster. But, for arcane domain we already have here 2 full casters, Sorcerer and Wizard, there is need that all of them to be full-casters, how many more we need?. Now it sets a starting point from which can evolve to a good combatant, or a good caster, or anything between. Is the only class that can choose its class abilities from a list for every 2 levels, with invocations, getting abilities as spells (not cantrips) at-will, permanent, or that can't even be replicated by spells, how can put value to that? Now it has access to full arcane spell list, so with that if you allow the old system and getting Hexblade, is simply not fair.
Or only have some minor features recharge on short rest, maybe with initiative rolls at mid to high levels. Sorcerers still get some sorcery points back, for example. The Warlock's issue was the major class feature was returned on a short rest, and it was one of the most limited resources in the game on top of it. A Cleric not having a chance to recharge channel divinity isn't as much of a detriment as a Warlock not being able to recharge their spells.
I was supposed to quote a post with this....Sorry Kaynadin.
A cleric sure, but a monk needs ki points(which maybe they change to a daily mechanic)a battle master fighter without maneuvers is just a dude swinging a sword, rune knights rune effects are on a short rest as well etc. There are very significant class features across a decent number of classes that are short rest based in the game.
Fully leveled up spells may be more significant, but as Saga pointed once either group is out it puts the warlock in the same boat as the monk/fighter without their resources, a basic damage dealer. Fighter will probably do more damage but the warlock will likely add some battlefield control effects in as well.
Nobody wants Eldritch Master as a low-level ability, nor is seriously proposing it. Short rest people mostly just want to sneer and be all superior at tables where time exists.
Counterpoint: Pact Magic is very easy to turn into an Invocation. I did it thirty pages ago.
"Pact Magic: choose one Arcane spell of [X] level. You gain one spell slot, which you can use to cast the chosen spell or any other spells you know. The level of the spell slot changes based on your warlock level, as shown in the Pact Magic table below. You regain this spell slot whenever you complete a short or long rest. Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can change the Arcane spell you chose for this Invocation. You can select this Invocation more than once, up to the number of times shown for your warlock level in the Pact Magic table."
Boom. Done. People who want their two entire short rest spell slots can burn two whole Invocations and get their Pact Magic spell slots entirely unmodified, as they desire. The rest of us can have actual spellcasting where we get to cast spells, or at least SOMETHING that actually works the way the game is played by many people.
Not that it matters. We all already know that the Unmodified Pact Magic people have already won. It doesn't matter that the most common and consistent feedback Wizards has gotten for the warlock is "more spells, more often!" Clearly the people who gave that feedback over the last eight years don't matter. So whatever.
Here's to ten more years of the warlock being seriously undertuned and difficult to play for any table that doesn't get unlimited at-will short rests.
I've already had people tell me in PM that if my table doesn't use short rests I have no business playing warlocks and should just accept that the class is soft-banned from my table. HOW IS THAT NOT BULLSHIT? How is that remotely fair? Why should ANYONE stand for that?
Because it's not Wizards of the Coast's job to make sure every class is equally playable if an individual table is going to houserule out literally half of the core rest mechanics?
If your GM is going to make a houserule that fundamentally breaks a bunch of classes, your GM can fix it.
I think it is important to point out that feedback that WotC has received over the past few years says that the majority of players don't agree with this. That is why they are attempting to move Warlock away from their dependence on Short Rests. WotC stated as much in their video about the UA changes.
I don't think that is accurate. They have received feedback from fans that they did not like how short rest worked for some classes. But the majority? highly doubt that. No one is sending in random feedback to say, you know what wizards i think your short rest mechanic works pretty well. You only get complaints, you don't get that many hey i like the way this works. The same issue arises in polls, if its not something that really bothers you, you wont get involved in the poll. Only the invested do.
Which isn't to say they can't be improved, its just there is a difference between this isn't working perfectly and toss it out entirely for those classes.
I am going only based off what WotC has said on the subject at about the 4 minute mark of the Player's Handbook Playtest 5 UA video. Number of spell slots and being tied to Short Rests was the main point of dissatisfaction with the Warlock. They even use Yurei's example of not using Short Rests as one of the stated issues players are having.
Exactly, calling warlocks "gloom rangers" and the like is like saying there is no difference between a Bard and sorcerer because they are both full casters that use charisma.
Here's the thing. You say you want a "nuanced conversation", but then you direct your energy toward... this. You complain that one person's analogy is nonsense, and then you respond with your own nonsense analogy rather than just ignoring them (or Ignoring them) if you don't think they're actually contributing to the discussion
UA warlocks are half-casters. They use the same spell slot table as other half-casters, and they count half their levels toward spell progression in a multi-class. You may feel that the add-ons make it an interesting and viable half-caster, one that has a different "style" than other half-casters -- which, y'know, I would hope so, since it's a different class and all -- but it's hard to take your arguments seriously while you keep denying what is clearly written in the rules
I think the reason people don't like the goth ranger analogy is not because it is nonsense, but because it actually works to encapsulate the problems people have with the new warlock. Yeah its not 100% a ranger, that isn't the argument, everyone knows that. But too much of the warlocks identity was lost into the half caster mold, changing from a entirely unique if maybe not perfectly balanced class into something that is far more generic. you have to use 1/2 your invocations at pretty much all levels to get more of a spell caster feel back but your invocations is what helped define you, so you in effect lose uniqueness on two fronts, you lost your pact magic, and now you have to use 1/2 your customizing invocations to catch back up. Which just further rolls it back into its bland mold.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Pact Magic is "different from Spellcasting (!)" in precisely two ways: forced maximum casting level, and short rest recharge. Remove either of those things and Pact Magic is no longer "different" enough to satisfy the people who claim warlocks are only playable because they're Different(C) from regular casters.
Problem: we know what warlocks are allowed to have with forced maximum level spellcasting and short rest recharge. Two entire spell slots per day and a bunch of entitled jerks calling anyone who doesn't treat short rests as an unlimited at-will resource 'dysfunctional'.
There. Is. No. Fixing. Pact. Magic. In a way that allows the diehards to keep their short rest abuse intact, and those people will also never permit a long rest based resource economy for warlocks. So we're back to what I said forty pages ago - Wizards has to make a version of Pact Magic that works equally well with both Zero short rests and Unlimited short rests, and that is mathematically impossible.
I've already had people tell me in PM that if my table doesn't use short rests I have no business playing warlocks and should just accept that the class is soft-banned from my table. HOW IS THAT NOT BULLSHIT? How is that remotely fair? Why should ANYONE stand for that?
Please do not contact or message me.
Because it's not Wizards of the Coast's job to make sure every class is equally playable if an individual table is going to houserule out literally half of the core rest mechanics?
If your GM is going to make a houserule that fundamentally breaks a bunch of classes, your GM can fix it.
That's just it. No unlimited short rests every single day *doesn't* break any class except warlock. Even monk can manage. But warlock spellcasting disappears if you don't get unlimited short rests every day and it's the ONLY class this happens to.
Why is this okay?
Please do not contact or message me.
Ultimately WotC will build classes around an assumption of an average number of short rests used at the average table as long as the concept of a short rest remains in the game. If people want classes that work equally well at all tables then we need to remove the short rest idea completely and rework all spells/classes to balance for a full adventure day with no renewing resources. No channel divinity renewal, action surge, ki points, warlock slots, etc....
For 5E, multiclassing a Warlock with any full caster, such as a Wizard, means you get Pact Slots and Invocations appropriate for your Warlock level and Spell Slots appropriate for your Wizard level. Warlock level never enters the calculations for multiclass spells.
For UA, multiclassing a Warlock with any full caster, such as a Wizard, means your get your Invocations for your Warlock level and Spell slots appropriate for your Wizard level and 1/2 your Warlock level.
Aren't the total number of spells you can cast higher with UA than 5E?
You don't need unlimited short rests per day, but you do need to be able to get in one or two most days. My first Warlock was in a game when the DM had our space between encounters as either the 5 minute workday (ONE encounter per day) or back to back without even enough time to bandage wounds. It wasn't much fun, and I wish I had just played a sorcerer or bard for that game. I mean before the game group broke up (people moving) there hadn't been a single short rest in the entire campaign, it was that bad.
When I played a the next 2 Warlocks, the DM for those games reduced short rests to 15 minutes - And I think the most the group needed in an adventure was 3. Hardly game breaking, but I can say that was partly due to a combination of having a Ring of Spell storing and one of the bonus spell feats (I think Shadow Touched).
A monk without ki points is just an auto-attack bot. A battlemaster without superiority dice is just an auto-attack bot. A warlock without spell slots is just an auto-attack bot. If you're suggesting that the first two aren't "broken," then neither is the third.
Or only have some minor features recharge on short rest, maybe with initiative rolls at mid to high levels. Sorcerers still get some sorcery points back, for example. The Warlock's issue was the major class feature was returned on a short rest, and it was one of the most limited resources in the game on top of it. A Cleric not having a chance to recharge channel divinity isn't as much of a detriment as a Warlock not being able to recharge their spells.
I was supposed to quote a post with this....Sorry Kaynadin.
I think it is important to point out that feedback that WotC has received over the past few years says that the majority of players don't agree with this. That is why they are attempting to move Warlock away from their dependence on Short Rests. WotC stated as much in their video about the UA changes.
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
I'd say in campaigns with just one fight the warlock probably would be fine, and wizards/sorcerers would be vastly over powered. Tossing 2 level 5 spells a fight is pretty solid.
If a DM takes flying out of their game, I don't think that Aarakocra would be very effective.
Why is this okay?
Just because you don't use a mechanic at your table doesn't mean that the mechanic should be ignored across the game. Maybe modifications can be made to make said mechanic more universally applicable. Or maybe the DM that runs your game should pop in an optional or homebrew rule to keep their irregularly timed game on the more-or-less balanced path that the game is supposed to be on. But just because a DM bans flying from my game doesn't mean I'm going to start demanding that the Aarakocra's flight is replaced by something else.
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)
And if Eldritch master became a level 5 ability? Now they have 1 on demand spell slot recharge a day. One short rest is pretty much all they need to be balanced, so in games without them they will be fine. In games with enough encounters per day that one short rest recharge is not enough for their pact magic to cover it the party is taking short rests because the party ran out of hit points. And if people really need multiple low level slots as well, build a lesser arcanum as a invocation. 1/2 caster fans were fine with people having to pay for the higher level slots, turn it around and pay for the low level ones. Make them actual spell slots maybe that can be changed daily but cap them at like X per spell level, recharge on long rest. They become available roughly following the 1/2 caster chart. Don;t give as many per day as the pact caster slots are still baked in.
I don't understand what point you're trying to make
UA warlock is a half-caster. You might think it's a good half-caster, or a bad half-caster, or better off as a half-caster than the 5e warlock with Pact Magic... but it's still a 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)
Yeah, the impact has a variable impact on a class level and even on a subclass level *coughtwilightclericscough*. If the goal is design that does not favor one playstyle over another like it does currently then you need to eliminate the source of the discrepancy is all I was getting at.
I don't think that is accurate. They have received feedback from fans that they did not like how short rest worked for some classes. But the majority? highly doubt that. No one is sending in random feedback to say, you know what wizards i think your short rest mechanic works pretty well. You only get complaints, you don't get that many hey i like the way this works. The same issue arises in polls, if its not something that really bothers you, you wont get involved in the poll. Only the invested do.
Which isn't to say they can't be improved, its just there is a difference between this isn't working perfectly and toss it out entirely for those classes.
I think with the same principle, anything that allows abuse, must be fixed from rules, as it creates imbalance, which destroys the game itself. An unbalanced game is really boring, but maybe for the one taking advantage of the imbalance, that is not even my group case (have fixed things affecting me directly for the sake of a balanced game), with multiple GM with an accord, if detecting something that cause abuse, fix it, no matter who is affected.
So why allowing unlimited short rest or banning them completely? As mentioned what I do is limiting it to 2 short rests between long rests (set your own for your game), and add a healing rest as option for healing that don't count as short rest.
When there is something what you so desperately want to take side of, is a clear sign that needs to be fixed.
I can understand those who want it to be a full spellcaster instead a half-caster. But, for arcane domain we already have here 2 full casters, Sorcerer and Wizard, there is need that all of them to be full-casters, how many more we need?. Now it sets a starting point from which can evolve to a good combatant, or a good caster, or anything between. Is the only class that can choose its class abilities from a list for every 2 levels, with invocations, getting abilities as spells (not cantrips) at-will, permanent, or that can't even be replicated by spells, how can put value to that? Now it has access to full arcane spell list, so with that if you allow the old system and getting Hexblade, is simply not fair.
A cleric sure, but a monk needs ki points(which maybe they change to a daily mechanic)a battle master fighter without maneuvers is just a dude swinging a sword, rune knights rune effects are on a short rest as well etc. There are very significant class features across a decent number of classes that are short rest based in the game.
Fully leveled up spells may be more significant, but as Saga pointed once either group is out it puts the warlock in the same boat as the monk/fighter without their resources, a basic damage dealer. Fighter will probably do more damage but the warlock will likely add some battlefield control effects in as well.
Nobody wants Eldritch Master as a low-level ability, nor is seriously proposing it. Short rest people mostly just want to sneer and be all superior at tables where time exists.
Counterpoint: Pact Magic is very easy to turn into an Invocation. I did it thirty pages ago.
"Pact Magic: choose one Arcane spell of [X] level. You gain one spell slot, which you can use to cast the chosen spell or any other spells you know. The level of the spell slot changes based on your warlock level, as shown in the Pact Magic table below. You regain this spell slot whenever you complete a short or long rest. Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can change the Arcane spell you chose for this Invocation. You can select this Invocation more than once, up to the number of times shown for your warlock level in the Pact Magic table."
Boom. Done. People who want their two entire short rest spell slots can burn two whole Invocations and get their Pact Magic spell slots entirely unmodified, as they desire. The rest of us can have actual spellcasting where we get to cast spells, or at least SOMETHING that actually works the way the game is played by many people.
Not that it matters. We all already know that the Unmodified Pact Magic people have already won. It doesn't matter that the most common and consistent feedback Wizards has gotten for the warlock is "more spells, more often!" Clearly the people who gave that feedback over the last eight years don't matter. So whatever.
Here's to ten more years of the warlock being seriously undertuned and difficult to play for any table that doesn't get unlimited at-will short rests.
Please do not contact or message me.
I am going only based off what WotC has said on the subject at about the 4 minute mark of the Player's Handbook Playtest 5 UA video. Number of spell slots and being tied to Short Rests was the main point of dissatisfaction with the Warlock. They even use Yurei's example of not using Short Rests as one of the stated issues players are having.
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
I think the reason people don't like the goth ranger analogy is not because it is nonsense, but because it actually works to encapsulate the problems people have with the new warlock. Yeah its not 100% a ranger, that isn't the argument, everyone knows that. But too much of the warlocks identity was lost into the half caster mold, changing from a entirely unique if maybe not perfectly balanced class into something that is far more generic. you have to use 1/2 your invocations at pretty much all levels to get more of a spell caster feel back but your invocations is what helped define you, so you in effect lose uniqueness on two fronts, you lost your pact magic, and now you have to use 1/2 your customizing invocations to catch back up. Which just further rolls it back into its bland mold.