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.
i don't hope it's dead, but mostly because i hope they give it to bards.
but what replaces half-caster for warlocks? see lilith's recap above for why they miiight not bringing back the old pact magic. or could they bring back pact magic minus short rests and just invent a few new eldritch invocations to re-provide spell-level 1 utility spell casts. and, i suppose, maybe a band-aid invocation for higher level warlocks who worry over much about losing pact slots to counterspell?
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!
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.
i don't hope it's dead, but mostly because i hope they give it to bards.
but what replaces half-caster for warlocks? see lilith's recap above for why they miiight not bringing back the old pact magic. or could they bring back pact magic minus short rests and just invent a few new eldritch invocations to re-provide spell-level 1 utility spell casts. and, i suppose, maybe a band-aid invocation for higher level warlocks who worry over much about losing pact slots to counterspell?
I very sincerely doubt they'll give it to bards, mainly because they seem to have doubled down hard on backwards compatibility (which I think is a mistake, but that's a separate conversation.)
Off the top of my head, I could thing of two ways to retune pact magic for a long rest model. The first (and easiest) would be to remove short rest recovery and slowly increase the number of pact slots as the Warlock progresses. The second would be to remove the short rest recharge, keep the number of pact slots the same, and move Eldritch Master to a lower level, (and retune as needed, maybe only recover half the amount of slots when use, then increase that amount as the class progresses). I wouldn't worry about losing pact slots to counterspell. That's just part of the game, in my view.
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.
They are trying to sell a community something, not a single person, and they are trying to create a product that is more in-sync with what a majority of people's visions are so that they can sell MORE product. Yes a business is in business to make money, but for a business to make money it needs to understand its product and the people it is selling to. The designers of a game may not have a perfect grasp of a game because of how close they are too it, but they do have a perfect grasp of their INTENT. And if they tell you the INTENT was never that Warlocks were full caster it is an INCREDIBLY strong indication that your view is wrong. Ignoring that is just willful ignorance at that point.
The designers have called it a full caster equivalent in the past. The intention was that it'd be similar enough to stand on par with a full caster while still being distinct from them. That, is why the half caster version is a failure for me and others. It fails on both of those counts.
The designers have called it a full caster equivalent in the past. The intention was that it'd be similar enough to stand on par with a full caster while still being distinct from them. That, is why the half caster version is a failure for me and others. It fails on both of those counts.
The designers have called it a full caster equivalent in the past. The intention was that it'd be similar enough to stand on par with a full caster while still being distinct from them. That, is why the half caster version is a failure for me and others. It fails on both of those counts.
Where? You have a source for that?
I forget where it was, but it was a video with an interview of Jeremy Crawford, and while I'm not going to go digging through multiple years of videos on multiple channels to find it, what I can do is direct you to look at the spell level progression of the vanilla warlock itself, and you can clearly see that the spell level progression matches that of the full casting classes. It's meant to be equivalent. Whether it succeeds in that or not is a separate question, and one I do personally feel has merit, but the design does reflect that intention.
The designers have called it a full caster equivalent in the past. The intention was that it'd be similar enough to stand on par with a full caster while still being distinct from them. That, is why the half caster version is a failure for me and others. It fails on both of those counts.
Where? You have a source for that?
I forget where it was, but it was a video with an interview of Jeremy Crawford, and while I'm not going to go digging through multiple years of videos on multiple channels to find it, what I can do is direct you to look at the spell level progression of the vanilla warlock itself, and you can clearly see that the spell level progression matches that of the full casting classes. It's meant to be equivalent. Whether it succeeds in that or not is a separate question, and one I do personally feel has merit, but the design does reflect that intention.
And if you look at the number of spell slots available you can clearly see the design intention was to make it not rely heavily on spells in combat making it closer to the half caster from the video which Jeremy Crawford that says the Warlock always resembled more of a half-caster under the hood than a full caster. So the only official word that I can find right now is that as their intent. The other sounds made up or a personal interpretation.
Now, I do understand that responding with "I've seen them say it myself" is not a satisfactory answer, and I do apologize for that. But that is the truth. I have seen them say that in past videos on the subject, and that is how it has played out in my games as well.
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.
They are trying to sell a community something, not a single person, and they are trying to create a product that is more in-sync with what a majority of people's visions are so that they can sell MORE product. Yes a business is in business to make money, but for a business to make money it needs to understand its product and the people it is selling to. The designers of a game may not have a perfect grasp of a game because of how close they are too it, but they do have a perfect grasp of their INTENT. And if they tell you the INTENT was never that Warlocks were full caster it is an INCREDIBLY strong indication that your view is wrong. Ignoring that is just willful ignorance at that point.
are you saying the designers never said it was a full caster equivalent? Because that's what I said.
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.
Now, I do understand that responding with "I've seen them say it myself" is not a satisfactory answer, and I do apologize for that. But that is the truth. I have seen them say that in past videos on the subject, and that is how it has played out in my games as well.
Your right it isn't satisfactory. It is the reason the Mandela effect exists. Like "Dry land is not a myth I've seen it" sure it is attributed to Water World, but they never actually say that in the film. Or "Luke I am your Father" and Vader never says that. Human memories are imperfect and change based on perception, which can be wrong.
I forget where it was, but it was a video with an interview of Jeremy Crawford, and while I'm not going to go digging through multiple years of videos on multiple channels to find it, what I can do is direct you to look at the spell level progression of the vanilla warlock itself, and you can clearly see that the spell level progression matches that of the full casting classes. It's meant to be equivalent. Whether it succeeds in that or not is a separate question, and one I do personally feel has merit, but the design does reflect that intention.
And if you look at the number of spell slots available you can clearly see the design intention was to make it not rely heavily on spells in combat making it closer to the half caster from the video which Jeremy Crawford that says the Warlock always resembled more of a half-caster under the hood than a full caster. So the only official word that I can find right now is that as their intent. The other sounds made up or a personal interpretation.
I do look at the number of spell slots, as well at the way they scale. They're absolutely designed to be used in combat, as an impactful heavy hitter to be dropped onto you enemies, in between uses of eldritch blast. That's why invocations for lower level spells like Mask of Many Faces exists, it's to give that reliable sort of utility at higher tiers of play. Again, you can argue that it doesn't succeed in that, and I will freely say that argument has merit, but that is why it exists.
And I understand why you have difficulty accepting what I say regarding their original intent, but I assure, it is neither made up nor a personal interpretation. I'm not asking you to accept that yourself, but I do ask that you understand, that is my experience, and that is where I'm coming from.
I forget where it was, but it was a video with an interview of Jeremy Crawford, and while I'm not going to go digging through multiple years of videos on multiple channels to find it, what I can do is direct you to look at the spell level progression of the vanilla warlock itself, and you can clearly see that the spell level progression matches that of the full casting classes. It's meant to be equivalent. Whether it succeeds in that or not is a separate question, and one I do personally feel has merit, but the design does reflect that intention.
And if you look at the number of spell slots available you can clearly see the design intention was to make it not rely heavily on spells in combat making it closer to the half caster from the video which Jeremy Crawford that says the Warlock always resembled more of a half-caster under the hood than a full caster. So the only official word that I can find right now is that as their intent. The other sounds made up or a personal interpretation.
I do look at the number of spell slots, as well at the way they scale. They're absolutely designed to be used in combat, as an impactful heavy hitter to be dropped onto you enemies, in between uses of eldritch blast. That's why invocations for lower level spells like Mask of Many Faces exists, it's to give that reliable sort of utility at higher tiers of play. Again, you can argue that it doesn't succeed in that, and I will freely say that argument has merit, but that is why it exists.
And I understand why you have difficulty accepting what I say regarding their original intent, but I assure, it is neither made up nor a personal interpretation. I'm not asking you to accept that yourself, but I do ask that you understand, that is my experience, and that is where I'm coming from.
Right and the one cast of a bomb + attack is a pattern the warlock shares with the half casters who do the same thing. A ranger pops hunter's mark and attacks, The Warlock pops hex and attacks. The Ranger puts down an area of damage with spike growth and attacks, the Warlock puts down an area of Hunger of Hadar and attacks. Their play pattern very much resembles a half caster. While a full caster like a wizard is throwing down Hypnotic Pattern and following up with more leveled spells like scorching ray.
The problem is that the Warlock was also designed on having access to to spells of the same level as full casters at the same rate. Half casting can't make up for that, and the mystic arcana invocation isn't able to fix that either.
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.
They are trying to sell a community something, not a single person, and they are trying to create a product that is more in-sync with what a majority of people's visions are so that they can sell MORE product. Yes a business is in business to make money, but for a business to make money it needs to understand its product and the people it is selling to. The designers of a game may not have a perfect grasp of a game because of how close they are too it, but they do have a perfect grasp of their INTENT. And if they tell you the INTENT was never that Warlocks were full caster it is an INCREDIBLY strong indication that your view is wrong. Ignoring that is just willful ignorance at that point.
are you saying the designers never said it was a full caster equivalent? Because that's what I said.
Yes, As far as I am aware they have not. As far as I know they have said if you look under the hood of what the Warlock was its playstyle always resembled more of a half caster than a full caster.
The problem is that the Warlock was also designed on having access to to spells of the same level as full casters. Half casting can't make up for that, and the mystic arcana invocation isn't able to fix that either.
Except Mystic Arcanum literally does do that. You literally DO have access to the spells of the same level as full casters.
The problem is that the Warlock was also designed on having access to to spells of the same level as full casters. Half casting can't make up for that, and the mystic arcana invocation isn't able to fix that either.
Except Mystic Arcanum literally does do that. You literally DO have access to the spells of the same level as full casters.
Once. Per invocation. While the rest of your spellcasting drops sharply behind. Which is something that the mystic arcana invocation can't fix.
The problem is that the Warlock was also designed on having access to to spells of the same level as full casters. Half casting can't make up for that, and the mystic arcana invocation isn't able to fix that either.
Except Mystic Arcanum literally does do that. You literally DO have access to the spells of the same level as full casters.
Once. Per invocation. While the rest of your spellcasting drops sharply behind. Which is something that the mystic arcana invocation can't fix.
And yet literally still does it, and provides you more casting otherwise thanks to lower level slots for spells the warlock would want to cast anyway like hex, or misty step or suggestion that don't really upcast well.
The problem is that the Warlock was also designed on having access to to spells of the same level as full casters. Half casting can't make up for that, and the mystic arcana invocation isn't able to fix that either.
Except Mystic Arcanum literally does do that. You literally DO have access to the spells of the same level as full casters.
Once. Per invocation. While the rest of your spellcasting drops sharply behind. Which is something that the mystic arcana invocation can't fix.
And yet literally still does it, and provides you more casting otherwise thanks to lower level slots for spells the warlock would want to cast anyway like hex, or misty step or suggestion that don't really upcast well.
Except it doesn't because you still lose flexibility in higher level spells in the early tier, and the later tier your spellcasting has fallen sharply behind, and saying half casting gives more spell slots still still doesn't account for the fact that pact slots refreshed on a short rest. Now again, you can argue that the short rest recovery doesn't make good design, and again I will say without hesitation that this argument has merit, but that doesn't disprove my argument that half casting is a poor replacement.
The problem is that the Warlock was also designed on having access to to spells of the same level as full casters. Half casting can't make up for that, and the mystic arcana invocation isn't able to fix that either.
Except Mystic Arcanum literally does do that. You literally DO have access to the spells of the same level as full casters.
Once. Per invocation. While the rest of your spellcasting drops sharply behind. Which is something that the mystic arcana invocation can't fix.
And yet literally still does it, and provides you more casting otherwise thanks to lower level slots for spells the warlock would want to cast anyway like hex, or misty step or suggestion that don't really upcast well.
Except it doesn't because you still lose flexibility in higher level spells in the early tier, and the later tier your spellcasting has fallen sharply behind, and saying half casting gives more spell slots still still doesn't account for the fact that pact slots refreshed on a short rest. Now again, you can argue that the short rest recovery doesn't make good design, and again I will say without hesitation that this argument has merit, but that doesn't disprove my argument that half casting is a poor replacement.
Early tiers is because of the lack of mystic arcanum at 3 which is a problem that needs fixing. Later tiers your spell casting HAS NOT fallen sharply behind, you still get access to that 1 higher level spell just like everyone else. At 7 you can cast 1 4th level spell, FULL CASTERS can only cast 1 4th level spell at 7, at 9 1 5th again same as full, at 11, 1 6th, at 13 one 7th, at 15 one 8th and at 17 say hi to wish. You have fewer spells a tier lower than the full caster, because Warlock isn't a full caster.
Mystic Arcanum at level 3 won't fix the problem because you still won't have the flexibility you had before, and being locked into a single spell that you can cast a single time is not enough to make up for both the loss of power or the loss of flexibility. It's at best a band-aid on losing both. And the Warlock's progression is still designed to be equivalent to that of a full caster, again exemplified in the progression of their spell slots. So far, nothing I've seen changes any of that, not even the inclusion of Wish to their spell list.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
i don't hope it's dead, but mostly because i hope they give it to bards.
but what replaces half-caster for warlocks? see lilith's recap above for why they miiight not bringing back the old pact magic. or could they bring back pact magic minus short rests and just invent a few new eldritch invocations to re-provide spell-level 1 utility spell casts. and, i suppose, maybe a band-aid invocation for higher level warlocks who worry over much about losing pact slots to counterspell?
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!
I very sincerely doubt they'll give it to bards, mainly because they seem to have doubled down hard on backwards compatibility (which I think is a mistake, but that's a separate conversation.)
Off the top of my head, I could thing of two ways to retune pact magic for a long rest model. The first (and easiest) would be to remove short rest recovery and slowly increase the number of pact slots as the Warlock progresses. The second would be to remove the short rest recharge, keep the number of pact slots the same, and move Eldritch Master to a lower level, (and retune as needed, maybe only recover half the amount of slots when use, then increase that amount as the class progresses). I wouldn't worry about losing pact slots to counterspell. That's just part of the game, in my view.
They are trying to sell a community something, not a single person, and they are trying to create a product that is more in-sync with what a majority of people's visions are so that they can sell MORE product. Yes a business is in business to make money, but for a business to make money it needs to understand its product and the people it is selling to. The designers of a game may not have a perfect grasp of a game because of how close they are too it, but they do have a perfect grasp of their INTENT. And if they tell you the INTENT was never that Warlocks were full caster it is an INCREDIBLY strong indication that your view is wrong. Ignoring that is just willful ignorance at that point.
The designers have called it a full caster equivalent in the past. The intention was that it'd be similar enough to stand on par with a full caster while still being distinct from them. That, is why the half caster version is a failure for me and others. It fails on both of those counts.
Where? You have a source for that?
I forget where it was, but it was a video with an interview of Jeremy Crawford, and while I'm not going to go digging through multiple years of videos on multiple channels to find it, what I can do is direct you to look at the spell level progression of the vanilla warlock itself, and you can clearly see that the spell level progression matches that of the full casting classes. It's meant to be equivalent. Whether it succeeds in that or not is a separate question, and one I do personally feel has merit, but the design does reflect that intention.
And if you look at the number of spell slots available you can clearly see the design intention was to make it not rely heavily on spells in combat making it closer to the half caster from the video which Jeremy Crawford that says the Warlock always resembled more of a half-caster under the hood than a full caster. So the only official word that I can find right now is that as their intent. The other sounds made up or a personal interpretation.
Now, I do understand that responding with "I've seen them say it myself" is not a satisfactory answer, and I do apologize for that. But that is the truth. I have seen them say that in past videos on the subject, and that is how it has played out in my games as well.
are you saying the designers never said it was a full caster equivalent? Because that's what I said.
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
Your right it isn't satisfactory. It is the reason the Mandela effect exists. Like "Dry land is not a myth I've seen it" sure it is attributed to Water World, but they never actually say that in the film. Or "Luke I am your Father" and Vader never says that. Human memories are imperfect and change based on perception, which can be wrong.
I do look at the number of spell slots, as well at the way they scale. They're absolutely designed to be used in combat, as an impactful heavy hitter to be dropped onto you enemies, in between uses of eldritch blast. That's why invocations for lower level spells like Mask of Many Faces exists, it's to give that reliable sort of utility at higher tiers of play. Again, you can argue that it doesn't succeed in that, and I will freely say that argument has merit, but that is why it exists.
And I understand why you have difficulty accepting what I say regarding their original intent, but I assure, it is neither made up nor a personal interpretation. I'm not asking you to accept that yourself, but I do ask that you understand, that is my experience, and that is where I'm coming from.
Right and the one cast of a bomb + attack is a pattern the warlock shares with the half casters who do the same thing. A ranger pops hunter's mark and attacks, The Warlock pops hex and attacks. The Ranger puts down an area of damage with spike growth and attacks, the Warlock puts down an area of Hunger of Hadar and attacks. Their play pattern very much resembles a half caster. While a full caster like a wizard is throwing down Hypnotic Pattern and following up with more leveled spells like scorching ray.
The problem is that the Warlock was also designed on having access to to spells of the same level as full casters at the same rate. Half casting can't make up for that, and the mystic arcana invocation isn't able to fix that either.
Yes, As far as I am aware they have not. As far as I know they have said if you look under the hood of what the Warlock was its playstyle always resembled more of a half caster than a full caster.
Except Mystic Arcanum literally does do that. You literally DO have access to the spells of the same level as full casters.
Once. Per invocation. While the rest of your spellcasting drops sharply behind. Which is something that the mystic arcana invocation can't fix.
And yet literally still does it, and provides you more casting otherwise thanks to lower level slots for spells the warlock would want to cast anyway like hex, or misty step or suggestion that don't really upcast well.
Except it doesn't because you still lose flexibility in higher level spells in the early tier, and the later tier your spellcasting has fallen sharply behind, and saying half casting gives more spell slots still still doesn't account for the fact that pact slots refreshed on a short rest. Now again, you can argue that the short rest recovery doesn't make good design, and again I will say without hesitation that this argument has merit, but that doesn't disprove my argument that half casting is a poor replacement.
Early tiers is because of the lack of mystic arcanum at 3 which is a problem that needs fixing. Later tiers your spell casting HAS NOT fallen sharply behind, you still get access to that 1 higher level spell just like everyone else. At 7 you can cast 1 4th level spell, FULL CASTERS can only cast 1 4th level spell at 7, at 9 1 5th again same as full, at 11, 1 6th, at 13 one 7th, at 15 one 8th and at 17 say hi to wish. You have fewer spells a tier lower than the full caster, because Warlock isn't a full caster.
Mystic Arcanum at level 3 won't fix the problem because you still won't have the flexibility you had before, and being locked into a single spell that you can cast a single time is not enough to make up for both the loss of power or the loss of flexibility. It's at best a band-aid on losing both. And the Warlock's progression is still designed to be equivalent to that of a full caster, again exemplified in the progression of their spell slots. So far, nothing I've seen changes any of that, not even the inclusion of Wish to their spell list.