Remember that the single level Hexblade dip also limited you to one-handed weapons. It took Pact of the Blade to get heavy/two-handed weapons, and most people wouldn't put three levels into Warlock.
Its main function for Paladin is one running sword-and-board, which isn't benefiting from most of the feats anyway.
Remember that the single level Hexblade dip also limited you to one-handed weapons. It took Pact of the Blade to get heavy/two-handed weapons, and most people wouldn't put three levels into Warlock.
Its main function for Paladin is one running sword-and-board, which isn't benefiting from most of the feats anyway.
The interesting thing, is that since all the combat feats are half-feats there isn't such an incentive for CHA-based attacks for paladin. Plus since the -5/+10 bonuses have been removed boosting your attack rolls isn't nearly as important as before. Even Sword-and-Board paladins might want to take Charger, Shield Master, and Mounted Combatant which nets them a +3 STR at the same time, or Sentinel, + Shield Master.
That said Devotion Paladins and many Bards I see dipping Warlock for PotB + Shield + Find Familiar.
I view it as more incentive. Bard and Paladin are still going to do it to be SAD, casters will do it for the easy access to medium armor without delaying spell level progression (and maybe to be sad melee sorcs). Paladin in particular can live without the heaviest armor. Medium armor works fine and having your weapons queue off your casting stat combined with aura, there's no reason /not/ to.
Lightly armored is a first level feat anyone could take. Easier and more rewarding to take that because it also gives shield proficiency without any delay of caster features or spells. Melee sorc would need at least 5 levels to be effective in melee at that point it isnt a level dip. And if the Paladin goes medium armor instead of heavy they just became more MAD not less. Because you have to have at 13 strength to multiclass pally. If you are wearing medium armor you want a 14 dex now you are wanting 4 high stats. In addition to not getting to grab the best weapons or feats because all the good feats bump your strength or dex and not CHA. You are still isolating one option without looking at all the changes around it. 1 level warlock dip for cha or wis attacks isn't good for the classes it used to be good for.
The only one that might do so is sword bard, because they already weren't going to grab the feats and Bardic inspiration scales with CHA.
Remember that the single level Hexblade dip also limited you to one-handed weapons. It took Pact of the Blade to get heavy/two-handed weapons, and most people wouldn't put three levels into Warlock.
Its main function for Paladin is one running sword-and-board, which isn't benefiting from most of the feats anyway.
The interesting thing, is that since all the combat feats are half-feats there isn't such an incentive for CHA-based attacks for paladin. Plus since the -5/+10 bonuses have been removed boosting your attack rolls isn't nearly as important as before. Even Sword-and-Board paladins might want to take Charger, Shield Master, and Mounted Combatant which nets them a +3 STR at the same time, or Sentinel, + Shield Master.
That said Devotion Paladins and many Bards I see dipping Warlock for PotB + Shield + Find Familiar.
Ya add in heavy armor master and mage slayer. Add in delaying not just spells, but also delaying access to smite delaying the ASI that gets you to +4 and +5 attack bonus in addition to giving up these feats, delaying extra attack and delaying aura of protection.
Hexblade now should be at level 3 because is a Patron, which is fine.
And now 1 level dip with PotB seems more interesting for Cleric than for Paladin, as the Cleric will continue maximizing Wisdom and using it for attack and damage. With the overpowered Searing Smite, using your Wis for hitting seems too good. But I see the problem really at Searing Smite, instead the Warlock dip.
Maybe I'll give my Arcane Trickster Magic Initiate (Divine) for Searing Smite.
Using a Shadow Blade cast at level 3, for 3d8 damage, Booming Blade for 3d8 damage, level 20 Sneak Attack for 10d6 damage, and a 4th level Searing Smite for 4d6 damage.
3d8+5 + 3d8 + 10d6 + 4d6, plus the 4d6 the target takes before they get to make their constitution save.
6(4.5) + 18(3.5) + 5 = 95
How many dice do we want to roll?
All the dice.
Then if we get a critical... so many dice.
Still, that's a lot of investment for only a moderate amount of damage at level 20. It'd likely be better at lower levels, allowing you to use spare spell slots to pump up your damage in certain circumstances. Given fire is so commonly resisted, perhaps Wrathful Smite with Necrotic damage inflicting the Frightened condition would be more reliable. The reason I prefer Chill Touch to Firebolt. The potential to just keep burning your enemy for Xd6 a round is so cool though.
I view it as more incentive. Bard and Paladin are still going to do it to be SAD, casters will do it for the easy access to medium armor without delaying spell level progression (and maybe to be sad melee sorcs). Paladin in particular can live without the heaviest armor. Medium armor works fine and having your weapons queue off your casting stat combined with aura, there's no reason /not/ to.
Lightly armored is a first level feat anyone could take. Easier and more rewarding to take that because it also gives shield proficiency without any delay of caster features or spells. Melee sorc would need at least 5 levels to be effective in melee at that point it isnt a level dip. And if the Paladin goes medium armor instead of heavy they just became more MAD not less. Because you have to have at 13 strength to multiclass pally. If you are wearing medium armor you want a 14 dex now you are wanting 4 high stats. In addition to not getting to grab the best weapons or feats because all the good feats bump your strength or dex and not CHA. You are still isolating one option without looking at all the changes around it. 1 level warlock dip for cha or wis attacks isn't good for the classes it used to be good for.
The only one that might do so is sword bard, because they already weren't going to grab the feats and Bardic inspiration scales with CHA.
I wouldnt touch lightly armored when I can get so much more out of 1 level warlock dip.
14 dex (I want anyways, I hate low dex characters) 16 char and 13 str to meet mc requirements is easy. Strength is mostly useless when you decouple it from the protection offered by heavy armor and the necessity for melee weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I view it as more incentive. Bard and Paladin are still going to do it to be SAD, casters will do it for the easy access to medium armor without delaying spell level progression (and maybe to be sad melee sorcs). Paladin in particular can live without the heaviest armor. Medium armor works fine and having your weapons queue off your casting stat combined with aura, there's no reason /not/ to.
Lightly armored is a first level feat anyone could take. Easier and more rewarding to take that because it also gives shield proficiency without any delay of caster features or spells. Melee sorc would need at least 5 levels to be effective in melee at that point it isnt a level dip. And if the Paladin goes medium armor instead of heavy they just became more MAD not less. Because you have to have at 13 strength to multiclass pally. If you are wearing medium armor you want a 14 dex now you are wanting 4 high stats. In addition to not getting to grab the best weapons or feats because all the good feats bump your strength or dex and not CHA. You are still isolating one option without looking at all the changes around it. 1 level warlock dip for cha or wis attacks isn't good for the classes it used to be good for.
The only one that might do so is sword bard, because they already weren't going to grab the feats and Bardic inspiration scales with CHA.
I wouldnt touch lightly armored when I can get so much more out of 1 level warlock dip.
14 dex (I want anyways, I hate low dex characters) 16 char and 13 str to meet mc requirements is easy. Strength is mostly useless when you decouple it from the protection offered by heavy armor and the necessity for melee weapons.
So you wouldn't touch a free first level feat choosing instead to delay smite a level, all of your spells a level, extra attack a level, making all the combat feats not as valuable for you, delay aura of protection. Alright that is a personal preference but it is for sure not a more powerful method and that is what multiclassing is for.
UA warlock is far from a one-trick pony. It's got a lot more tricks up it's sleeve than the current warlock imo.
Level by level, sure, but I think it's easy to confuse character creation features with in-play features. The UA edition can cast more spells per day, but the effect of those is negligable compared to the effect of ripping off an Eldritch blast. Like.. my concern is that each class should be able to bring something uniquely their own to a dramatic situation in the game. Mostly this means combat, but it could also mean a difficult challenge to overcome or a unique utility they bring that highlights that character classes contribution.
Warrior classes do this by playing at the vanguard and meeting whatever terrifying enginge of death is baring down on the party. This doesn't stop them from picking up a ranged weapon to be a bow weilding badass, but if things get especially bad they can still take the front. Casters put themselves in less immediate danger, but have both utility and fight-stopping powers on rotation. The same can be extended to expert classes. The new Warlock, otoh, is a solid mix of abilities without an opportunity to stand out. Their spellcasting doesn't kick on fast enough to be a challenge to the enemies they'll face at an appropriate level, the buffs aren't anything more significant than other casters can get through a subclass function, and their martial abilities don't lend themselves to acting in the role of a warrior archetype.
I'm not saying it's not an improvement over the old Warlock, the problem there being that all your spell casting was dependent on a mechanic that most of your team didn't much benefit from. I think there's potential in Mystic Arcanum, but taking away an invocation for the benefit of one spell, once per day, chosen at every level up feels way too restricticve.
Spitballing an alternative, I'd like to see a the Warlock get more choice and an increased focus on Patrons. For instance, the Patron could grant a Mystic Arcanum dependent for applicable slots 3-9 at the appropriate level, but you can still only cast only one spell at those higher slots /long rest. Or the Warlock could lean into the sold themselves for power trope and expend hit dice or exhaustion for the ability to upcast a spell?
It shouldn't equal the power of a wizard or sorcerer of course, but as the new class stands it feels like it doesn't have a getting serious mode like the more common archetypes do. Mystic Arcanum's sorta do this, but those restrictions are so tight they feel difficult to build a character around.
I think that mystic arcanum makes it MUCH stronger than the primal and divine half casters are. That's what the balance lever we should be looking at, not sorcs and wizards.
At it's core, Warlock is and will continue to be...an archer. I suppose that's likely where the disconnect comes from. I view the warlock as a martial that uses magic to do it's damage (EB is a heavy crossbow without the reload property), and most people are trying to view it as a spell caster. As an archer, the warlock dumps all over the ranger, and it's got a lot of nifty tricks up it's sleeve with it's spell casting as well.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
The issue isn't what's stronger, the issue is what's interesting to do. The half-caster spell progression assures that no matter what level you get your core spells at they're watered down for the encounter level. Darkness, Invisibility, or an upcasted AoA or Sleep at level 3 is a game changer, at level 5 its an inconvenience. The pattern scales up to the degree that each tier at which you get a given spell level you're already in the position that the spell is mechanically less effective than going with EB instead. Maybe this flattens out at tier 3 or 4, but by that point all published adventures are basically over.
As I said above MA tries to fix this, but I don't believe that 1 spell per day chosen according when you level is sufficient to be a class defining ability. The problem gets worse when you consider how many of the star spells => 4th level are either Concentration stapled with costly and/or rare components. If you've got one star spell and it gets blown on a bad Concentration roll or are suddenly in the wilderness without access for months you're going to feel pretty hoses by your choice.
I think it's fixable and I definitely don't want the class to go hack to short rest base, but as it stands now it feels way too much like a gamified constraint.
As for the Warlock being an archer? Oof. The EB spammer isn't an "archer" they're a walking turret with a face. A ranger isn't just an archer; they're a survivalist, a skill expert, a second string healer, and equally capable of fighting in the vanguard. A Ranger is defined by more than just their bow, a Warlock shouldn't be defined by just EB.
The issue isn't what's stronger, the issue is what's interesting to do. The half-caster spell progression assures that no matter what level you get your core spells at they're watered down for the encounter level. Darkness, Invisibility, or an upcasted AoA or Sleep at level 3 is a game changer, at level 5 its an inconvenience. The pattern scales up to the degree that each tier at which you get a given spell level you're already in the position that the spell is mechanically less effective than going with EB instead. Maybe this flattens out at tier 3 or 4, but by that point all published adventures are basically over.
As I said above MA tries to fix this, but I don't believe that 1 spell per day chosen according when you level is sufficient to be a class defining ability. The problem gets worse when you consider how many of the star spells => 4th level are either Concentration stapled with costly and/or rare components. If you've got one star spell and it gets blown on a bad Concentration roll or are suddenly in the wilderness without access for months you're going to feel pretty hoses by your choice.
I think it's fixable and I definitely don't want the class to go hack to short rest base, but as it stands now it feels way too much like a gamified constraint.
As for the Warlock being an archer? Oof. The EB spammer isn't an "archer" they're a walking turret with a face. A ranger isn't just an archer; they're a survivalist, a skill expert, a second string healer, and equally capable of fighting in the vanguard. A Ranger is defined by more than just their bow, a Warlock shouldn't be defined by just EB.
Just remember that full casters only have 1 caster of a 4th level spell at level 7 and they only have one cast of a 5h level spell at level 9. So the only ones they can really cast "more" are the 3rd level spells at 5, and then it is going to be their lower level spells.
I've seen people say that in D&D Martials are linear, and Full Casters are quadratic.
If that is a helpful comparison we can then see that a Half Caster is about one quarter as powerful as a Full Caster, and a One Third Caster about one ninth as powerful.
The power level of spells you get access to, and the level that you get access to them, combine to give the Full Caster its power.
Warlocks, previously, up to level 9 were as powerful as a Full Caster, but were held back by their very limited spell slots. That was intended to balance the reliable, resourceless, damage they were able to put out with Eldritch Blast. However their spell slot limitation was then balanced by the short rest recharge mechanic. It meant that a Warlock with frequent short rests could put out some serious casting numbers, but with few or none it became basically an Eldritch Blast turret. Take the Spell Sniper feat and it could even do it in melee.
Now their spell access drops them to one quarter that power with, perhaps, Vancian casting of higher level spells trying to fill the gap, but their reliable spellcasting is severely weakened. If your single cast of a level 3 or 4 spell (levels 7 and 8) is dispelled or counterspelled (yes, DMs do give their casters those spells) then you're left relying on levels 1 and 2 spells for the game, and/or being an Eldritch Blast turret. That's basically where you were before, but without the hope of grabbing a quick rest and being back in the fight again.
WotC have now proposed the Arcane Bard, which is a full caster, a charisma caster, with expertise in a variety of skills. A true Jack-of-all-trades.
As for Full Casters, they have level 4 and 5 spell SLOTS. Sure, at level 7 they have one level 4, and at level 9 one level 5, but they have the ability to take multiple spells of that level and pick whatever is most relevant for them OR upcast a lower level spell if that is what they need. UAWarlocks do not.
Who wants to point out that if a One!Warlock's Level 3 and 4 arcanums can be dispelled/counterspelled, so too can the 5e!Warlock's spells? And whereas the One!Warlock would still have access to four 1st-level slots and three 2nd-level slots (plus their free cast of a Patron spell), plus more viable options from their Pact Boon, and Eldritch Blast of course, the 5e!Warlock has...Eldritch Blast.
And who also wants to point out that for all of the insistence that half-casters are completely impotent or whatnot...there's three other half-casters that exist in 5e that no one has made these same arguments about, because much like the One!Warlock, they have features to give them more options outside of casting?
(And who wants to repeat the point that the same people who think the 5e!Warlock deserves a short rest whenever and wherever they want and thus have zero problems are also people who think the Monk is bad because it's supposedly useless without frequent short rests?)
That's why I said it's a perception problem. People have this idea in their head that the warlock is a full caster like a sorc and wizard. It's not, and never has been. Before it was a quirky, but interesting short rest class. Now, it's the most powerful of the half casters due to mystic arcanum
As for the person who scoffed at my suggestion that the warlock is an archer, it's more than a turret with a face. Have you taken a gander at the spells it has available to it? It utterly smashes the ranger. it did in 2014, and it will will. All those 'benefits' you talk about? Rangers have been scoffing at those as being useless since...2014. As far as archery (ranged attack spammer), the warlock flat out does it better than the ranger does. As far as the spells? The warlock's got better ones. As far as flavor? The warlock has a ton more than the ranger does.
The warlock as presented, is better than the ranger in nearly every way. The paladin is the only half caster that can dream of competing with with it's auras.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Who wants to point out that if a One!Warlock's Level 3 and 4 arcanums can be dispelled/counterspelled, so too can the 5e!Warlock's spells? And whereas the One!Warlock would still have access to four 1st-level slots and three 2nd-level slots (plus their free cast of a Patron spell), plus more viable options from their Pact Boon, and Eldritch Blast of course, the 5e!Warlock has...Eldritch Blast.
And who also wants to point out that for all of the insistence that half-casters are completely impotent or whatnot...there's three other half-casters that exist in 5e that no one has made these same arguments about, because much like the One!Warlock, they have features to give them more options outside of casting?
(And who wants to repeat the point that the same people who think the 5e!Warlock deserves a short rest whenever and wherever they want and thus have zero problems are also people who think the Monk is bad because it's supposedly useless without frequent short rests?)
That's why I said it's a perception problem. People have this idea in their head that the warlock is a full caster like a sorc and wizard. It's not, and never has been. Before it was a quirky, but interesting short rest class. Now, it's the most powerful of the half casters due to mystic arcanum
As for the person who scoffed at my suggestion that the warlock is an archer, it's more than a turret with a face. Have you taken a gander at the spells it has available to it? It utterly smashes the ranger. it did in 2014, and it will will. All those 'benefits' you talk about? Rangers have been scoffing at those as being useless since...2014. As far as archery (ranged attack spammer), the warlock flat out does it better than the ranger does. As far as the spells? The warlock's got better ones. As far as flavor? The warlock has a ton more than the ranger does.
The warlock as presented, is better than the ranger in nearly every way. The paladin is the only half caster that can dream of competing with with it's auras.
Its always the others persons perception that is the problem.
Who wants to point out that if a One!Warlock's Level 3 and 4 arcanums can be dispelled/counterspelled, so too can the 5e!Warlock's spells? And whereas the One!Warlock would still have access to four 1st-level slots and three 2nd-level slots (plus their free cast of a Patron spell), plus more viable options from their Pact Boon, and Eldritch Blast of course, the 5e!Warlock has...Eldritch Blast.
And who also wants to point out that for all of the insistence that half-casters are completely impotent or whatnot...there's three other half-casters that exist in 5e that no one has made these same arguments about, because much like the One!Warlock, they have features to give them more options outside of casting?
(And who wants to repeat the point that the same people who think the 5e!Warlock deserves a short rest whenever and wherever they want and thus have zero problems are also people who think the Monk is bad because it's supposedly useless without frequent short rests?)
That's why I said it's a perception problem. People have this idea in their head that the warlock is a full caster like a sorc and wizard. It's not, and never has been. Before it was a quirky, but interesting short rest class. Now, it's the most powerful of the half casters due to mystic arcanum
As for the person who scoffed at my suggestion that the warlock is an archer, it's more than a turret with a face. Have you taken a gander at the spells it has available to it? It utterly smashes the ranger. it did in 2014, and it will will. All those 'benefits' you talk about? Rangers have been scoffing at those as being useless since...2014. As far as archery (ranged attack spammer), the warlock flat out does it better than the ranger does. As far as the spells? The warlock's got better ones. As far as flavor? The warlock has a ton more than the ranger does.
The warlock as presented, is better than the ranger in nearly every way. The paladin is the only half caster that can dream of competing with with it's auras.
Its always the others persons perception that is the problem.
Well when WotC comes out and outright states that the perception of the Warlock as a full caster is wrong. Then yes. In the video when they talked about the warlock changes they said the warlock was weird but you pulled back the hood you would see a more of a half caster there with a LITTLE extra casting. They always cast a concentration spell and than eldritch blast because of the spell slot amount. When WotC says your perception is wrong, it is good indication your perception is wrong.
Who wants to point out that if a One!Warlock's Level 3 and 4 arcanums can be dispelled/counterspelled, so too can the 5e!Warlock's spells? And whereas the One!Warlock would still have access to four 1st-level slots and three 2nd-level slots (plus their free cast of a Patron spell), plus more viable options from their Pact Boon, and Eldritch Blast of course, the 5e!Warlock has...Eldritch Blast.
And who also wants to point out that for all of the insistence that half-casters are completely impotent or whatnot...there's three other half-casters that exist in 5e that no one has made these same arguments about, because much like the One!Warlock, they have features to give them more options outside of casting?
(And who wants to repeat the point that the same people who think the 5e!Warlock deserves a short rest whenever and wherever they want and thus have zero problems are also people who think the Monk is bad because it's supposedly useless without frequent short rests?)
That's why I said it's a perception problem. People have this idea in their head that the warlock is a full caster like a sorc and wizard. It's not, and never has been. Before it was a quirky, but interesting short rest class. Now, it's the most powerful of the half casters due to mystic arcanum
As for the person who scoffed at my suggestion that the warlock is an archer, it's more than a turret with a face. Have you taken a gander at the spells it has available to it? It utterly smashes the ranger. it did in 2014, and it will will. All those 'benefits' you talk about? Rangers have been scoffing at those as being useless since...2014. As far as archery (ranged attack spammer), the warlock flat out does it better than the ranger does. As far as the spells? The warlock's got better ones. As far as flavor? The warlock has a ton more than the ranger does.
The warlock as presented, is better than the ranger in nearly every way. The paladin is the only half caster that can dream of competing with with it's auras.
Its always the others persons perception that is the problem.
Well when WotC comes out and outright states that the perception of the Warlock as a full caster is wrong. Then yes. In the video when they talked about the warlock changes they said the warlock was weird but you pulled back the hood you would see a more of a half caster there with a LITTLE extra casting. They always cast a concentration spell and than eldritch blast because of the spell slot amount. When WotC says your perception is wrong, it is good indication your perception is wrong.
People saying others saw it as a full caster is their perception of the issue. I don't know anyone who saw it as exactly a full caster. More full than half sure. At most people saw it as a Full Caster with a big *as it gained full caster progression but with a lot less slots so it relied on its invocations to fill the gap. It was a unique caster that enough people loved that it was consistently in the top 3 of favorite classes. And that is with a lot of flaws in invocations. Now it lost that. When you frame other peoples perceptions in a negative light its pretty easy to say their perceptions are flawed. I would go on, but honestly this thread has gotten so condescending and rude its not really worth it anymore. Its not much fun to discuss things when people are sniping back and forth.
And no in general about one or 5e if WOTC tells you your perception is wrong, it is not a good indication it is wrong. Everything they tell you is marketing. They are selling you something, they are not trying to spread hidden truths about their game.
That's why I said it's a perception problem. People have this idea in their head that the warlock is a full caster like a sorc and wizard. It's not, and never has been. Before it was a quirky, but interesting short rest class. Now, it's the most powerful of the half casters due to mystic arcanum...
Its always the others persons perception that is the problem.
Well when WotC comes out and outright states that the perception of the Warlock as a full caster is wrong. Then yes. In the video when they talked about the warlock changes they said the warlock was weird but you pulled back the hood you would see a more of a half caster there with a LITTLE extra casting. They always cast a concentration spell and than eldritch blast because of the spell slot amount. When WotC says your perception is wrong, it is good indication your perception is wrong.
warlocks were a "cast a spell and then eldritch blast" class to many before that video. if your perceptions were different, well, isn't that variability in experience exactly why the UA has changed these things? devs couldn't guarantee everyone the same number of short rests so UA-5 playtested warlocks as a more bland version. and people who played it say it's not terrible. why shouldn't it remain?
on the other hand, what's wrong with just running out of pact slots and and MA then casting EB for a while? it builds character.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
Warlocks were a full-caster equivalent, and the vanilla warlock could spend their spell slots and regain them on a short rest. Which, y'know, isn't the same as casting them and being done for the entire day, which is what the half-casting abomination is forced to do with mystic arcanums. And no, their nerfed half-casting spell slot progression is not an improvement, or even equivalent. Not to those who played it as the alternative to full casters that it was, and didn't ban themselves from taking short rests...
And I'm all for switching from a short rest recovery to a more appropriate long rest one. I expected Pact Casting to shift to a long rest model. Instead, it was replaced with a nerfed half casting model that doesn't actually fix anything.
The half caster warlock is bad design. And judging from the response I've seen, it's probably dead. Which good. I hope it is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Remember that the single level Hexblade dip also limited you to one-handed weapons. It took Pact of the Blade to get heavy/two-handed weapons, and most people wouldn't put three levels into Warlock.
Its main function for Paladin is one running sword-and-board, which isn't benefiting from most of the feats anyway.
The interesting thing, is that since all the combat feats are half-feats there isn't such an incentive for CHA-based attacks for paladin. Plus since the -5/+10 bonuses have been removed boosting your attack rolls isn't nearly as important as before. Even Sword-and-Board paladins might want to take Charger, Shield Master, and Mounted Combatant which nets them a +3 STR at the same time, or Sentinel, + Shield Master.
That said Devotion Paladins and many Bards I see dipping Warlock for PotB + Shield + Find Familiar.
Lightly armored is a first level feat anyone could take. Easier and more rewarding to take that because it also gives shield proficiency without any delay of caster features or spells. Melee sorc would need at least 5 levels to be effective in melee at that point it isnt a level dip. And if the Paladin goes medium armor instead of heavy they just became more MAD not less. Because you have to have at 13 strength to multiclass pally. If you are wearing medium armor you want a 14 dex now you are wanting 4 high stats. In addition to not getting to grab the best weapons or feats because all the good feats bump your strength or dex and not CHA. You are still isolating one option without looking at all the changes around it. 1 level warlock dip for cha or wis attacks isn't good for the classes it used to be good for.
The only one that might do so is sword bard, because they already weren't going to grab the feats and Bardic inspiration scales with CHA.
Ya add in heavy armor master and mage slayer. Add in delaying not just spells, but also delaying access to smite delaying the ASI that gets you to +4 and +5 attack bonus in addition to giving up these feats, delaying extra attack and delaying aura of protection.
Hexblade now should be at level 3 because is a Patron, which is fine.
And now 1 level dip with PotB seems more interesting for Cleric than for Paladin, as the Cleric will continue maximizing Wisdom and using it for attack and damage. With the overpowered Searing Smite, using your Wis for hitting seems too good. But I see the problem really at Searing Smite, instead the Warlock dip.
Maybe I'll give my Arcane Trickster Magic Initiate (Divine) for Searing Smite.
Using a Shadow Blade cast at level 3, for 3d8 damage, Booming Blade for 3d8 damage, level 20 Sneak Attack for 10d6 damage, and a 4th level Searing Smite for 4d6 damage.
3d8+5 + 3d8 + 10d6 + 4d6, plus the 4d6 the target takes before they get to make their constitution save.
6(4.5) + 18(3.5) + 5 = 95
How many dice do we want to roll?
All the dice.
Then if we get a critical... so many dice.
Still, that's a lot of investment for only a moderate amount of damage at level 20. It'd likely be better at lower levels, allowing you to use spare spell slots to pump up your damage in certain circumstances. Given fire is so commonly resisted, perhaps Wrathful Smite with Necrotic damage inflicting the Frightened condition would be more reliable. The reason I prefer Chill Touch to Firebolt. The potential to just keep burning your enemy for Xd6 a round is so cool though.
I wouldnt touch lightly armored when I can get so much more out of 1 level warlock dip.
14 dex (I want anyways, I hate low dex characters) 16 char and 13 str to meet mc requirements is easy. Strength is mostly useless when you decouple it from the protection offered by heavy armor and the necessity for melee weapons.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
So you wouldn't touch a free first level feat choosing instead to delay smite a level, all of your spells a level, extra attack a level, making all the combat feats not as valuable for you, delay aura of protection. Alright that is a personal preference but it is for sure not a more powerful method and that is what multiclassing is for.
Level by level, sure, but I think it's easy to confuse character creation features with in-play features. The UA edition can cast more spells per day, but the effect of those is negligable compared to the effect of ripping off an Eldritch blast. Like.. my concern is that each class should be able to bring something uniquely their own to a dramatic situation in the game. Mostly this means combat, but it could also mean a difficult challenge to overcome or a unique utility they bring that highlights that character classes contribution.
Warrior classes do this by playing at the vanguard and meeting whatever terrifying enginge of death is baring down on the party. This doesn't stop them from picking up a ranged weapon to be a bow weilding badass, but if things get especially bad they can still take the front. Casters put themselves in less immediate danger, but have both utility and fight-stopping powers on rotation. The same can be extended to expert classes. The new Warlock, otoh, is a solid mix of abilities without an opportunity to stand out. Their spellcasting doesn't kick on fast enough to be a challenge to the enemies they'll face at an appropriate level, the buffs aren't anything more significant than other casters can get through a subclass function, and their martial abilities don't lend themselves to acting in the role of a warrior archetype.
I'm not saying it's not an improvement over the old Warlock, the problem there being that all your spell casting was dependent on a mechanic that most of your team didn't much benefit from. I think there's potential in Mystic Arcanum, but taking away an invocation for the benefit of one spell, once per day, chosen at every level up feels way too restricticve.
Spitballing an alternative, I'd like to see a the Warlock get more choice and an increased focus on Patrons. For instance, the Patron could grant a Mystic Arcanum dependent for applicable slots 3-9 at the appropriate level, but you can still only cast only one spell at those higher slots /long rest. Or the Warlock could lean into the sold themselves for power trope and expend hit dice or exhaustion for the ability to upcast a spell?
It shouldn't equal the power of a wizard or sorcerer of course, but as the new class stands it feels like it doesn't have a getting serious mode like the more common archetypes do. Mystic Arcanum's sorta do this, but those restrictions are so tight they feel difficult to build a character around.
I think that mystic arcanum makes it MUCH stronger than the primal and divine half casters are. That's what the balance lever we should be looking at, not sorcs and wizards.
At it's core, Warlock is and will continue to be...an archer. I suppose that's likely where the disconnect comes from. I view the warlock as a martial that uses magic to do it's damage (EB is a heavy crossbow without the reload property), and most people are trying to view it as a spell caster. As an archer, the warlock dumps all over the ranger, and it's got a lot of nifty tricks up it's sleeve with it's spell casting as well.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
The issue isn't what's stronger, the issue is what's interesting to do. The half-caster spell progression assures that no matter what level you get your core spells at they're watered down for the encounter level. Darkness, Invisibility, or an upcasted AoA or Sleep at level 3 is a game changer, at level 5 its an inconvenience. The pattern scales up to the degree that each tier at which you get a given spell level you're already in the position that the spell is mechanically less effective than going with EB instead. Maybe this flattens out at tier 3 or 4, but by that point all published adventures are basically over.
As I said above MA tries to fix this, but I don't believe that 1 spell per day chosen according when you level is sufficient to be a class defining ability. The problem gets worse when you consider how many of the star spells => 4th level are either Concentration stapled with costly and/or rare components. If you've got one star spell and it gets blown on a bad Concentration roll or are suddenly in the wilderness without access for months you're going to feel pretty hoses by your choice.
I think it's fixable and I definitely don't want the class to go hack to short rest base, but as it stands now it feels way too much like a gamified constraint.
As for the Warlock being an archer? Oof. The EB spammer isn't an "archer" they're a walking turret with a face. A ranger isn't just an archer; they're a survivalist, a skill expert, a second string healer, and equally capable of fighting in the vanguard. A Ranger is defined by more than just their bow, a Warlock shouldn't be defined by just EB.
Just remember that full casters only have 1 caster of a 4th level spell at level 7 and they only have one cast of a 5h level spell at level 9. So the only ones they can really cast "more" are the 3rd level spells at 5, and then it is going to be their lower level spells.
I've seen people say that in D&D Martials are linear, and Full Casters are quadratic.
If that is a helpful comparison we can then see that a Half Caster is about one quarter as powerful as a Full Caster, and a One Third Caster about one ninth as powerful.
The power level of spells you get access to, and the level that you get access to them, combine to give the Full Caster its power.
Warlocks, previously, up to level 9 were as powerful as a Full Caster, but were held back by their very limited spell slots. That was intended to balance the reliable, resourceless, damage they were able to put out with Eldritch Blast. However their spell slot limitation was then balanced by the short rest recharge mechanic. It meant that a Warlock with frequent short rests could put out some serious casting numbers, but with few or none it became basically an Eldritch Blast turret. Take the Spell Sniper feat and it could even do it in melee.
Now their spell access drops them to one quarter that power with, perhaps, Vancian casting of higher level spells trying to fill the gap, but their reliable spellcasting is severely weakened. If your single cast of a level 3 or 4 spell (levels 7 and 8) is dispelled or counterspelled (yes, DMs do give their casters those spells) then you're left relying on levels 1 and 2 spells for the game, and/or being an Eldritch Blast turret. That's basically where you were before, but without the hope of grabbing a quick rest and being back in the fight again.
WotC have now proposed the Arcane Bard, which is a full caster, a charisma caster, with expertise in a variety of skills. A true Jack-of-all-trades.
As for Full Casters, they have level 4 and 5 spell SLOTS. Sure, at level 7 they have one level 4, and at level 9 one level 5, but they have the ability to take multiple spells of that level and pick whatever is most relevant for them OR upcast a lower level spell if that is what they need. UAWarlocks do not.
That's why I said it's a perception problem. People have this idea in their head that the warlock is a full caster like a sorc and wizard. It's not, and never has been. Before it was a quirky, but interesting short rest class. Now, it's the most powerful of the half casters due to mystic arcanum
As for the person who scoffed at my suggestion that the warlock is an archer, it's more than a turret with a face. Have you taken a gander at the spells it has available to it? It utterly smashes the ranger. it did in 2014, and it will will. All those 'benefits' you talk about? Rangers have been scoffing at those as being useless since...2014. As far as archery (ranged attack spammer), the warlock flat out does it better than the ranger does. As far as the spells? The warlock's got better ones. As far as flavor? The warlock has a ton more than the ranger does.
The warlock as presented, is better than the ranger in nearly every way. The paladin is the only half caster that can dream of competing with with it's auras.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Its always the others persons perception that is the problem.
Well when WotC comes out and outright states that the perception of the Warlock as a full caster is wrong. Then yes. In the video when they talked about the warlock changes they said the warlock was weird but you pulled back the hood you would see a more of a half caster there with a LITTLE extra casting. They always cast a concentration spell and than eldritch blast because of the spell slot amount. When WotC says your perception is wrong, it is good indication your perception is wrong.
People saying others saw it as a full caster is their perception of the issue. I don't know anyone who saw it as exactly a full caster. More full than half sure. At most people saw it as a Full Caster with a big *as it gained full caster progression but with a lot less slots so it relied on its invocations to fill the gap. It was a unique caster that enough people loved that it was consistently in the top 3 of favorite classes. And that is with a lot of flaws in invocations. Now it lost that. When you frame other peoples perceptions in a negative light its pretty easy to say their perceptions are flawed. I would go on, but honestly this thread has gotten so condescending and rude its not really worth it anymore. Its not much fun to discuss things when people are sniping back and forth.
And no in general about one or 5e if WOTC tells you your perception is wrong, it is not a good indication it is wrong. Everything they tell you is marketing. They are selling you something, they are not trying to spread hidden truths about their game.
warlocks were a "cast a spell and then eldritch blast" class to many before that video. if your perceptions were different, well, isn't that variability in experience exactly why the UA has changed these things? devs couldn't guarantee everyone the same number of short rests so UA-5 playtested warlocks as a more bland version. and people who played it say it's not terrible. why shouldn't it remain?
on the other hand, what's wrong with just running out of pact slots and and MA then casting EB for a while? it builds character.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
Warlocks were a full-caster equivalent, and the vanilla warlock could spend their spell slots and regain them on a short rest. Which, y'know, isn't the same as casting them and being done for the entire day, which is what the half-casting abomination is forced to do with mystic arcanums. And no, their nerfed half-casting spell slot progression is not an improvement, or even equivalent. Not to those who played it as the alternative to full casters that it was, and didn't ban themselves from taking short rests...
And I'm all for switching from a short rest recovery to a more appropriate long rest one. I expected Pact Casting to shift to a long rest model. Instead, it was replaced with a nerfed half casting model that doesn't actually fix anything.
The half caster warlock is bad design. And judging from the response I've seen, it's probably dead. Which good. I hope it is.