That's just math, and some variant of it will be true no matter how you design your consumable resources, unless you design your consumable resources to be completely useless.
But that's the thing, right now in 5e that's pretty much how it works out.
If you're in a game with 10 combats per day, then the average CR of the monsters in those combats is going to be pretty low, otherwise you're party is dead after the second one. This means that those monsters are more likely to fail saves against spells, there is more likely to lots of enemies per combat making AoE magic ultra effective etc... All of which increases the power of the spellcasters.
If you're in a game with 1 combat per day, then the average CR of the monsters is WAY higher than those in a game with 10 combats per day. Which means those monsters are much more likely to save from spells, they are much more likely to have legendary resistances, and are much more likely to be solo-boss monsters all of which makes spells a lot less effective.
e.g. you can cast Polymorph every round in your one-combat-per-day group, but if the monster has an 80% chance of success, you aren't going to be as effective than if you had cast Polymorph 3x each time in a different combat across a 10-combat-day where the monster had a 40% chance to succeed the save.
You can't assume a character is equally effective in an ultra difficult single-combat-per-day as they are in a series of 10 easy encounters. Just consider Fireball, in a 5th level party. Now if you're fighting 10 combats per day, most likely at least one of those will involve a large number of CR 1/2 monsters which you can insta-kill with a single fireball, whereas if you're fighting 1 combat per day, you're unlikely to see any monster of CR 1 or lower in that combat, so you're Fireball isn't going to insta-kill anything, it will just soften up a couple of enemies.
As far as I am aware the primary use of a spell like polymorph in a big fight is a pseudo heal that makes a character into a powerful fighter. Using on the allies is 100% reliability.
That's just math, and some variant of it will be true no matter how you design your consumable resources, unless you design your consumable resources to be completely useless.
But that's the thing, right now in 5e that's pretty much how it works out.
If you're in a game with 10 combats per day, then the average CR of the monsters in those combats is going to be pretty low, otherwise you're party is dead after the second one. This means that those monsters are more likely to fail saves against spells, there is more likely to lots of enemies per combat making AoE magic ultra effective etc... All of which increases the power of the spellcasters.
If you're in a game with 1 combat per day, then the average CR of the monsters is WAY higher than those in a game with 10 combats per day. Which means those monsters are much more likely to save from spells, they are much more likely to have legendary resistances, and are much more likely to be solo-boss monsters all of which makes spells a lot less effective.
e.g. you can cast Polymorph every round in your one-combat-per-day group, but if the monster has an 80% chance of success, you aren't going to be as effective than if you had cast Polymorph 3x each time in a different combat across a 10-combat-day where the monster had a 40% chance to succeed the save.
You can't assume a character is equally effective in an ultra difficult single-combat-per-day as they are in a series of 10 easy encounters. Just consider Fireball, in a 5th level party. Now if you're fighting 10 combats per day, most likely at least one of those will involve a large number of CR 1/2 monsters which you can insta-kill with a single fireball, whereas if you're fighting 1 combat per day, you're unlikely to see any monster of CR 1 or lower in that combat, so you're Fireball isn't going to insta-kill anything, it will just soften up a couple of enemies.
As far as I am aware the primary use of a spell like polymorph in a big fight is a pseudo heal that makes a character into a powerful fighter. Using on the allies is 100% reliability.
It can be a decent soft lockdown of an enemy for a few rounds, particularly as it doesn't apply any conditions or have target restrictions something like Hold Person or Tasha's Hideous Laughter does. Plus it's save or suck until the HP is dropped to 0. Strictly speaking Banishment is probably better, but as noted Polymorph has some additional utility, so there's a number of factors at play.
That's just math, and some variant of it will be true no matter how you design your consumable resources, unless you design your consumable resources to be completely useless.
But that's the thing, right now in 5e that's pretty much how it works out.
If you're in a game with 10 combats per day, then the average CR of the monsters in those combats is going to be pretty low, otherwise you're party is dead after the second one. This means that those monsters are more likely to fail saves against spells, there is more likely to lots of enemies per combat making AoE magic ultra effective etc... All of which increases the power of the spellcasters.
If you're in a game with 1 combat per day, then the average CR of the monsters is WAY higher than those in a game with 10 combats per day. Which means those monsters are much more likely to save from spells, they are much more likely to have legendary resistances, and are much more likely to be solo-boss monsters all of which makes spells a lot less effective.
e.g. you can cast Polymorph every round in your one-combat-per-day group, but if the monster has an 80% chance of success, you aren't going to be as effective than if you had cast Polymorph 3x each time in a different combat across a 10-combat-day where the monster had a 40% chance to succeed the save.
You can't assume a character is equally effective in an ultra difficult single-combat-per-day as they are in a series of 10 easy encounters. Just consider Fireball, in a 5th level party. Now if you're fighting 10 combats per day, most likely at least one of those will involve a large number of CR 1/2 monsters which you can insta-kill with a single fireball, whereas if you're fighting 1 combat per day, you're unlikely to see any monster of CR 1 or lower in that combat, so you're Fireball isn't going to insta-kill anything, it will just soften up a couple of enemies.
As far as I am aware the primary use of a spell like polymorph in a big fight is a pseudo heal that makes a character into a powerful fighter. Using on the allies is 100% reliability.
That's just a bunch of HP before until your concentration is broken. But again if you're having 1 fight per day then most likely you aren't holding concentration for more than 2, maybe 3 rounds because you'll be instantly a priority target and for the combat to be deadly enemy focus fire should be KOing a PC every 2 rounds. Whereas if you're having 10 combats per day one Polymorph on an ally could last for 2-3 whole combats.
This is laughably false. Invocations are nothing more than "pick a class feature," which is something that every class should be getting already. You hate short rests. You hate Pact Magic. You only play warlocks for invocations. It should be abundantly clear by now that you are not the typical warlock player, and I encourage you to advocate for the warlock you want to see, but don't lie about how common your playstyle is.
The issue of a short rest class in a long rest game isn't going away if you simply ignore it. Hundreds of warlock players will ceaselessly nag and beg for short rests when the rest of the party doesn't need it. I went through that experience, and I sure as hell didn't like it.
Besides, JC was pretty clear about the value of invocations when he said that if warlocks were to become fullcasters, they'd have to remove invocations for the amount of power they give.
This is laughably false. Invocations are nothing more than "pick a class feature," which is something that every class should be getting already. You hate short rests. You hate Pact Magic. You only play warlocks for invocations. It should be abundantly clear by now that you are not the typical warlock player, and I encourage you to advocate for the warlock you want to see, but don't lie about how common your playstyle is.
The issue of a short rest class in a long rest game isn't going away if you simply ignore it. Hundreds of warlock players will ceaselessly nag and beg for short rests when the rest of the party doesn't need it. I went through that experience, and I sure as hell didn't like it.
Besides, JC was pretty clear about the value of invocations when he said that if warlocks were to become fullcasters, they'd have to remove invocations for the amount of power they give.
100%
While I agree that invocations are nothing more than pick a class feature, JC and his team has the only vote that counts. I like picking my class features though, and that's far cooler than pact magic will ever be.
As for the short rest thing, my party never likes to take short rests when it doesn't make narrative sense. When I was a celestial bardlock and did the primary healing, they'd take those short rests. As a fiendlock...they do not. Pact magic is interesting, but it's not good.
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.
This is laughably false. Invocations are nothing more than "pick a class feature," which is something that every class should be getting already. You hate short rests. You hate Pact Magic. You only play warlocks for invocations. It should be abundantly clear by now that you are not the typical warlock player, and I encourage you to advocate for the warlock you want to see, but don't lie about how common your playstyle is.
The issue of a short rest class in a long rest game isn't going away if you simply ignore it. Hundreds of warlock players will ceaselessly nag and beg for short rests when the rest of the party doesn't need it. I went through that experience, and I sure as hell didn't like it.
Besides, JC was pretty clear about the value of invocations when he said that if warlocks were to become fullcasters, they'd have to remove invocations for the amount of power they give.
That maybe the case but nobody should confuse mystic arcanum with the power of a fullcaster, it is a once per long rest cast of a particular spell. It doesn't allow up casting of lower levelled spells, nor the choice or versatility that a fullcaster has at those levels.
Also there are some obvious issues with short rest, too many classes get little more than recovering HP from a short rest. Warlock is most dependent on them, Monk gets ki/discipline back, Bard gets inspirations back, Fighter gets their action surge back and some subclasses get their charges back like battlemaster or arcane archer. Druid gets wildshape charges back which is a bit subclass dependent on exactly how much they rely on them, Wizard once a day gets spell slots back... then it gets more iffy...
Channel Divinity can be good, but it definitely varies by subclass and situation, relentless rage and tireless just shouldn't be coming up often while Stroke of Luck and Sorcerous Restoration at level 20... generally won't come up for probably 99% of campaigns. There is clearly an imbalance and Warlock has the shortest stick while Rogue and Sorcerer pretty much get nothing from a short rest at all.
This is laughably false. Invocations are nothing more than "pick a class feature," which is something that every class should be getting already. You hate short rests. You hate Pact Magic. You only play warlocks for invocations. It should be abundantly clear by now that you are not the typical warlock player, and I encourage you to advocate for the warlock you want to see, but don't lie about how common your playstyle is.
The issue of a short rest class in a long rest game isn't going away if you simply ignore it. Hundreds of warlock players will ceaselessly nag and beg for short rests when the rest of the party doesn't need it. I went through that experience, and I sure as hell didn't like it.
Besides, JC was pretty clear about the value of invocations when he said that if warlocks were to become fullcasters, they'd have to remove invocations for the amount of power they give.
I guess they need to remove metamagic then..
But unless the issue of a long rests class goes away all martials will ceaselessly nag and complain in most games.
This is laughably false. Invocations are nothing more than "pick a class feature," which is something that every class should be getting already. You hate short rests. You hate Pact Magic. You only play warlocks for invocations. It should be abundantly clear by now that you are not the typical warlock player, and I encourage you to advocate for the warlock you want to see, but don't lie about how common your playstyle is.
The issue of a short rest class in a long rest game isn't going away if you simply ignore it. Hundreds of warlock players will ceaselessly nag and beg for short rests when the rest of the party doesn't need it. I went through that experience, and I sure as hell didn't like it.
Besides, JC was pretty clear about the value of invocations when he said that if warlocks were to become fullcasters, they'd have to remove invocations for the amount of power they give.
I guess they need to remove metamagic then..
But unless the issue of a long rests class goes away all martials will ceaselessly nag and complain in most games.
"I guess they need to remove metamagic then..."
Damn...that's cold. But your point is well made.
Bard is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features far more powerful/impactful than invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Bardic Inspiration/Magical Secrets in return for full casting.
Druid is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features arguably as strong and versatile as invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Wild Shape in return for full casting.
Sorcerer is a full caster with arguably the best saving throw proficiency for a caster and a class feature far more powerful/impactful than invocations in metamagic/font of magic. Yet no one calls for the removal of metamagic in return for full casting.
And I don't know a single Pact Magic advocate that says Warlock should get full casting with a straight face. Pact Magic is GOOD and DIFFERENT and needs to stay. It just needs a few minor tweaks and it would be fine.
And I don't know a single Pact Magic advocate that says Warlock should get full casting with a straight face. Pact Magic is GOOD and DIFFERENT and needs to stay. It just needs a few minor tweaks and it would be fine.
Yeah I think majority argument is improve what warlock currently is not make it a full caster. I could see some changes to mystic arcanum happening, like maybe they should be able to upcast into other arcanum slots. A year and a day suggestion via mass suggestion seems really warlock like for example. And they probably should have some method to swap them out between levels, not daily like a wizard but with a ritual or something. But I feel the same for the sorcerer, they need some way between levels to swap out spells. Not a daily swap but something. I don't think that would make a warlock a full caster though as they still have pact magic for their base, while not perma stuck on arcanums they are fairly rigid. I think the thing is while they are not a "full caster" they are seen primarily as a caster. Whereas I think things like the paladin or ranger are primarily seen as warriors with magic.
This is laughably false. Invocations are nothing more than "pick a class feature," which is something that every class should be getting already. You hate short rests. You hate Pact Magic. You only play warlocks for invocations. It should be abundantly clear by now that you are not the typical warlock player, and I encourage you to advocate for the warlock you want to see, but don't lie about how common your playstyle is.
The issue of a short rest class in a long rest game isn't going away if you simply ignore it. Hundreds of warlock players will ceaselessly nag and beg for short rests when the rest of the party doesn't need it. I went through that experience, and I sure as hell didn't like it.
Besides, JC was pretty clear about the value of invocations when he said that if warlocks were to become fullcasters, they'd have to remove invocations for the amount of power they give.
That maybe the case but nobody should confuse mystic arcanum with the power of a fullcaster, it is a once per long rest cast of a particular spell. It doesn't allow up casting of lower levelled spells, nor the choice or versatility that a fullcaster has at those levels.
Also there are some obvious issues with short rest, too many classes get little more than recovering HP from a short rest. Warlock is most dependent on them, Monk gets ki/discipline back, Bard gets inspirations back, Fighter gets their action surge back and some subclasses get their charges back like battlemaster or arcane archer. Druid gets wildshape charges back which is a bit subclass dependent on exactly how much they rely on them, Wizard once a day gets spell slots back... then it gets more iffy...
Channel Divinity can be good, but it definitely varies by subclass and situation, relentless rage and tireless just shouldn't be coming up often while Stroke of Luck and Sorcerous Restoration at level 20... generally won't come up for probably 99% of campaigns. There is clearly an imbalance and Warlock has the shortest stick while Rogue and Sorcerer pretty much get nothing from a short rest at all.
I do want to note something about druid and wild shape. With all the new options to use wild shape in these new playtests the druid as a whole has a greater incentive for restng to recover wild shapes than ever. Of course they only recover 1 now as well so the short rest isn't as potent for them. Which is also why I think the 1 recovery is what we will see with Warlock. Still making monk the odd man out the most I feel.
Bard is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features far more powerful/impactful than invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Bardic Inspiration/Magical Secrets in return for full casting.
Druid is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features arguably as strong and versatile as invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Wild Shape in return for full casting.
Sorcerer is a full caster with arguably the best saving throw proficiency for a caster and a class feature far more powerful/impactful than invocations in metamagic/font of magic. Yet no one calls for the removal of metamagic in return for full casting.
And I don't know a single Pact Magic advocate that says Warlock should get full casting with a straight face. Pact Magic is GOOD and DIFFERENT and needs to stay. It just needs a few minor tweaks and it would be fine.
Bard has a more limited spell list which is balanced by its class features - no Mage Armour, no Absorb Elements, no Shield -> this is made up for with d8 hit die and light armour proficiency - extremely limited damage spell options -> this is made up for with extra weapon proficiencies - has known spells that cannot be changed on a LR greatly reducing versatility -> this is made up for with Bardic Inspiration and VM/DW that have broad applicability
Sorcerer has much more limited spells known which is balanced by it's one class feature - no Ritual casting - known spells that cannot be changed on a LR - fewer spells known These are all balanced by greater flexibility with the spells they do know thanks to metamagic. If you turned Sorcerer into a preparation caster with ritual casting you would absolutely need to remove metamagic.
Druid has a weak spell list which is balanced by it's class features - no mage Armour, no Shield -> balanced by d8 hit die, light armour + shield proficiency - no access to teleportation, save-or-suck spells, invisibility, the best control spells or blasting spells -> balanced by being a preparation caster with all spells known and a huge diverse spell list - the WORST damage cantrips in the game -> tons of out-of-combat utility from WS
Cleric has a tiny spell list which balances its class features
And I don't know a single Pact Magic advocate that says Warlock should get full casting with a straight face. Pact Magic is GOOD and DIFFERENT and needs to stay. It just needs a few minor tweaks and it would be fine.
Yeah I think majority argument is improve what warlock currently is not make it a full caster. I could see some changes to mystic arcanum happening, like maybe they should be able to upcast into other arcanum slots. A year and a day suggestion via mass suggestion seems really warlock like for example. And they probably should have some method to swap them out between levels, not daily like a wizard but with a ritual or something. But I feel the same for the sorcerer, they need some way between levels to swap out spells. Not a daily swap but something. I don't think that would make a warlock a full caster though as they still have pact magic for their base, while not perma stuck on arcanums they are fairly rigid. I think the thing is while they are not a "full caster" they are seen primarily as a caster. Whereas I think things like the paladin or ranger are primarily seen as warriors with magic.
Yep I agree with this. Maybe 1d4 days of downtime to switch out half proficiency (min 1) bonus worth of spells known or something like that. Or maybe the easiest to adjudicate would just be 1 spell known on a long rest.
Fixing Pact Magic isn't hard either. Have Pact Slots equal to Proficiency Bonus but based on Warlock level that recover on Long Rest. At level 1 you can recover all your pact slots once per day via a 1 minute ritual. Maybe in late Tier 3 / early Tier 4 they can also recover once per day on a short rest.
Bard is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features far more powerful/impactful than invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Bardic Inspiration/Magical Secrets in return for full casting.
Druid is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features arguably as strong and versatile as invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Wild Shape in return for full casting.
Sorcerer is a full caster with arguably the best saving throw proficiency for a caster and a class feature far more powerful/impactful than invocations in metamagic/font of magic. Yet no one calls for the removal of metamagic in return for full casting.
And I don't know a single Pact Magic advocate that says Warlock should get full casting with a straight face. Pact Magic is GOOD and DIFFERENT and needs to stay. It just needs a few minor tweaks and it would be fine.
Bard has a more limited spell list which is balanced by its class features - no Mage Armour, no Absorb Elements, no Shield -> this is made up for with d8 hit die and light armour proficiency - extremely limited damage spell options -> this is made up for with extra weapon proficiencies - has known spells that cannot be changed on a LR greatly reducing versatility -> this is made up for with Bardic Inspiration and VM/DW that have broad applicability
Sorcerer has much more limited spells known which is balanced by it's one class feature - no Ritual casting - known spells that cannot be changed on a LR - fewer spells known These are all balanced by greater flexibility with the spells they do know thanks to metamagic. If you turned Sorcerer into a preparation caster with ritual casting you would absolutely need to remove metamagic.
Druid has a weak spell list which is balanced by it's class features - no mage Armour, no Shield -> balanced by d8 hit die, light armour + shield proficiency - no access to teleportation, save-or-suck spells, invisibility, the best control spells or blasting spells -> balanced by being a preparation caster with all spells known and a huge diverse spell list - the WORST damage cantrips in the game -> tons of out-of-combat utility from WS
Cleric has a tiny spell list which balances its class features
Bard- you kinda forgot about magical secrets- basically at level 10 (6 if you take the very popular Lore Bard), you nullify most of those "balancing" factors.
Sorcerer- "If you turned Sorcerer into a preparation caster with ritual casting you would absolutely need to remove metamagic." Sorcerer is literally getting ritual casting, metamagic buffs, subclass buffs and major class feature buffs in 1D&D all without giving up full casting. So it's really difficult to take this line of logic seriously.
Druid- Ummm just going to have to agree to strongly disagree on "Weak Spell List." They have some of the best control, support and utility spells in the game and their subclass spell lists give them access to major blasting spells as well.
Hm. -18% damage and -75% range compared to fire bolt, with a side effect that you can use it as a candle? I don't think 'awesome' is the word I'd use there...
Hm. -18% damage and -75% range compared to fire bolt, with a side effect that you can use it as a candle? I don't think 'awesome' is the word I'd use there...
Oh no! The horror of having 1 less damage per die on average!
The range is a bit more of a consideration, but considering Druids get Medium Armor and Shield proficiency, it's not a major issue. Strictly speaking Firebolt is "better" than Produce Flame, but in practical play you're not going to notice much difference between the two in combat.
The range is a bit more of a consideration, but considering Druids get Medium Armor and Shield proficiency, it's not a major issue.
30' range is a pretty major issue. Honestly, using magic stone and/or shillelagh in tier 1 and then never using a cantrip again is your best choice, both of those are excellent cantrips in tier 1 that are nearly totally useless after tier 1 because they don't have any scaling.
I do want to note something about druid and wild shape. With all the new options to use wild shape in these new playtests the druid as a whole has a greater incentive for restng to recover wild shapes than ever. Of course they only recover 1 now as well so the short rest isn't as potent for them. Which is also why I think the 1 recovery is what we will see with Warlock. Still making monk the odd man out the most I feel.
Depends on Circle, Circle of the Land can almost entirely ignore wild shape charges and it is just 1 charge, most druids would want all charges back which is long rest.
Personally I think long rest is just too convenient, it should be the same as short rest but required once a day to avoid a level of exhaustion and then another type of rest, say called "downtime", is required to fully recover everything but can only be done in safe locations, like towns, inns or what not. Of course a lot of how things are recovered would need to change so it wouldn't be a small change but the type of change I think is needed, else wise just drop short/long rest and just have "rest" which recovers everything, since balancing around the current form of short rest just isn't feasible.
The range is a bit more of a consideration, but considering Druids get Medium Armor and Shield proficiency, it's not a major issue.
30' range is a pretty major issue. Honestly, using magic stone and/or shillelagh in tier 1 and then never using a cantrip again is your best choice, both of those are excellent cantrips in tier 1 that are nearly totally useless after tier 1 because they don't have any scaling.
It would be a major issue if you were a squishy caster like a Wizard or Sorcerer. Druids have better defenses because they're meant to be mid-range casters, not way over in the back. Like I said, strictly speaking Firebolt has stronger stats, but in terms of play Druids don't need many super long range attacks because they're not going to be standing 60-90 ft back for the entire fight.
It would be a major issue if you were a squishy caster like a Wizard or Sorcerer. Druids have better defenses because they're meant to be mid-range casters, not way over in the back. Like I said, strictly speaking Firebolt has stronger stats, but in terms of play Druids don't need many super long range attacks because they're not going to be standing 60-90 ft back for the entire fight.
The reason you need long range attacks isn't because you plan to stay a long distance behind the rest of the party, it's because the enemy is at long range. If you have an outdoor encounter starting at 100', a first level wizard has a bunch of spell options, or they can use a crossbow, light. A first level druid has zero damaging options beyond 60' and only two non-damaging options (entangle and fog cloud) that are not not particularly good against ranged foes who are often well dispersed.
As far as I am aware the primary use of a spell like polymorph in a big fight is a pseudo heal that makes a character into a powerful fighter. Using on the allies is 100% reliability.
It can be a decent soft lockdown of an enemy for a few rounds, particularly as it doesn't apply any conditions or have target restrictions something like Hold Person or Tasha's Hideous Laughter does. Plus it's save or suck until the HP is dropped to 0. Strictly speaking Banishment is probably better, but as noted Polymorph has some additional utility, so there's a number of factors at play.
That's just a bunch of HP before until your concentration is broken. But again if you're having 1 fight per day then most likely you aren't holding concentration for more than 2, maybe 3 rounds because you'll be instantly a priority target and for the combat to be deadly enemy focus fire should be KOing a PC every 2 rounds. Whereas if you're having 10 combats per day one Polymorph on an ally could last for 2-3 whole combats.
The issue of a short rest class in a long rest game isn't going away if you simply ignore it. Hundreds of warlock players will ceaselessly nag and beg for short rests when the rest of the party doesn't need it. I went through that experience, and I sure as hell didn't like it.
Besides, JC was pretty clear about the value of invocations when he said that if warlocks were to become fullcasters, they'd have to remove invocations for the amount of power they give.
100%
While I agree that invocations are nothing more than pick a class feature, JC and his team has the only vote that counts. I like picking my class features though, and that's far cooler than pact magic will ever be.
As for the short rest thing, my party never likes to take short rests when it doesn't make narrative sense. When I was a celestial bardlock and did the primary healing, they'd take those short rests. As a fiendlock...they do not. Pact magic is interesting, but it's not good.
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
That maybe the case but nobody should confuse mystic arcanum with the power of a fullcaster, it is a once per long rest cast of a particular spell. It doesn't allow up casting of lower levelled spells, nor the choice or versatility that a fullcaster has at those levels.
Also there are some obvious issues with short rest, too many classes get little more than recovering HP from a short rest. Warlock is most dependent on them, Monk gets ki/discipline back, Bard gets inspirations back, Fighter gets their action surge back and some subclasses get their charges back like battlemaster or arcane archer. Druid gets wildshape charges back which is a bit subclass dependent on exactly how much they rely on them, Wizard once a day gets spell slots back... then it gets more iffy...
Cleric and Paladin gets Channel Divinity Back, Barbarian resets relentless rage, Ranger activates Tireless, Rogue gets Stroke of Luck (lv 20!) back, Sorcerer gets Sorcerous Restoration (lv 20!).
Channel Divinity can be good, but it definitely varies by subclass and situation, relentless rage and tireless just shouldn't be coming up often while Stroke of Luck and Sorcerous Restoration at level 20... generally won't come up for probably 99% of campaigns. There is clearly an imbalance and Warlock has the shortest stick while Rogue and Sorcerer pretty much get nothing from a short rest at all.
I guess they need to remove metamagic then..
But unless the issue of a long rests class goes away all martials will ceaselessly nag and complain in most games.
"I guess they need to remove metamagic then..."
Damn...that's cold. But your point is well made.
Bard is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features far more powerful/impactful than invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Bardic Inspiration/Magical Secrets in return for full casting.
Druid is a full caster with D8 hit die, options for armor proficiency and class features arguably as strong and versatile as invocations. Yet no one calls for the removal of Wild Shape in return for full casting.
Sorcerer is a full caster with arguably the best saving throw proficiency for a caster and a class feature far more powerful/impactful than invocations in metamagic/font of magic. Yet no one calls for the removal of metamagic in return for full casting.
And I don't know a single Pact Magic advocate that says Warlock should get full casting with a straight face. Pact Magic is GOOD and DIFFERENT and needs to stay. It just needs a few minor tweaks and it would be fine.
Yeah I think majority argument is improve what warlock currently is not make it a full caster. I could see some changes to mystic arcanum happening, like maybe they should be able to upcast into other arcanum slots. A year and a day suggestion via mass suggestion seems really warlock like for example. And they probably should have some method to swap them out between levels, not daily like a wizard but with a ritual or something. But I feel the same for the sorcerer, they need some way between levels to swap out spells. Not a daily swap but something. I don't think that would make a warlock a full caster though as they still have pact magic for their base, while not perma stuck on arcanums they are fairly rigid. I think the thing is while they are not a "full caster" they are seen primarily as a caster. Whereas I think things like the paladin or ranger are primarily seen as warriors with magic.
I do want to note something about druid and wild shape. With all the new options to use wild shape in these new playtests the druid as a whole has a greater incentive for restng to recover wild shapes than ever. Of course they only recover 1 now as well so the short rest isn't as potent for them. Which is also why I think the 1 recovery is what we will see with Warlock. Still making monk the odd man out the most I feel.
Bard has a more limited spell list which is balanced by its class features
- no Mage Armour, no Absorb Elements, no Shield -> this is made up for with d8 hit die and light armour proficiency
- extremely limited damage spell options -> this is made up for with extra weapon proficiencies
- has known spells that cannot be changed on a LR greatly reducing versatility -> this is made up for with Bardic Inspiration and VM/DW that have broad applicability
Sorcerer has much more limited spells known which is balanced by it's one class feature
- no Ritual casting
- known spells that cannot be changed on a LR
- fewer spells known
These are all balanced by greater flexibility with the spells they do know thanks to metamagic. If you turned Sorcerer into a preparation caster with ritual casting you would absolutely need to remove metamagic.
Druid has a weak spell list which is balanced by it's class features
- no mage Armour, no Shield -> balanced by d8 hit die, light armour + shield proficiency
- no access to teleportation, save-or-suck spells, invisibility, the best control spells or blasting spells -> balanced by being a preparation caster with all spells known and a huge diverse spell list
- the WORST damage cantrips in the game -> tons of out-of-combat utility from WS
Cleric has a tiny spell list which balances its class features
Yep I agree with this. Maybe 1d4 days of downtime to switch out half proficiency (min 1) bonus worth of spells known or something like that. Or maybe the easiest to adjudicate would just be 1 spell known on a long rest.
Fixing Pact Magic isn't hard either. Have Pact Slots equal to Proficiency Bonus but based on Warlock level that recover on Long Rest. At level 1 you can recover all your pact slots once per day via a 1 minute ritual. Maybe in late Tier 3 / early Tier 4 they can also recover once per day on a short rest.
Bard- you kinda forgot about magical secrets- basically at level 10 (6 if you take the very popular Lore Bard), you nullify most of those "balancing" factors.
Sorcerer- "If you turned Sorcerer into a preparation caster with ritual casting you would absolutely need to remove metamagic." Sorcerer is literally getting ritual casting, metamagic buffs, subclass buffs and major class feature buffs in 1D&D all without giving up full casting. So it's really difficult to take this line of logic seriously.
Druid- Ummm just going to have to agree to strongly disagree on "Weak Spell List." They have some of the best control, support and utility spells in the game and their subclass spell lists give them access to major blasting spells as well.
whoa, hey, produce flame is awesome (even if it doesn't interact with control flames but wow if it did)
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!
Hm. -18% damage and -75% range compared to fire bolt, with a side effect that you can use it as a candle? I don't think 'awesome' is the word I'd use there...
Oh no! The horror of having 1 less damage per die on average!
The range is a bit more of a consideration, but considering Druids get Medium Armor and Shield proficiency, it's not a major issue. Strictly speaking Firebolt is "better" than Produce Flame, but in practical play you're not going to notice much difference between the two in combat.
30' range is a pretty major issue. Honestly, using magic stone and/or shillelagh in tier 1 and then never using a cantrip again is your best choice, both of those are excellent cantrips in tier 1 that are nearly totally useless after tier 1 because they don't have any scaling.
Depends on Circle, Circle of the Land can almost entirely ignore wild shape charges and it is just 1 charge, most druids would want all charges back which is long rest.
Personally I think long rest is just too convenient, it should be the same as short rest but required once a day to avoid a level of exhaustion and then another type of rest, say called "downtime", is required to fully recover everything but can only be done in safe locations, like towns, inns or what not. Of course a lot of how things are recovered would need to change so it wouldn't be a small change but the type of change I think is needed, else wise just drop short/long rest and just have "rest" which recovers everything, since balancing around the current form of short rest just isn't feasible.
It would be a major issue if you were a squishy caster like a Wizard or Sorcerer. Druids have better defenses because they're meant to be mid-range casters, not way over in the back. Like I said, strictly speaking Firebolt has stronger stats, but in terms of play Druids don't need many super long range attacks because they're not going to be standing 60-90 ft back for the entire fight.
The reason you need long range attacks isn't because you plan to stay a long distance behind the rest of the party, it's because the enemy is at long range. If you have an outdoor encounter starting at 100', a first level wizard has a bunch of spell options, or they can use a crossbow, light. A first level druid has zero damaging options beyond 60' and only two non-damaging options (entangle and fog cloud) that are not not particularly good against ranged foes who are often well dispersed.