For every other class I would completely agree with you, and I partially agree on warlock. The difference is that the lore of warlock seems to be begging for people to multiclass into it
If that's what they actually wanted, it wouldn't be a class at all, it would be a feat. Warlock isn't super dippable because WotC wants them dippable, it's because their game design people aren't very good at mechanics.
You can always play things off brand, its doesn't mean you are playing it wrong. You can take 2 levels in wizard just to get the bladesinger benefit on your smart investigator rogue and never use your wizard spells. But I'm not sure the class design should be based around oddball choices a handful of players might make. Though im not sure going spirit shroud is an example for that especially if going pact of the blade. As then pact of the blade is your source of consistent damage not eldritch blast. You aren't giving up consistent damage, just going with the warlocks other option. These arguments basically are someone saying weapon use is integral to the fighter, and someone saying nope I took 2 levels of fighter so I can action surge and cast 2 fireballs in one turn with my sorcerer.
For every other class I would completely agree with you, and I partially agree on warlock. The difference is that the lore of warlock seems to be begging for people to multiclass into it, and the 2014 design seemed to be designed to facilitate people doing so since you got a cool patron-specific feature at level 1, some of the best invocations at level 2 and your pact boon at level 3. Taking 3 levels of warlock could complement a lot of different characters in many different ways because of the flexibility of the class compared to others which thematically fits with people being tempted to make a deal with the devil for warlock powers.
Sure WotC doesn't need to support MCing and seems to be actively trying to discourage it, but that's their prerogative. But it's a shame to see this flexibility be removed in order to ease players of the FOMO of having some invocations be more generally useful than others.
I think the lore of the warlock is begging for single class, the mechanics seem to help it as a dip class. The lore is about super obsessed power seekers searching for arcane lore in places man was not meant to be. That seems kind of dedicated and focused on warlock not a dip. Sure, people can always come up with a dip reasons, I made a reckless pact with a fiend, I'm a noble rogue swashbuckler and dabbling in the occult is a secret passion etc but you can do similar things for any multi class. A wizard who gets beat up a lot takes some fighter levels to bone up on combat training, a disciplined monk finally gives into the all consuming rage he was trying to suppress with monastic training and dips into barbarian. But the core of the class concept seems to be pretty dedicated on being a warlock. Now if the class design was how each level you take harder deals for more power I could see it being lore wise through class design something people dip or dabble in, at what point is the pact asking for too much from you. But with a one shot deal for arcane power it kind of seems like the thing you'd go all into to get the most out of the deal. I sold my soul and all I got was this tshirt seems a weird choice for most people.
The "it's boring" is such a bad argument it's completely dismissible out of hand.
And yet it is the primary argument why all martial classes suck.
Except it's not. The problem with martials, and the primary argument against them is not that they are boring, but that they don't scale in proportion to magic.
Them being boring actually seems to be the selling point for a lot of people. I'm using the term boring loosely, but any time people suggest giving fighters combat options people lose it as they want the class to be just I hit you on the head. Weapon masteries works because its still just i hit you on the head, just now you fall down. No choices, simple, boring.
The complaints seem to be spell casters out pace them by level Y(oh and just nerf magic because if you make me stronger than a toddler with a spork you've broken my class fantasy of the mundane hero) and I'd also add they don't have enough to do outside of combat/single target damage that spell casters can't already do. Any class can sneak, jump, pick locks, intimidate etc as everyone gets skills and backgrounds. So all the mundane tasks in the world are nice but the wizard can do them as well. Experts at least have an edge but there are a lot of martial non experts.
You can always play things off brand, its doesn't mean you are playing it wrong. You can take 2 levels in wizard just to get the bladesinger benefit on your smart investigator rogue and never use your wizard spells. But I'm not sure the class design should be based around oddball choices a handful of players might make. Though im not sure going spirit shroud is an example for that especially if going pact of the blade. As then pact of the blade is your source of consistent damage not eldritch blast. You aren't giving up consistent damage, just going with the warlocks other option. These arguments basically are someone saying weapon use is integral to the fighter, and someone saying nope I took 2 levels of fighter so I can action surge and cast 2 fireballs in one turn with my sorcerer.
For every other class I would completely agree with you, and I partially agree on warlock. The difference is that the lore of warlock seems to be begging for people to multiclass into it, and the 2014 design seemed to be designed to facilitate people doing so since you got a cool patron-specific feature at level 1, some of the best invocations at level 2 and your pact boon at level 3. Taking 3 levels of warlock could complement a lot of different characters in many different ways because of the flexibility of the class compared to others which thematically fits with people being tempted to make a deal with the devil for warlock powers.
Sure WotC doesn't need to support MCing and seems to be actively trying to discourage it, but that's their prerogative. But it's a shame to see this flexibility be removed in order to ease players of the FOMO of having some invocations be more generally useful than others.
I think the lore of the warlock is begging for single class, the mechanics seem to help it as a dip class. The lore is about super obsessed power seekers searching for arcane lore in places man was not meant to be. That seems kind of dedicated and focused on warlock not a dip. Sure, people can always come up with a dip reasons.
Sorry but apparently I wasn't clear enough. For warlock you don't need to "come up with a reason to dip", but rather normal events that just happen during the campaign would encourage you to MC into warlock for narrative reasons. These are some examples of what I mean:
We were playing BG:DiA and in order to get an item we needed to progress the plot one of the players made a deal with a Pit Fiend, since they had to make a deal anyway they negotiated for some extra powers for themselves at the same time thus MCing into warlock. Later on in the campaign we got hold of the Sword of Zariel and the player character that attuned to it swapped some of their levels for Celestial Warlock to mechanically represent the changes the sword had on their character.
The party went to the Fey Wilds in order to find a BBEG, but they discovered thus BBEG had a whole fortress that they couldn't hope to take on by themselves so they went to Tatiana for help. Tatiana sympathized but would only help if at least one of the party made a deal to repay the favour later. Two of the party agreed and MCed into Fey warlock.
Delving into mysterious ruins, the party found a sword stuck in a stone. When they grabbed hold of it to try and pull it out it talked to them, and made them swear to help it defeat the BBEG who destroyed temple they were exploring to be pulled free - had one of them agreed they could have MCed into Hexblade warlock.
Paladin is the only other class where I see players make narrative choices that would make it logical for them to MC without 'forcing it' but those are much more restricted cases since Paladin is usually associated with an oath to a god which PCs are usually less likely to encounter than a potential warlock patron.
The "it's boring" is such a bad argument it's completely dismissible out of hand.
And yet it is the primary argument why all martial classes suck.
Except it's not. The problem with martials, and the primary argument against them is not that they are boring, but that they don't scale in proportion to magic.
Them being boring actually seems to be the selling point for a lot of people. I'm using the term boring loosely, but any time people suggest giving fighters combat options people lose it as they want the class to be just I hit you on the head. Weapon masteries works because its still just i hit you on the head, just now you fall down. No choices, simple, boring.
And yet every time I see a thread in this forum discussing "fixing" martials it is always focused on giving them more "choices" in combat not increasing their raw power (damage and survivability) to keep pace with casters.
The "it's boring" is such a bad argument it's completely dismissible out of hand.
And yet it is the primary argument why all martial classes suck.
Except it's not. The problem with martials, and the primary argument against them is not that they are boring, but that they don't scale in proportion to magic.
Them being boring actually seems to be the selling point for a lot of people. I'm using the term boring loosely, but any time people suggest giving fighters combat options people lose it as they want the class to be just I hit you on the head. Weapon masteries works because its still just i hit you on the head, just now you fall down. No choices, simple, boring.
And yet every time I see a thread in this forum discussing "fixing" martials it is always focused on giving them more "choices" in combat not increasing their raw power (damage and survivability) to keep pace with casters.
Because increasing raw damage won't fix them, when the bard uses Faerie Fire or the Cleric Bless, that is increasing the damage martials do, for Sorcerer, their damage is AoE so you'd have to increase martial damage to a stupid degree where they basically one-shot everything to match. Wizards have a lot of utility, paralysing, sleeping, levitating, etc, not much equivalent in the martials, only stunning strike on monk. As for Paladin, they can spike their damage up there for a few turns despite doing subpar damage on all other rounds and people say that is overpowered. So raw damage isn't really the answer.
Making them equivalent is a terrible design, because that leaves every character exactly the same and there is no need for cooperation, tactics, or planning. You party could be all fighters, all wizards, all warlocks and it would play exactly the same. Which would be incredibly boring. Why even have different classes if every class can do the same things?
Every class should have a different playstyle, have different things they can do, so that players have to work together to overcome challenges.
Martials should not be able to petrify, paralyze, charm, frighten, restrain, or incapacitate enemies, they should kill them. Casters should impose and remove conditions, manipulate the battlefield, and deal with hordes, but they should be trash at dealing damage to single BBEGs. Martials should be able to stand toe-to-toe with the enemy, and be able to turn advantageous situations into massive damage, and wade through the horde without dying. Casters should have to hide at the back, running away from any enemy that approaches for fear of being squashed like a bug.
Making martials into discount casters that can also hit things with a weapon won't solve anything, and all the single-target damage spells other than cantrips should be taken away from casters (I cannot describe how much I hate the 5e Dissonant Whispers, Spiritual Weapon, Mind Whip, Psychic Lance). Bless, Haste, Faerie Fire do not deal damage, casters claiming that the martials damage is theirs b/c they increased the martial's chance to hit is BS, those spells do nothing if you don't have powerful martials in the party, that damage belongs to them not the caster.
Balanced but distinct game play would have: Any enemy a caster could one-shot take them out of the fight with a spell like Polymorph, a martial could one-shot by killing them with a critical hit (or a round of all successful attacks). Any enemy that would be killed by a single failed save vs Fireball should be killed by a single successful attack by a martial.
Making them equivalent is a terrible design, because that leaves every character exactly the same and there is no need for cooperation, tactics, or planning. You party could be all fighters, all wizards, all warlocks and it would play exactly the same. Which would be incredibly boring. Why even have different classes if every class can do the same things?
Every class should have a different playstyle, have different things they can do, so that players have to work together to overcome challenges.
Martials should not be able to petrify, paralyze, charm, frighten, restrain, or incapacitate enemies, they should kill them. Casters should impose and remove conditions, manipulate the battlefield, and deal with hordes, but they should be trash at dealing damage to single BBEGs. Martials should be able to stand toe-to-toe with the enemy, and be able to turn advantageous situations into massive damage, and wade through the horde without dying. Casters should have to hide at the back, running away from any enemy that approaches for fear of being squashed like a bug.
Making martials into discount casters that can also hit things with a weapon won't solve anything, and all the single-target damage spells other than cantrips should be taken away from casters (I cannot describe how much I hate the 5e Dissonant Whispers, Spiritual Weapon, Mind Whip, Psychic Lance). Bless, Haste, Faerie Fire do not deal damage, casters claiming that the martials damage is theirs b/c they increased the martial's chance to hit is BS, those spells do nothing if you don't have powerful martials in the party, that damage belongs to them not the caster.
I did not say the solution was to do any of that, I was saying that using raw damage is a terrible solution to the issue. trying to equate how much raw damage is equal to various status effects and buffs is already difficult and you'll either end out with raw damage mattering too much or not enough, you'll never strike a perfect balance.
You can always play things off brand, its doesn't mean you are playing it wrong. You can take 2 levels in wizard just to get the bladesinger benefit on your smart investigator rogue and never use your wizard spells. But I'm not sure the class design should be based around oddball choices a handful of players might make. Though im not sure going spirit shroud is an example for that especially if going pact of the blade. As then pact of the blade is your source of consistent damage not eldritch blast. You aren't giving up consistent damage, just going with the warlocks other option. These arguments basically are someone saying weapon use is integral to the fighter, and someone saying nope I took 2 levels of fighter so I can action surge and cast 2 fireballs in one turn with my sorcerer.
For every other class I would completely agree with you, and I partially agree on warlock. The difference is that the lore of warlock seems to be begging for people to multiclass into it, and the 2014 design seemed to be designed to facilitate people doing so since you got a cool patron-specific feature at level 1, some of the best invocations at level 2 and your pact boon at level 3. Taking 3 levels of warlock could complement a lot of different characters in many different ways because of the flexibility of the class compared to others which thematically fits with people being tempted to make a deal with the devil for warlock powers.
Sure WotC doesn't need to support MCing and seems to be actively trying to discourage it, but that's their prerogative. But it's a shame to see this flexibility be removed in order to ease players of the FOMO of having some invocations be more generally useful than others.
I think the lore of the warlock is begging for single class, the mechanics seem to help it as a dip class. The lore is about super obsessed power seekers searching for arcane lore in places man was not meant to be. That seems kind of dedicated and focused on warlock not a dip. Sure, people can always come up with a dip reasons.
Sorry but apparently I wasn't clear enough. For warlock you don't need to "come up with a reason to dip", but rather normal events that just happen during the campaign would encourage you to MC into warlock for narrative reasons. These are some examples of what I mean:
We were playing BG:DiA and in order to get an item we needed to progress the plot one of the players made a deal with a Pit Fiend, since they had to make a deal anyway they negotiated for some extra powers for themselves at the same time thus MCing into warlock. Later on in the campaign we got hold of the Sword of Zariel and the player character that attuned to it swapped some of their levels for Celestial Warlock to mechanically represent the changes the sword had on their character.
The party went to the Fey Wilds in order to find a BBEG, but they discovered thus BBEG had a whole fortress that they couldn't hope to take on by themselves so they went to Tatiana for help. Tatiana sympathized but would only help if at least one of the party made a deal to repay the favour later. Two of the party agreed and MCed into Fey warlock.
Delving into mysterious ruins, the party found a sword stuck in a stone. When they grabbed hold of it to try and pull it out it talked to them, and made them swear to help it defeat the BBEG who destroyed temple they were exploring to be pulled free - had one of them agreed they could have MCed into Hexblade warlock.
Paladin is the only other class where I see players make narrative choices that would make it logical for them to MC without 'forcing it' but those are much more restricted cases since Paladin is usually associated with an oath to a god which PCs are usually less likely to encounter than a potential warlock patron.
If the game had training times for multi classing and warlock didn't I guess I could see it in that it might be the only class you can just do over night, except well cleric and paladin which likely would be the same, maybe sorcerer as well. But your examples are no different than a monk while at a bar is approached by a stern barbarian who looks at him and says I see you are holding back a great rage, instead of controlling it let me show you how to tap into it. Or a fighter approaching the 8 strength wizards, hey you, I could even make a great warrior out of you. Yes, the DM can design story events for tying multi classing into the characters narrative as opposed to the all too frequent poof I have the stats for it. Warlock might be easier in the narrative due to its easier to say poof I guess though I think legitimately I'd still require a training montage for any of them.
The "it's boring" is such a bad argument it's completely dismissible out of hand.
And yet it is the primary argument why all martial classes suck.
Except it's not. The problem with martials, and the primary argument against them is not that they are boring, but that they don't scale in proportion to magic.
Them being boring actually seems to be the selling point for a lot of people. I'm using the term boring loosely, but any time people suggest giving fighters combat options people lose it as they want the class to be just I hit you on the head. Weapon masteries works because its still just i hit you on the head, just now you fall down. No choices, simple, boring.
And yet every time I see a thread in this forum discussing "fixing" martials it is always focused on giving them more "choices" in combat not increasing their raw power (damage and survivability) to keep pace with casters.
Yup and its resoundingly shot down by the fighter fans. You have 2 people arguing the people who are focused on the mechanics and how to "fix" it and the people who are focusing on the narrative of the class and how it feels to play. It is kind of similar to the warlock argument in that regard. Warriors probably need a new class entirely as people are too tied to the fighter as is. Give them a single attack per round mega attack with options class, the rogue with cunning action but juiced up to increase in power in a "quadratic" fashion.
Making them equivalent is a terrible design, because that leaves every character exactly the same and there is no need for cooperation, tactics, or planning. You party could be all fighters, all wizards, all warlocks and it would play exactly the same. Which would be incredibly boring. Why even have different classes if every class can do the same things?
Every class should have a different playstyle, have different things they can do, so that players have to work together to overcome challenges.
Martials should not be able to petrify, paralyze, charm, frighten, restrain, or incapacitate enemies, they should kill them. Casters should impose and remove conditions, manipulate the battlefield, and deal with hordes, but they should be trash at dealing damage to single BBEGs. Martials should be able to stand toe-to-toe with the enemy, and be able to turn advantageous situations into massive damage, and wade through the horde without dying. Casters should have to hide at the back, running away from any enemy that approaches for fear of being squashed like a bug.
Making martials into discount casters that can also hit things with a weapon won't solve anything, and all the single-target damage spells other than cantrips should be taken away from casters (I cannot describe how much I hate the 5e Dissonant Whispers, Spiritual Weapon, Mind Whip, Psychic Lance). Bless, Haste, Faerie Fire do not deal damage, casters claiming that the martials damage is theirs b/c they increased the martial's chance to hit is BS, those spells do nothing if you don't have powerful martials in the party, that damage belongs to them not the caster.
Balanced but distinct game play would have: Any enemy a caster could one-shot take them out of the fight with a spell like Polymorph, a martial could one-shot by killing them with a critical hit (or a round of all successful attacks). Any enemy that would be killed by a single failed save vs Fireball should be killed by a single successful attack by a martial.
The problem is you are lumping all martials and all casters into specific baskets. Some martials should be focused on doing damage as should some casters, some martials should be focussed on control and should some casters. Whatever you focus on the other area you should be weaker on. As there are people who play casters who just want to kill things and blow things up, and there are some people who like to play martials who want to be a controller or defender.
Making them equivalent is a terrible design, because that leaves every character exactly the same and there is no need for cooperation, tactics, or planning. You party could be all fighters, all wizards, all warlocks and it would play exactly the same. Which would be incredibly boring. Why even have different classes if every class can do the same things?
Every class should have a different playstyle, have different things they can do, so that players have to work together to overcome challenges.
Martials should not be able to petrify, paralyze, charm, frighten, restrain, or incapacitate enemies, they should kill them. Casters should impose and remove conditions, manipulate the battlefield, and deal with hordes, but they should be trash at dealing damage to single BBEGs. Martials should be able to stand toe-to-toe with the enemy, and be able to turn advantageous situations into massive damage, and wade through the horde without dying. Casters should have to hide at the back, running away from any enemy that approaches for fear of being squashed like a bug.
Making martials into discount casters that can also hit things with a weapon won't solve anything, and all the single-target damage spells other than cantrips should be taken away from casters (I cannot describe how much I hate the 5e Dissonant Whispers, Spiritual Weapon, Mind Whip, Psychic Lance). Bless, Haste, Faerie Fire do not deal damage, casters claiming that the martials damage is theirs b/c they increased the martial's chance to hit is BS, those spells do nothing if you don't have powerful martials in the party, that damage belongs to them not the caster.
I did not say the solution was to do any of that, I was saying that using raw damage is a terrible solution to the issue. trying to equate how much raw damage is equal to various status effects and buffs is already difficult and you'll either end out with raw damage mattering too much or not enough, you'll never strike a perfect balance.
I don't think it will ever be balanced if there is one group of people using a resource to generate power and another group with no resource cost.(except HP for all of them)
Making them equivalent is a terrible design, because that leaves every character exactly the same and there is no need for cooperation, tactics, or planning. You party could be all fighters, all wizards, all warlocks and it would play exactly the same. Which would be incredibly boring. Why even have different classes if every class can do the same things?
Every class should have a different playstyle, have different things they can do, so that players have to work together to overcome challenges.
Martials should not be able to petrify, paralyze, charm, frighten, restrain, or incapacitate enemies, they should kill them. Casters should impose and remove conditions, manipulate the battlefield, and deal with hordes, but they should be trash at dealing damage to single BBEGs. Martials should be able to stand toe-to-toe with the enemy, and be able to turn advantageous situations into massive damage, and wade through the horde without dying. Casters should have to hide at the back, running away from any enemy that approaches for fear of being squashed like a bug.
Making martials into discount casters that can also hit things with a weapon won't solve anything, and all the single-target damage spells other than cantrips should be taken away from casters (I cannot describe how much I hate the 5e Dissonant Whispers, Spiritual Weapon, Mind Whip, Psychic Lance). Bless, Haste, Faerie Fire do not deal damage, casters claiming that the martials damage is theirs b/c they increased the martial's chance to hit is BS, those spells do nothing if you don't have powerful martials in the party, that damage belongs to them not the caster.
Balanced but distinct game play would have: Any enemy a caster could one-shot take them out of the fight with a spell like Polymorph, a martial could one-shot by killing them with a critical hit (or a round of all successful attacks). Any enemy that would be killed by a single failed save vs Fireball should be killed by a single successful attack by a martial.
i could easily imagine an equivalent-damage system built on rock-paper-scissors: where an accurate finesse attack unbalances the target allowing for better chance to land a heavy melee hit that rattles the wits thereby reducing reflexes and mental defense against magic attacks which require a focus to beat back which leaves the foe open to accurate finesse attacks... equally effective (in some way yet to be determined) at fighting a single big monster or a swarm or a group. morale checks maybe, i dunno.
((and please don't let the first comment after this be "no, that only works if turn order is perfect," because a system like this would include ways to manipulate initiative.))
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 yet every time I see a thread in this forum discussing "fixing" martials it is always focused on giving them more "choices" in combat not increasing their raw power (damage and survivability) to keep pace with casters.
Mostly because damage and survivability aren't the major problems; while some martials have poor scaling in tiers 3 and 4, in general martials are fine within their niche, the problem is that their niche is really narrow.
The "it's boring" is such a bad argument it's completely dismissible out of hand.
And yet it is the primary argument why all martial classes suck.
Except it's not. The problem with martials, and the primary argument against them is not that they are boring, but that they don't scale in proportion to magic.
Them being boring actually seems to be the selling point for a lot of people. I'm using the term boring loosely, but any time people suggest giving fighters combat options people lose it as they want the class to be just I hit you on the head. Weapon masteries works because its still just i hit you on the head, just now you fall down. No choices, simple, boring.
The complaints seem to be spell casters out pace them by level Y(oh and just nerf magic because if you make me stronger than a toddler with a spork you've broken my class fantasy of the mundane hero) and I'd also add they don't have enough to do outside of combat/single target damage that spell casters can't already do. Any class can sneak, jump, pick locks, intimidate etc as everyone gets skills and backgrounds. So all the mundane tasks in the world are nice but the wizard can do them as well. Experts at least have an edge but there are a lot of martial non experts.
being boring IS a selling point to a lot of people. Myself, I tend to find melees "boring" too. That doesn't make people who LIKE them wrong, means that class isn't for me.
I do however like having some options. martials, typically don't have that for me. Warlock on the other hand...I can spam EB most rounds, but I still have some other worthwhile things I can think about using. My biggest problem with pact magic is the lack of lower level spell slots that I can use for utility options that I have. Blowing a third or 4th level slot on misty step feels terrible. being forced to concentrate on hex in order to use it effectively because I HAD to upcast it, feels terrible. I typically multiclass my warlocks JUST so I have some low level spell slots to play with in game. Half caster warlock was a breath of fresh air in the fact that no longer feel the necessity to do that. It was ruined by people who should be playing sorcerers or wizards on one hand, and people who don't actually play warlocks to see the limitations of pact magic as far as I am concerned, just as much as territorial wizards ruined sorcerer and warlock access to arcane spell lists. "You can't have something nice because the precious is all miiiiiine" is what I got out of that reversion.
I'm not super interested in parsing through my spell list every round looking for a game changer. I'm happy with casting EB on 75% of my rounds. That last 25% of the time, i want some options for though. I'm not wrong any more than the guy who wants to crit-fish on his champion with MBA, all day, or the wizard that wants to alter reality, every turn, in a unique manner. "That's boring" is just a way of telling other people "your fun is wrong and bad in my opinion, therefore is not worthy of being considered."
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 would agree that using a 4th or 5th level slot for misty step feels bad, but you can swap it out for Thunder Step, then Dimension Door and use the appropriate slots. I agree that using EB most of the time is "not boring" and the limited other slots help fill in as needed. Same for Invocations, if they expand them to help with more utility use without pact slots.
Personally I'd like to see the Warlock class lean into the "curse" theme a bit more. Perhaps a short list of "curses" along the lines of"
Hex - as current
Vex - You place a curse on a creature that you can see within range. Until the spell ends, the target has disadvantage on attack rolls against you, as well as spell concentration checks.
Warlocks should gain access to the Bestow Curse spell, etc.
Sever Link or "Out of Touch" - Until the spell ends the target is unable to provide commands or issue "orders" for pets or familiars
"Turn on your Master" - Makes a summoned creature conduct a spell DC save - on a fail the summoned creatures immediately turn aggressive on the original summoner for a number of rounds equal to difference in the failed spell DC check.
Personally I'd like to see the Warlock class lean into the "curse" theme a bit more. Perhaps a short list of "curses" along the lines of"
Hex - as current
Vex - You place a curse on a creature that you can see within range. Until the spell ends, the target has disadvantage on attack rolls against you, as well as spell concentration checks.
Warlocks should gain access to the Bestow Curse spell, etc.
Sever Link or "Out of Touch" - Until the spell ends the target is unable to provide commands or issue "orders" for pets or familiars
"Turn on your Master" - Makes a summoned creature conduct a spell DC save - on a fail the summoned creatures immediately turn aggressive on the original summoner for a number of rounds equal to difference in the failed spell DC check.
That should be a subclass. This should have been what the "Hexblade" was. As Warlocks get their powers from lots of different potential sources, it wouldn't make sense for a Genie-lock or Celestial Warlock to be curse based for example.
I would agree that using a 4th or 5th level slot for misty step feels bad, but you can swap it out for Thunder Step, then Dimension Door and use the appropriate slots.
Two issues with this.
First off, Misty Step =/= Thunder Step =/= Dimension Door =/= Far Step.
Thunder Step is an Action, has a radial damage effect and makes A LOT of noise.
Dimension Door is an Action.
Far Step requires concentration. (This is by far the closest admittedly)
Secondly, Warlocks can only replace 1 known spell per level up. This means that even IF all spells had viable upgrades, you have to wait several levels AT BEST to upgrade them.
The real solution is either to give all Warlock spells upcasting, or to give warlock additional bonuses if they cast a spell that doesn't upcasted.
Honestly, any 1st or 2nd level spell that is worth spending a 5th level slot on (even if it feels bad) is probably OP. I'd really like to see misty step, and shield nerfed for that reason. Warlock focusing on up-castable spells is one of the things that gives them a unique play style.
Misty Step with upcasting could be interesting: at 2nd level it lets you teleport 10 ft, and upcasting it increases the distance you can teleport by 10 ft for each level above 2nd.
Likewise, Shield should probably be: give you a +2 AC bonus, increasing by 1 for each level it is upcast.
If that's what they actually wanted, it wouldn't be a class at all, it would be a feat. Warlock isn't super dippable because WotC wants them dippable, it's because their game design people aren't very good at mechanics.
I think the lore of the warlock is begging for single class, the mechanics seem to help it as a dip class. The lore is about super obsessed power seekers searching for arcane lore in places man was not meant to be. That seems kind of dedicated and focused on warlock not a dip. Sure, people can always come up with a dip reasons, I made a reckless pact with a fiend, I'm a noble rogue swashbuckler and dabbling in the occult is a secret passion etc but you can do similar things for any multi class. A wizard who gets beat up a lot takes some fighter levels to bone up on combat training, a disciplined monk finally gives into the all consuming rage he was trying to suppress with monastic training and dips into barbarian. But the core of the class concept seems to be pretty dedicated on being a warlock. Now if the class design was how each level you take harder deals for more power I could see it being lore wise through class design something people dip or dabble in, at what point is the pact asking for too much from you. But with a one shot deal for arcane power it kind of seems like the thing you'd go all into to get the most out of the deal. I sold my soul and all I got was this tshirt seems a weird choice for most people.
Them being boring actually seems to be the selling point for a lot of people. I'm using the term boring loosely, but any time people suggest giving fighters combat options people lose it as they want the class to be just I hit you on the head. Weapon masteries works because its still just i hit you on the head, just now you fall down. No choices, simple, boring.
The complaints seem to be spell casters out pace them by level Y(oh and just nerf magic because if you make me stronger than a toddler with a spork you've broken my class fantasy of the mundane hero) and I'd also add they don't have enough to do outside of combat/single target damage that spell casters can't already do. Any class can sneak, jump, pick locks, intimidate etc as everyone gets skills and backgrounds. So all the mundane tasks in the world are nice but the wizard can do them as well. Experts at least have an edge but there are a lot of martial non experts.
Sorry but apparently I wasn't clear enough. For warlock you don't need to "come up with a reason to dip", but rather normal events that just happen during the campaign would encourage you to MC into warlock for narrative reasons. These are some examples of what I mean:
We were playing BG:DiA and in order to get an item we needed to progress the plot one of the players made a deal with a Pit Fiend, since they had to make a deal anyway they negotiated for some extra powers for themselves at the same time thus MCing into warlock. Later on in the campaign we got hold of the Sword of Zariel and the player character that attuned to it swapped some of their levels for Celestial Warlock to mechanically represent the changes the sword had on their character.
The party went to the Fey Wilds in order to find a BBEG, but they discovered thus BBEG had a whole fortress that they couldn't hope to take on by themselves so they went to Tatiana for help. Tatiana sympathized but would only help if at least one of the party made a deal to repay the favour later. Two of the party agreed and MCed into Fey warlock.
Delving into mysterious ruins, the party found a sword stuck in a stone. When they grabbed hold of it to try and pull it out it talked to them, and made them swear to help it defeat the BBEG who destroyed temple they were exploring to be pulled free - had one of them agreed they could have MCed into Hexblade warlock.
Paladin is the only other class where I see players make narrative choices that would make it logical for them to MC without 'forcing it' but those are much more restricted cases since Paladin is usually associated with an oath to a god which PCs are usually less likely to encounter than a potential warlock patron.
And yet every time I see a thread in this forum discussing "fixing" martials it is always focused on giving them more "choices" in combat not increasing their raw power (damage and survivability) to keep pace with casters.
Because increasing raw damage won't fix them, when the bard uses Faerie Fire or the Cleric Bless, that is increasing the damage martials do, for Sorcerer, their damage is AoE so you'd have to increase martial damage to a stupid degree where they basically one-shot everything to match. Wizards have a lot of utility, paralysing, sleeping, levitating, etc, not much equivalent in the martials, only stunning strike on monk. As for Paladin, they can spike their damage up there for a few turns despite doing subpar damage on all other rounds and people say that is overpowered. So raw damage isn't really the answer.
Making them equivalent is a terrible design, because that leaves every character exactly the same and there is no need for cooperation, tactics, or planning. You party could be all fighters, all wizards, all warlocks and it would play exactly the same. Which would be incredibly boring. Why even have different classes if every class can do the same things?
Every class should have a different playstyle, have different things they can do, so that players have to work together to overcome challenges.
Martials should not be able to petrify, paralyze, charm, frighten, restrain, or incapacitate enemies, they should kill them. Casters should impose and remove conditions, manipulate the battlefield, and deal with hordes, but they should be trash at dealing damage to single BBEGs. Martials should be able to stand toe-to-toe with the enemy, and be able to turn advantageous situations into massive damage, and wade through the horde without dying. Casters should have to hide at the back, running away from any enemy that approaches for fear of being squashed like a bug.
Making martials into discount casters that can also hit things with a weapon won't solve anything, and all the single-target damage spells other than cantrips should be taken away from casters (I cannot describe how much I hate the 5e Dissonant Whispers, Spiritual Weapon, Mind Whip, Psychic Lance). Bless, Haste, Faerie Fire do not deal damage, casters claiming that the martials damage is theirs b/c they increased the martial's chance to hit is BS, those spells do nothing if you don't have powerful martials in the party, that damage belongs to them not the caster.
Balanced but distinct game play would have: Any enemy a caster could one-shot take them out of the fight with a spell like Polymorph, a martial could one-shot by killing them with a critical hit (or a round of all successful attacks). Any enemy that would be killed by a single failed save vs Fireball should be killed by a single successful attack by a martial.
I did not say the solution was to do any of that, I was saying that using raw damage is a terrible solution to the issue. trying to equate how much raw damage is equal to various status effects and buffs is already difficult and you'll either end out with raw damage mattering too much or not enough, you'll never strike a perfect balance.
If the game had training times for multi classing and warlock didn't I guess I could see it in that it might be the only class you can just do over night, except well cleric and paladin which likely would be the same, maybe sorcerer as well. But your examples are no different than a monk while at a bar is approached by a stern barbarian who looks at him and says I see you are holding back a great rage, instead of controlling it let me show you how to tap into it. Or a fighter approaching the 8 strength wizards, hey you, I could even make a great warrior out of you. Yes, the DM can design story events for tying multi classing into the characters narrative as opposed to the all too frequent poof I have the stats for it. Warlock might be easier in the narrative due to its easier to say poof I guess though I think legitimately I'd still require a training montage for any of them.
Yup and its resoundingly shot down by the fighter fans. You have 2 people arguing the people who are focused on the mechanics and how to "fix" it and the people who are focusing on the narrative of the class and how it feels to play. It is kind of similar to the warlock argument in that regard. Warriors probably need a new class entirely as people are too tied to the fighter as is. Give them a single attack per round mega attack with options class, the rogue with cunning action but juiced up to increase in power in a "quadratic" fashion.
The problem is you are lumping all martials and all casters into specific baskets. Some martials should be focused on doing damage as should some casters, some martials should be focussed on control and should some casters. Whatever you focus on the other area you should be weaker on. As there are people who play casters who just want to kill things and blow things up, and there are some people who like to play martials who want to be a controller or defender.
I don't think it will ever be balanced if there is one group of people using a resource to generate power and another group with no resource cost.(except HP for all of them)
i could easily imagine an equivalent-damage system built on rock-paper-scissors: where an accurate finesse attack unbalances the target allowing for better chance to land a heavy melee hit that rattles the wits thereby reducing reflexes and mental defense against magic attacks which require a focus to beat back which leaves the foe open to accurate finesse attacks... equally effective (in some way yet to be determined) at fighting a single big monster or a swarm or a group. morale checks maybe, i dunno.
((and please don't let the first comment after this be "no, that only works if turn order is perfect," because a system like this would include ways to manipulate initiative.))
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!
Mostly because damage and survivability aren't the major problems; while some martials have poor scaling in tiers 3 and 4, in general martials are fine within their niche, the problem is that their niche is really narrow.
being boring IS a selling point to a lot of people. Myself, I tend to find melees "boring" too. That doesn't make people who LIKE them wrong, means that class isn't for me.
I do however like having some options. martials, typically don't have that for me. Warlock on the other hand...I can spam EB most rounds, but I still have some other worthwhile things I can think about using. My biggest problem with pact magic is the lack of lower level spell slots that I can use for utility options that I have. Blowing a third or 4th level slot on misty step feels terrible. being forced to concentrate on hex in order to use it effectively because I HAD to upcast it, feels terrible. I typically multiclass my warlocks JUST so I have some low level spell slots to play with in game. Half caster warlock was a breath of fresh air in the fact that no longer feel the necessity to do that. It was ruined by people who should be playing sorcerers or wizards on one hand, and people who don't actually play warlocks to see the limitations of pact magic as far as I am concerned, just as much as territorial wizards ruined sorcerer and warlock access to arcane spell lists. "You can't have something nice because the precious is all miiiiiine" is what I got out of that reversion.
I'm not super interested in parsing through my spell list every round looking for a game changer. I'm happy with casting EB on 75% of my rounds. That last 25% of the time, i want some options for though. I'm not wrong any more than the guy who wants to crit-fish on his champion with MBA, all day, or the wizard that wants to alter reality, every turn, in a unique manner. "That's boring" is just a way of telling other people "your fun is wrong and bad in my opinion, therefore is not worthy of being considered."
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
I would agree that using a 4th or 5th level slot for misty step feels bad, but you can swap it out for Thunder Step, then Dimension Door and use the appropriate slots. I agree that using EB most of the time is "not boring" and the limited other slots help fill in as needed. Same for Invocations, if they expand them to help with more utility use without pact slots.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Personally I'd like to see the Warlock class lean into the "curse" theme a bit more. Perhaps a short list of "curses" along the lines of"
Warlocks should gain access to the Bestow Curse spell, etc.
That should be a subclass. This should have been what the "Hexblade" was. As Warlocks get their powers from lots of different potential sources, it wouldn't make sense for a Genie-lock or Celestial Warlock to be curse based for example.
Two issues with this.
First off, Misty Step =/= Thunder Step =/= Dimension Door =/= Far Step.
Secondly, Warlocks can only replace 1 known spell per level up. This means that even IF all spells had viable upgrades, you have to wait several levels AT BEST to upgrade them.
The real solution is either to give all Warlock spells upcasting, or to give warlock additional bonuses if they cast a spell that doesn't upcasted.
Honestly, any 1st or 2nd level spell that is worth spending a 5th level slot on (even if it feels bad) is probably OP. I'd really like to see misty step, and shield nerfed for that reason. Warlock focusing on up-castable spells is one of the things that gives them a unique play style.
Misty Step with upcasting could be interesting: at 2nd level it lets you teleport 10 ft, and upcasting it increases the distance you can teleport by 10 ft for each level above 2nd.
Likewise, Shield should probably be: give you a +2 AC bonus, increasing by 1 for each level it is upcast.