Don't agree. This can effectively remove the warlock from combat for two entire rounds.
Round 1: Warlock casts pact weapon. Enemy caster counterspells. Warlock's contribution to the fight: nothing, and the enemy caster hasn't used an action to nullify the warlock.
Round 2: Warlock casts pact weapon again. It requires an action. Warlock again contributes nothing to the fight.
So counterspell can easily remove one player character from the fight until the third round of combat. If the party only has four characters - or fewer! - this isn't insignificant.
I really don't understand your logic here. How is this any different than if you were a tomelock and they counterspelled your Eldritch Blast? Or if instead of countering your cantrip, they countered your cleric buddy's Spirit Guardians, or your Fireball? Are they also removed from combat for a round? Of course counterspell is going to nullify someone's action in the party, that's what it does. No matter what you or anyone else cast, somebody would be losing an action in that scenario, bladelock is not under some kind of unique disadvantage here.
If an enemy is dumb enough to dispel your pact weapon, you just switch back to hitting them with Eldritch Blast.
They're interchangeable for damage below level 9, and basically interchangeable from level 11. Eldritch Blast becomes significantly better at level 17.
Hopefully at level 11, you're using pact weapon on a versatile +2 weapon and a +3 weapon at level 17. That'll leave pact weapon doing more until level 17 where it's almost equal. With those weapons you'll be getting around the same chance to get Hex off as with Eldritch blast, so the difference at level 11 with a +2 is 10% more chance to hit and +2 damage a hit vs an additional 1d10+MOD.
If you assume MOD is +5 and to hit normally would be a 65% chance:
17 EB+AB: (1d10 * 0.7 + MOD * 0.65) * 4 + 3d6 * 0.98499375 = average DPR of 38.742434375
The only thing I have not calculated into this is the critical chance on Hex, which is virtually the same for all of these, unless you some how missed 2/3 attacks on EB and got a critical on the 3rd/4th hit, a very small number not worth calculating.
At level 17, harder to hit creatures, will go back to favouring Pact of the Blade with a +3 weapon and easier to hit creatures favour Eldritch Blast more.
I don't think any of those three force people taking those pacts to necessarily take them, you could still do well with a pact weapon without a combat style and there is no way to include it in the cantrip where re-casting the cantrip just allows you to casually switch the combat style you've selected each time; which would basically give a cantrip access to every single fighting style in the game.
Ancient Secrets isn't required, it gives more rituals but rituals aren't a necessity, they are helpful tho. Perhaps the change I suggested for Pact of the Chain could be rolled in to the cantrip but I feel that doing that shifts Pact of the Chain from too weak to too strong, as you can effectively hex at will and benefit from the extra familiar attack at no cost at all.
That's the thing. Whichever pact boon you take, you're going to specialize in that thing. Bladelocks are always going to want ways to boost their melee; tomelocks are always going to want more utility spells; chainlocks are always going to want more and better ways to use their familiar
Can you be OK with your pact weapon if you don't have a fighting style? Sure. But why would anyone ever settle for just OK?
Pact of the Blade is the only one people specialize in, if you go pact of the tome, you're getting what, 2 extra cantrips and access to two first level rituals... okay, so you get what, Detect Magic, Comprehend Languages, Tensor's Floating Disk, or what not and 2 cantrips, which if they aren't utility, will likely be cantrips that do less damage then Eldritch Blast... this isn't adding that much or changing how you play Warlock. With Pact of the Chain, you get a familiar of questionable value that barely scales to level at all and does less damage then using your bonus action on hex to re-apply it to a new target (which is usually going to happen more often than not, in combat), it's basically a scout.
The one Invocation for Pact of the Chain adds so little, it can be entirely ignored and the one invocation for Pact of the Tome is nice to keep one person up one more hit but really isn't doing much, considering you're not a healer, so it's not a deal breaker if you ignore it in favour of other invocations.
Are you talking about 5e, or the UA? Because you just switched from one to the other
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)
Are you talking about 5e, or the UA? Because you just switched from one to the other
I am talking UA
Tome pact’s two cantrips if not utility might do less damage than eldritch blast but more damage than any other caster at 5th level. Also it’s not like tome pact doesn’t have eldritch blast as an option. The best cantrips to use Tome pact’s ability on are in the playtest because they came from other books. aoe cantrips thunderclap, sword burst and word of radiance would deal the additional +cha to all targets that failed the save. Toll the dead+ Cha is pretty strong. I guess for what’s available in the play test sacred flame is a good choice to have a non attack roll option next to your eldritch blast.
Pact familiar is the best scouting familiar in the playtest, but is inferior to 5e warlock familiars and in combat inferior to the playtest find familiar.
Are you talking about 5e, or the UA? Because you just switched from one to the other
I am talking UA
Tome pact’s two cantrips if not utility might do less damage than eldritch blast but more damage than any other caster at 5th level. Also it’s not like tome pact doesn’t have eldritch blast as an option. The best cantrips to use Tome pact’s ability on are in the playtest because they came from other books. aoe cantrips thunderclap, sword burst and word of radiance would deal the additional +cha to all targets that failed the save. Toll the dead+ Cha is pretty strong. I guess for what’s available in the play test sacred flame is a good choice to have a non attack roll option next to your eldritch blast.
Pact familiar is the best scouting familiar in the playtest, but is inferior to 5e warlock familiars and in combat inferior to the playtest find familiar.
The AoEs are potentially good options for those reasons but it's still very limited, unless your pact of the blade, you probably want to avoid being that close to enemies in the first place... and you'd be pact of the blade, not pact of the tome. Also Eldritch Blast is already prepared, as per the Pact Boon feature, Eldritch Blast and Hex are defacto prepared for Warlock from level 1 now.
Don't agree. This can effectively remove the warlock from combat for two entire rounds.
Round 1: Warlock casts pact weapon. Enemy caster counterspells. Warlock's contribution to the fight: nothing, and the enemy caster hasn't used an action to nullify the warlock.
Round 2: Warlock casts pact weapon again. It requires an action. Warlock again contributes nothing to the fight.
So counterspell can easily remove one player character from the fight until the third round of combat. If the party only has four characters - or fewer! - this isn't insignificant.
I really don't understand your logic here. How is this any different than if you were a tomelock and they counterspelled your Eldritch Blast? Or if instead of countering your cantrip, they countered your cleric buddy's Spirit Guardians, or your Fireball? Are they also removed from combat for a round? Of course counterspell is going to nullify someone's action in the party, that's what it does. No matter what you or anyone else cast, somebody would be losing an action in that scenario, bladelock is not under some kind of unique disadvantage here.
Well, first, because up until now, the pact weapon wasn't something that could be dispelled. That in and of itself is a big change.
Second, because I'll say again: treating warlocks as eldritch blast machines is boring and IMNSHO lacks imagination. Bladelocks are meant to be frontline fighters; if a warlock is within reach of a hostile but suddenly lacks an actual weapon to hit that enemy with, they either have to use a ranged spell attack at disadvantage and/or retreat (and risk an opportunity attack unless they burn an action using Disengage which means: no eldritch blast).
Don't agree. This can effectively remove the warlock from combat for two entire rounds.
Round 1: Warlock casts pact weapon. Enemy caster counterspells. Warlock's contribution to the fight: nothing, and the enemy caster hasn't used an action to nullify the warlock.
Round 2: Warlock casts pact weapon again. It requires an action. Warlock again contributes nothing to the fight.
So counterspell can easily remove one player character from the fight until the third round of combat. If the party only has four characters - or fewer! - this isn't insignificant.
I really don't understand your logic here. How is this any different than if you were a tomelock and they counterspelled your Eldritch Blast? Or if instead of countering your cantrip, they countered your cleric buddy's Spirit Guardians, or your Fireball? Are they also removed from combat for a round? Of course counterspell is going to nullify someone's action in the party, that's what it does. No matter what you or anyone else cast, somebody would be losing an action in that scenario, bladelock is not under some kind of unique disadvantage here.
Well, first, because up until now, the pact weapon wasn't something that could be dispelled. That in and of itself is a big change.
Second, because I'll say again: treating warlocks as eldritch blast machines is boring and IMNSHO lacks imagination. Bladelocks are meant to be frontline fighters; if a warlock is within reach of a hostile but suddenly lacks an actual weapon to hit that enemy with, they either have to use a ranged spell attack at disadvantage and/or retreat (and risk an opportunity attack unless they burn an action using Disengage which means: no eldritch blast).
Question: who waits until combat to cast pact weapon? That’s already waste.
Just looking at pact weapon during this discussion has made me think it might be a great 1-level dip for a fighter that wants to go thrown weapon. Finally, you don’t need to depend on the artificer to make you a returning weapon. And you could even be wisdom based and qualify for the multiclass, since wis is a pretty useful stat for fighters. Use light hammers which give you nick, take crusher for the push and you can knock people all around. Only a d4 damage, but but kind of cool add on effects. Kind of strange, since I thought they were trying to tamp down on those kinds of dips.
Well, first, because up until now, the pact weapon wasn't something that could be dispelled. That in and of itself is a big change.
Second, because I'll say again: treating warlocks as eldritch blast machines is boring and IMNSHO lacks imagination. Bladelocks are meant to be frontline fighters; if a warlock is within reach of a hostile but suddenly lacks an actual weapon to hit that enemy with, they either have to use a ranged spell attack at disadvantage and/or retreat (and risk an opportunity attack unless they burn an action using Disengage which means: no eldritch blast).
1) Yet again, if they're burning a dispel on your pact weapon, it means they're leaving whatever you were concentrating on alone. That's a good thing! Do your Warlocks usually not have any other spells going in combat? I'm not saying that's not a valid playstyle, but it doesn't seem optimal (on both sides).
2) In the very very rare case that whatever monster you're fighting can dispel AND chooses to burn that dispel on your cantrip, you have more options than shoot in melee or retreat, you have actual spells now. Hit them with a Shocking Grasp and then retreat, or Misty Step and Eldritch Blast, or Metamagic Adept Quicken your blade back out and attack, etc etc. This is a nothingburger complaint, you have options.
And as others have said repeatedly, you should have your pact weapon already summoned/bonded when combat starts, there's no reason not to. It stays even if you sheathe it.
Getting enemy spellcasters to dispel or counterspell your cantrip is very much a feature, not a bug.
Don't agree. This can effectively remove the warlock from combat for two entire rounds.
Round 1: Warlock casts pact weapon. Enemy caster counterspells. Warlock's contribution to the fight: nothing, and the enemy caster hasn't used an action to nullify the warlock.
Round 2: Warlock casts pact weapon again. It requires an action. Warlock again contributes nothing to the fight.
So counterspell can easily remove one player character from the fight until the third round of combat. If the party only has four characters - or fewer! - this isn't insignificant.
There is pretty close to zero chance a blade pact warlock didn't cast pact weapon before the start of the combat, so the way it actually works is that the spellcaster has to spend his first action to cast dispel magic -- and because pact weapon is either a magical construct or a spell on a weapon, not a spell on the caster, this does not allow dispelling any other buffs on the warlock, all it does it dispel the pact magic.
There are very few situations where I wouldn't rather have an enemy spellcaster dispel a pact weapon rather than using the same spell slot to fireball the entire party.
As for counterspell, remember that you can just step out of line of sight and the enemy can't counterspell you. Counterspelling self-buff spells is not never effective, but it's not that reliable.
Now, I would like counterspell to get changed in One D&D, because it's straight up bad gameplay, but countering castings of pact weapon is way less relevant than countering castings of higher level spells.
I've said this in other threads, but the idea that a major class feature can be counterspelled because it's been turned into a spell is absolutely bonkers, regardless of how unlikely it is
"It'll never actually happen" isn't an acceptable answer, because we all know it will happen at somebody's table somewhere. It shouldn't even be a possibility, however remote
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I've said this in other threads, but the idea that a major class feature can be counterspelled because it's been turned into a spell is absolutely bonkers, regardless of how unlikely it is
"It'll never actually happen" isn't an acceptable answer, because we all know it will happen at somebody's table somewhere. It shouldn't even be a possibility, however remote
We're not saying "it'll never actually happen." We're saying "if it does happen, that enemy caster is a pants-on-head idiot and you're probably in for a much easier encounter than you would be otherwise."
That goes double if they're dispelling your cantrip with their Action instead of counterspelling it, which they can't do if you walk into the fight with it turned on.
I've said this in other threads, but the idea that a major class feature can be counterspelled because it's been turned into a spell is absolutely bonkers, regardless of how unlikely it is
Counterspelling pact weapon is no more bonkers than counterspelling fireball (spellcasting is absolutely a major class feature). Either way, the victim of the counterspell feels like "Wow, my action was just totally negated by someone else using a reaction", which sucks and is why counterspell should be changed, but at least the warlock can try again next turn with absolutely no penalty, whereas the wizard just lost that spell slot that he can't get back at all easily.
I've said this in other threads, but the idea that a major class feature can be counterspelled because it's been turned into a spell is absolutely bonkers, regardless of how unlikely it is
Counterspelling pact weapon is no more bonkers than counterspelling fireball (spellcasting is absolutely a major class feature). Either way, the victim of the counterspell feels like "Wow, my action was just totally negated by someone else using a reaction", which sucks and is why counterspell should be changed, but at least the warlock can try again next turn with absolutely no penalty, whereas the wizard just lost that spell slot that he can't get back at all easily.
fireball is not a class feature. Spellcasting is the class feature
The equivalent would be using counterspell to remove your ability to cast any spells at all
Keep in mind too that the blade cantrip is the only one with a casting time of 1 action. If you try and re-cast tome to switch up the spells in it and it gets countered or otherwise fizzled, you lose it for an hour
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)
Keep in mind too that the blade cantrip is the only one with a casting time of 1 action. If you try and re-cast tome to switch up the spells in it and it gets countered or otherwise fizzled, you lose it for an hour
You can't dispel the book, it's instantaneous. And nobody is countering a 1 hour spell either.
Seriously, y'all come up with some outlandish scenarios to justify hating something that isn't going to come up at 99% of tables I swear.
fireball is not a class feature. Spellcasting is the class feature
The equivalent would be using counterspell to remove your ability to cast any spells at all
Gosh, it's a good thing nobody can do that then, isn't it? 😛
Thanks for proving my point
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)
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)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If an enemy is dumb enough to dispel your pact weapon, you just switch back to hitting them with Eldritch Blast.
They're interchangeable for damage below level 9, and basically interchangeable from level 11. Eldritch Blast becomes significantly better at level 17.
I really don't understand your logic here. How is this any different than if you were a tomelock and they counterspelled your Eldritch Blast? Or if instead of countering your cantrip, they countered your cleric buddy's Spirit Guardians, or your Fireball? Are they also removed from combat for a round? Of course counterspell is going to nullify someone's action in the party, that's what it does. No matter what you or anyone else cast, somebody would be losing an action in that scenario, bladelock is not under some kind of unique disadvantage here.
Hopefully at level 11, you're using pact weapon on a versatile +2 weapon and a +3 weapon at level 17. That'll leave pact weapon doing more until level 17 where it's almost equal. With those weapons you'll be getting around the same chance to get Hex off as with Eldritch blast, so the difference at level 11 with a +2 is 10% more chance to hit and +2 damage a hit vs an additional 1d10+MOD.
If you assume MOD is +5 and to hit normally would be a 65% chance:
11 w+2: ((1d10 +1d6) * 0.8 + (MOD+2) * 0.75) * 2 + 2d6 * 0.9375 = average DPR of 31.4625
11 EB+AB: (1d10 * 0.7 + MOD * 0.65) * 3 + 2d6 * 0.957125 = average DPR of 27.999875
17 w+3: ((1d10 +1d6) * 0.85 + (MOD+3) * 0.8) * 2 + 3d6 * 0.96 = average DPR of 38.18
17 EB+AB: (1d10 * 0.7 + MOD * 0.65) * 4 + 3d6 * 0.98499375 = average DPR of 38.742434375
The only thing I have not calculated into this is the critical chance on Hex, which is virtually the same for all of these, unless you some how missed 2/3 attacks on EB and got a critical on the 3rd/4th hit, a very small number not worth calculating.
At level 17, harder to hit creatures, will go back to favouring Pact of the Blade with a +3 weapon and easier to hit creatures favour Eldritch Blast more.
Are you talking about 5e, or the UA? Because you just switched from one to the other
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I am talking UA
Tome pact’s two cantrips if not utility might do less damage than eldritch blast but more damage than any other caster at 5th level. Also it’s not like tome pact doesn’t have eldritch blast as an option. The best cantrips to use Tome pact’s ability on are in the playtest because they came from other books. aoe cantrips thunderclap, sword burst and word of radiance would deal the additional +cha to all targets that failed the save. Toll the dead+ Cha is pretty strong. I guess for what’s available in the play test sacred flame is a good choice to have a non attack roll option next to your eldritch blast.
Pact familiar is the best scouting familiar in the playtest, but is inferior to 5e warlock familiars and in combat inferior to the playtest find familiar.
The AoEs are potentially good options for those reasons but it's still very limited, unless your pact of the blade, you probably want to avoid being that close to enemies in the first place... and you'd be pact of the blade, not pact of the tome. Also Eldritch Blast is already prepared, as per the Pact Boon feature, Eldritch Blast and Hex are defacto prepared for Warlock from level 1 now.
Well, first, because up until now, the pact weapon wasn't something that could be dispelled. That in and of itself is a big change.
Second, because I'll say again: treating warlocks as eldritch blast machines is boring and IMNSHO lacks imagination. Bladelocks are meant to be frontline fighters; if a warlock is within reach of a hostile but suddenly lacks an actual weapon to hit that enemy with, they either have to use a ranged spell attack at disadvantage and/or retreat (and risk an opportunity attack unless they burn an action using Disengage which means: no eldritch blast).
Question: who waits until combat to cast pact weapon? That’s already waste.
Just looking at pact weapon during this discussion has made me think it might be a great 1-level dip for a fighter that wants to go thrown weapon. Finally, you don’t need to depend on the artificer to make you a returning weapon. And you could even be wisdom based and qualify for the multiclass, since wis is a pretty useful stat for fighters. Use light hammers which give you nick, take crusher for the push and you can knock people all around. Only a d4 damage, but but kind of cool add on effects.
Kind of strange, since I thought they were trying to tamp down on those kinds of dips.
1) Yet again, if they're burning a dispel on your pact weapon, it means they're leaving whatever you were concentrating on alone. That's a good thing! Do your Warlocks usually not have any other spells going in combat? I'm not saying that's not a valid playstyle, but it doesn't seem optimal (on both sides).
2) In the very very rare case that whatever monster you're fighting can dispel AND chooses to burn that dispel on your cantrip, you have more options than shoot in melee or retreat, you have actual spells now. Hit them with a Shocking Grasp and then retreat, or Misty Step and Eldritch Blast, or Metamagic Adept Quicken your blade back out and attack, etc etc. This is a nothingburger complaint, you have options.
And as others have said repeatedly, you should have your pact weapon already summoned/bonded when combat starts, there's no reason not to. It stays even if you sheathe it.
There is pretty close to zero chance a blade pact warlock didn't cast pact weapon before the start of the combat, so the way it actually works is that the spellcaster has to spend his first action to cast dispel magic -- and because pact weapon is either a magical construct or a spell on a weapon, not a spell on the caster, this does not allow dispelling any other buffs on the warlock, all it does it dispel the pact magic.
There are very few situations where I wouldn't rather have an enemy spellcaster dispel a pact weapon rather than using the same spell slot to fireball the entire party.
As for counterspell, remember that you can just step out of line of sight and the enemy can't counterspell you. Counterspelling self-buff spells is not never effective, but it's not that reliable.
Now, I would like counterspell to get changed in One D&D, because it's straight up bad gameplay, but countering castings of pact weapon is way less relevant than countering castings of higher level spells.
I've said this in other threads, but the idea that a major class feature can be counterspelled because it's been turned into a spell is absolutely bonkers, regardless of how unlikely it is
"It'll never actually happen" isn't an acceptable answer, because we all know it will happen at somebody's table somewhere. It shouldn't even be a possibility, however remote
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
We're not saying "it'll never actually happen." We're saying "if it does happen, that enemy caster is a pants-on-head idiot and you're probably in for a much easier encounter than you would be otherwise."
That goes double if they're dispelling your cantrip with their Action instead of counterspelling it, which they can't do if you walk into the fight with it turned on.
Counterspelling pact weapon is no more bonkers than counterspelling fireball (spellcasting is absolutely a major class feature). Either way, the victim of the counterspell feels like "Wow, my action was just totally negated by someone else using a reaction", which sucks and is why counterspell should be changed, but at least the warlock can try again next turn with absolutely no penalty, whereas the wizard just lost that spell slot that he can't get back at all easily.
fireball is not a class feature. Spellcasting is the class feature
The equivalent would be using counterspell to remove your ability to cast any spells at all
Keep in mind too that the blade cantrip is the only one with a casting time of 1 action. If you try and re-cast tome to switch up the spells in it and it gets countered or otherwise fizzled, you lose it for an hour
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)
Gosh, it's a good thing nobody can do that then, isn't it? 😛
You can't dispel the book, it's instantaneous. And nobody is countering a 1 hour spell either.
Seriously, y'all come up with some outlandish scenarios to justify hating something that isn't going to come up at 99% of tables I swear.
Thanks for proving my point
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)
And counterspell prevents you from using it for one round -- whether it's fireball or pact weapon.
No, it doesn't. If your fireball gets countered, it doesn't prevent you from casting shield in the same round
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)