PS, the Aura of Protection is so overrated. Consider the One D&D version of Resistance (a cantrip available at level 1) provides on average 2.5 bonus to a save in the same radius, while most Paladin AoP are a +2 to +3. If everyone in the party takes Magic Initiate to get Resistance as their level 1 feat
So, you think the Aura is overrated because if everyone else in the party burns a feat, they can roughly match the bonus it gives?
Are you sure that's the answer you want to go with?
No if you want to actual math why it is over rate it is very simple, even with a +5 aura, having 1 member of the party avoid being targeted the AOE damage results in less total damage to the party than if everyone was in that +5 aura. The aura of protection is a trap, it encourages the party to bunch up with results in them taking MORE damage from AOE effects.
There are so many wrong assumptions in there I'm actually a bit dizzy, but since this is a warlock thread and not a paladin thread I'll just leave you with this one -- who said anything about saving throws against damage?
Because the vast majority of saving throws that affect more than 1 target (thus Aura > Resistance) are against damage. Unless you're in a campaign exclusively against mindflayers damage is going to be your chief AoE danger. This is before we even consider that you're crippling your own ability to deal damage by staying back with your squishies rather than moving into melee to SMITE. I've played with a paladin in the party for 3/4 campaigns I've been in, and >90% of the saves where the Aura actually made a difference for at least 1 character were AoE damage, and at least 5 times I've saved my character more damage by moving away from the paladin to avoid being hit than staying in the aura.
But even against AoE saves vs conditions, it is STILL better to move away so you aren't targeted than to stay in the aura and hope the bonus saves you, because an aura of +5 is only an extra 25% chance to save, whereas not getting targeted is a 100% chance to avoid all the effects. Man.. I should really suggest one to of the D&D optimization tubers they do a video to dispel this myth. If you can't avoid getting hit then Aura is better obviously, but avoiding getting hit is always better.
BI and One D&D Resistance are better than the aura vs single-target effects and moving out of the area is better vs AoE.
While I like the half-caster design, I kinda have a problem with Mystic Arcanum being taken away from warlocks and put under a price tag of invocations. Maybe simply granting more invocations could fix it - it's still better than Pact Magic system - but I'd rather prefer those free Mystic Arcanums back.
While I like the half-caster design, I kinda have a problem with Mystic Arcanum being taken away from warlocks and put under a price tag of invocations. Maybe simply granting more invocations could fix it - it's still better than Pact Magic system - but I'd rather prefer those free Mystic Arcanums back.
One of the main issues I have with the UA half-caster idea is that they didn't seem to have a clue what to do about the other half, so they ended up with this unfocused mishmish that does neither theme nor mechanics any favors
They've tried to streamline/simplify things with these class groups, but by doing that they feel compelled to make the groups "balanced". So the Expert group has a half-caster in the ranger, and the Priest group has a half-caster in the paladin, meaning I guess the Mage group needs a half-caster too. (Why Mage doesn't just have three full casters the way Warrior has three full melee classes, I have no idea... unless monk is going to end up somehow half-melee, half-expert)
If they aren't willing to have a warlock that can hang with other full casters, even if it works outside the usual spell slot progression, then just get rid of it entirely and replace it with a true gish/swordmage class
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)
This might be a weird suggestion, but what if Pact Magic was reformed into an invocation option where it would be somewhat similar to a wizard's Arcane Recovery but without the limitation of being once per day? Something like - Pact Magic. Each time you complete a short rest, you regain two expended spell slots. Maybe give it the stipulation that you can choose the invocation multiple times, increasing the number of slots you regain per short rest by some increment.
This might be a weird suggestion, but what if Pact Magic was reformed into an invocation option where it would be somewhat similar to a wizard's Arcane Recovery but without the limitation of being once per day? Something like - Pact Magic. Each time you complete a short rest, you regain two expended spell slots. Maybe give it the stipulation that you can choose the invocation multiple times, increasing the number of slots you regain per short rest by some increment.
I think that would be nice, but I'd hesitate to have the option to take it multiple times... recovering spell slots on every short rest is balanced in Pact magic by just how few max slots a Warlock has. There's a reason anything that allows spell slot regeneration for other classes is extremely limited. I think, though, that even just getting 2 level 1 spell slots back at every short rest on its own is potentially worth an invocation.
If the design direction is going to be taking old Warlock features and stripping them away only to reintroduce them as invocations, then they're going to need to give more invocation slots to Warlocks to not make it feel like a major downgrade. I think that's starting to be where I fall on this debate... personally, I would prefer just to stick to the Pact Magic system and simply give more spell slots, but if WOTC does go the half-caster route then I think they'll need to also provide more invocations. If they're changing Warlock from being a weirdo full-caster into a half-caster-half-whateveryouwant, then just to keep up with the other half-casters the Warlock needs a lot more room for the customization invocations offer. Even if they go with something similar to Artificers, where they have more infusions known than they have infusions active at any one time... being able to swap invocations on a short or long rest would give a lot of versatility to the class to make up for the invocation tax now put on certain builds.
At lvl 9 the 2014 PHB warlock had 2 5th level spells. The playtest warlock had 3rd level spells as their max (without spending evocations) spell level
Is it important to you that the warlock has access to 5th level spells at 9th level ? Or would the power increase just from the higher spell slots available be enough?
For example a option where twice a day you can spontaneously up cast a spell by 2 spell levels at level 9. You could sill only prepare 3rd level spells maximum but cast them as if you used a 5th level spell slot.
While I like the half-caster design, I kinda have a problem with Mystic Arcanum being taken away from warlocks and put under a price tag of invocations. Maybe simply granting more invocations could fix it - it's still better than Pact Magic system - but I'd rather prefer those free Mystic Arcanums back.
One of the main issues I have with the UA half-caster idea is that they didn't seem to have a clue what to do about the other half, so they ended up with this unfocused mishmish that does neither theme nor mechanics any favors
They've tried to streamline/simplify things with these class groups, but by doing that they feel compelled to make the groups "balanced". So the Expert group has a half-caster in the ranger, and the Priest group has a half-caster in the paladin, meaning I guess the Mage group needs a half-caster too. (Why Mage doesn't just have three full casters the way Warrior has three full melee classes, I have no idea... unless monk is going to end up somehow half-melee, half-expert)
If they aren't willing to have a warlock that can hang with other full casters, even if it works outside the usual spell slot progression, then just get rid of it entirely and replace it with a true gish/swordmage class
I don't think changing Warlock has anything to do with making the groups "balanced" against one another. As you yourself said, the Warrior group has no half or full casters at all, while the Priest group has two full casters and the Expert group has only one. The groups are not meant to mirror one another - the ties between the classes in a group are thematic, not rigidly mechanical.
The actual reasons they changed Warlock were all spelled out by Crawford in the devblog:
Short rest recovery meant the devs having to tightly restrict the number of slots they got for most of their career, which led to people cantrip-spamming and hoarding those few slots, creating a subpar play experience.
Even with the DMG guidance on rests per day, rests are wildly inconsistent across tables, because repeatedly begging your party to stop everything for an hour especially when the other players get nothing out of it isn't fun. Some tables do one big fight per day with no short rest, others allow a single short rest, others do multiple and allow a short rest after every single one, and many of those vary substantially from day to day. It's impossible to design around an expected warlock experience under those conditions.
Pact Slots interact weirdly with other parts of the system, especially multiclassing. In the extreme this leads to unintended interactions like coffeelock and rest casting.
Making Warlocks a LR-based class with proper spell slots fixes all of these, and making them a half-caster that can punch above every other half-caster in terms of magic preserves their unique feel and allows them to function as a party's primary caster in a pinch. For a caster class that came to power without scholarship, piety, or nepotism, that's still impressive.
I still think that if we want to lean heavily on the "warlocks don't really learn magic themselves, and just steal/borrow power from their Patron", we should not stop at half measures, pun intended, by making them half-casters. Instead get rid spell slots entirely, double the amount of available invocations, and make us take all spells as Mystic Arcanums.
When you choose Mystic Arcanum you choose what level (of those available to you) you commit it to memory as a Mystic Arcanum
A spell is always cast as the level it was chosen.
Allow taking the same spell multiple times, each time spending an invocation doing so.
The level as which the spell is taken determines the number of times it can be cast per long rest.
Utility spell of any level (of those available to you at your level) that can't be upcast normally, infinite times at will.
PS, the Aura of Protection is so overrated. Consider the One D&D version of Resistance (a cantrip available at level 1) provides on average 2.5 bonus to a save in the same radius, while most Paladin AoP are a +2 to +3. If everyone in the party takes Magic Initiate to get Resistance as their level 1 feat
So, you think the Aura is overrated because if everyone else in the party burns a feat, they can roughly match the bonus it gives?
Are you sure that's the answer you want to go with?
No if you want to actual math why it is over rate it is very simple, even with a +5 aura, having 1 member of the party avoid being targeted the AOE damage results in less total damage to the party than if everyone was in that +5 aura. The aura of protection is a trap, it encourages the party to bunch up with results in them taking MORE damage from AOE effects.
There are so many wrong assumptions in there I'm actually a bit dizzy, but since this is a warlock thread and not a paladin thread I'll just leave you with this one -- who said anything about saving throws against damage?
Because the vast majority of saving throws that affect more than 1 target (thus Aura > Resistance) are against damage. Unless you're in a campaign exclusively against mindflayers damage is going to be your chief AoE danger. This is before we even consider that you're crippling your own ability to deal damage by staying back with your squishies rather than moving into melee to SMITE. I've played with a paladin in the party for 3/4 campaigns I've been in, and >90% of the saves where the Aura actually made a difference for at least 1 character were AoE damage, and at least 5 times I've saved my character more damage by moving away from the paladin to avoid being hit than staying in the aura.
But even against AoE saves vs conditions, it is STILL better to move away so you aren't targeted than to stay in the aura and hope the bonus saves you, because an aura of +5 is only an extra 25% chance to save, whereas not getting targeted is a 100% chance to avoid all the effects. Man.. I should really suggest one to of the D&D optimization tubers they do a video to dispel this myth. If you can't avoid getting hit then Aura is better obviously, but avoiding getting hit is always better.
BI and One D&D Resistance are better than the aura vs single-target effects and moving out of the area is better vs AoE.
The Aura is just objectively better.
Noone is disputing that moving out of the area of effect is generally better than the Aura, but how in the world does that lead to Resistance - a ressource-based buff (reaction) - being better than a passive bonus?
Even if the Aura only aids one ally or yourself you don’t have to use a reaction to get or give the aid.
AND in the event you ARE bunched up (for whatever reason) while getting hit by an AoE save effect the Aura is infinitely better.
There’s a reason one is a 7th level ability and the other is a Cantrip.
This might be a weird suggestion, but what if Pact Magic was reformed into an invocation option where it would be somewhat similar to a wizard's Arcane Recovery but without the limitation of being once per day? Something like - Pact Magic. Each time you complete a short rest, you regain two expended spell slots. Maybe give it the stipulation that you can choose the invocation multiple times, increasing the number of slots you regain per short rest by some increment.
Just spitballing a few other mechanical ideas here. As another admittedly weird idea, what if the Warlocks were given a limited recharge mechanic, either as an invocation option or a base Warlock feature, to make their spellcasting feel more unique? Something like - Patron's Gift.After you cast one of your Patron Spells for free, you can use your bonus action on each turn after to attempt to draw upon your connection to your patron. Roll a d6. If the value rolled is greater than the level of the Patron Spell you had cast, you regain a use of your Free Casting feature.
Statistically speaking, this would basically guarantee that you would regain the ability to use Free Casting during the downtime between combats, but would also provide the possibility of being able to regain additional castings during combat. The lower level of Patron spell you cast each time, the more likely you are to get multiple free castings throughout combat.
Of course, I doubt that suggestions for "new" mechanics are on the table for the survey, but I like thinking about these things anyway.
I've had something running through my mind, especially after watching a few more videos and reading more about thoughts on Warlock. I think my perspective is a bit skewed because I've never had problems convincing any group I've played with to take short rests semi-regularly. I actually played through a fairly long campaign with a Warlock in the party and she was rarely, if ever, at a loss due to low spell slots. And one thing that really helped with that was simply the fact that the Bard in our team new the spell Catnap, which lets players get a full short rest in just 10 minutes (although each player can only benefit from it once per day).
I feel like, just giving Warlocks one free casting of Catnap per day would do a lot to help Pact Magic as-is in 5e keep up even at tables with few encounters per-day. It's a spell that the entire party can benefit from, so no one's going to be jealous of the Warlock gaining access to it. It's a lot easier to justify taking 10 minutes for the Warlock to recover their spell slots if it only takes the length of time of a ritual casting... while the Wizard might be ritual casting Identify to figure out how a nifty new sword works, the Warlock can grab a quick Catnap and suddenly they're back and ready to go. Maybe you could even give Warlocks a feature at some point where they can benefit from Catnap more than once in a day.
Because the vast majority of saving throws that affect more than 1 target (thus Aura > Resistance) are against damage. Unless you're in a campaign exclusively against mindflayers damage is going to be your chief AoE danger. This is before we even consider that you're crippling your own ability to deal damage by staying back with your squishies rather than moving into melee to SMITE. I've played with a paladin in the party for 3/4 campaigns I've been in, and >90% of the saves where the Aura actually made a difference for at least 1 character were AoE damage, and at least 5 times I've saved my character more damage by moving away from the paladin to avoid being hit than staying in the aura.
But even against AoE saves vs conditions, it is STILL better to move away so you aren't targeted than to stay in the aura and hope the bonus saves you, because an aura of +5 is only an extra 25% chance to save, whereas not getting targeted is a 100% chance to avoid all the effects. Man.. I should really suggest one to of the D&D optimization tubers they do a video to dispel this myth. If you can't avoid getting hit then Aura is better obviously, but avoiding getting hit is always better.
BI and One D&D Resistance are better than the aura vs single-target effects and moving out of the area is better vs AoE.
While I like the half-caster design, I kinda have a problem with Mystic Arcanum being taken away from warlocks and put under a price tag of invocations. Maybe simply granting more invocations could fix it - it's still better than Pact Magic system - but I'd rather prefer those free Mystic Arcanums back.
One of the main issues I have with the UA half-caster idea is that they didn't seem to have a clue what to do about the other half, so they ended up with this unfocused mishmish that does neither theme nor mechanics any favors
They've tried to streamline/simplify things with these class groups, but by doing that they feel compelled to make the groups "balanced". So the Expert group has a half-caster in the ranger, and the Priest group has a half-caster in the paladin, meaning I guess the Mage group needs a half-caster too. (Why Mage doesn't just have three full casters the way Warrior has three full melee classes, I have no idea... unless monk is going to end up somehow half-melee, half-expert)
If they aren't willing to have a warlock that can hang with other full casters, even if it works outside the usual spell slot progression, then just get rid of it entirely and replace it with a true gish/swordmage class
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)
This might be a weird suggestion, but what if Pact Magic was reformed into an invocation option where it would be somewhat similar to a wizard's Arcane Recovery but without the limitation of being once per day? Something like - Pact Magic. Each time you complete a short rest, you regain two expended spell slots. Maybe give it the stipulation that you can choose the invocation multiple times, increasing the number of slots you regain per short rest by some increment.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I think that would be nice, but I'd hesitate to have the option to take it multiple times... recovering spell slots on every short rest is balanced in Pact magic by just how few max slots a Warlock has. There's a reason anything that allows spell slot regeneration for other classes is extremely limited. I think, though, that even just getting 2 level 1 spell slots back at every short rest on its own is potentially worth an invocation.
If the design direction is going to be taking old Warlock features and stripping them away only to reintroduce them as invocations, then they're going to need to give more invocation slots to Warlocks to not make it feel like a major downgrade. I think that's starting to be where I fall on this debate... personally, I would prefer just to stick to the Pact Magic system and simply give more spell slots, but if WOTC does go the half-caster route then I think they'll need to also provide more invocations. If they're changing Warlock from being a weirdo full-caster into a half-caster-half-whateveryouwant, then just to keep up with the other half-casters the Warlock needs a lot more room for the customization invocations offer. Even if they go with something similar to Artificers, where they have more infusions known than they have infusions active at any one time... being able to swap invocations on a short or long rest would give a lot of versatility to the class to make up for the invocation tax now put on certain builds.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
A question to people here.
At lvl 9 the 2014 PHB warlock had 2 5th level spells.
The playtest warlock had 3rd level spells as their max (without spending evocations) spell level
Is it important to you that the warlock has access to 5th level spells at 9th level ?
Or would the power increase just from the higher spell slots available be enough?
For example a option where twice a day you can spontaneously up cast a spell by 2 spell levels at level 9.
You could sill only prepare 3rd level spells maximum but cast them as if you used a 5th level spell slot.
I don't think changing Warlock has anything to do with making the groups "balanced" against one another. As you yourself said, the Warrior group has no half or full casters at all, while the Priest group has two full casters and the Expert group has only one. The groups are not meant to mirror one another - the ties between the classes in a group are thematic, not rigidly mechanical.
The actual reasons they changed Warlock were all spelled out by Crawford in the devblog:
Making Warlocks a LR-based class with proper spell slots fixes all of these, and making them a half-caster that can punch above every other half-caster in terms of magic preserves their unique feel and allows them to function as a party's primary caster in a pinch. For a caster class that came to power without scholarship, piety, or nepotism, that's still impressive.
I still think that if we want to lean heavily on the "warlocks don't really learn magic themselves, and just steal/borrow power from their Patron", we should not stop at half measures, pun intended, by making them half-casters. Instead get rid spell slots entirely, double the amount of available invocations, and make us take all spells as Mystic Arcanums.
The Aura is just objectively better.
Noone is disputing that moving out of the area of effect is generally better than the Aura, but how in the world does that lead to Resistance - a ressource-based buff (reaction) - being better than a passive bonus?
Even if the Aura only aids one ally or yourself you don’t have to use a reaction to get or give the aid.
AND in the event you ARE bunched up (for whatever reason) while getting hit by an AoE save effect the Aura is infinitely better.
There’s a reason one is a 7th level ability and the other is a Cantrip.
Just spitballing a few other mechanical ideas here. As another admittedly weird idea, what if the Warlocks were given a limited recharge mechanic, either as an invocation option or a base Warlock feature, to make their spellcasting feel more unique? Something like - Patron's Gift. After you cast one of your Patron Spells for free, you can use your bonus action on each turn after to attempt to draw upon your connection to your patron. Roll a d6. If the value rolled is greater than the level of the Patron Spell you had cast, you regain a use of your Free Casting feature.
Statistically speaking, this would basically guarantee that you would regain the ability to use Free Casting during the downtime between combats, but would also provide the possibility of being able to regain additional castings during combat. The lower level of Patron spell you cast each time, the more likely you are to get multiple free castings throughout combat.
Of course, I doubt that suggestions for "new" mechanics are on the table for the survey, but I like thinking about these things anyway.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I've had something running through my mind, especially after watching a few more videos and reading more about thoughts on Warlock. I think my perspective is a bit skewed because I've never had problems convincing any group I've played with to take short rests semi-regularly. I actually played through a fairly long campaign with a Warlock in the party and she was rarely, if ever, at a loss due to low spell slots. And one thing that really helped with that was simply the fact that the Bard in our team new the spell Catnap, which lets players get a full short rest in just 10 minutes (although each player can only benefit from it once per day).
I feel like, just giving Warlocks one free casting of Catnap per day would do a lot to help Pact Magic as-is in 5e keep up even at tables with few encounters per-day. It's a spell that the entire party can benefit from, so no one's going to be jealous of the Warlock gaining access to it. It's a lot easier to justify taking 10 minutes for the Warlock to recover their spell slots if it only takes the length of time of a ritual casting... while the Wizard might be ritual casting Identify to figure out how a nifty new sword works, the Warlock can grab a quick Catnap and suddenly they're back and ready to go. Maybe you could even give Warlocks a feature at some point where they can benefit from Catnap more than once in a day.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium