You know, Bob... You just gave me an idea (oh no). But I'll put that one in a new thread since it's got nothing to do with warlocks and their slotty behaviour :)
The bards are the slotty ones. Warlocks are happy to be left alone with their invocations...
I'm afraid of what you've come up with, but I'll check it out.
You know, Bob... You just gave me an idea (oh no). But I'll put that one in a new thread since it's got nothing to do with warlocks and their slotty behaviour :)
Please stop slot-shaming warlocks. There's nothing wrong with them exploiting their slots as much as they want!
I don't mind secondary resources refilling on a short rest - things like Channel Divinity and Wild Shape and Bardic Inspiration.
But spell slots and ki discipline shouldn't rely on begging the rest of the party to stop for an entire pace-killing hour - Yurei is completely right about that. And the alternative solution of making SRs shorter than an hour would mean a lot of unintended consequences all over the rest of the system, from spells to features to racials to magic items.
But it seems WotC plans to ignore the feedback they themselves acknowledged getting about classes begging for a SR feeling bad, simply because their first draft attempt at fixing the problem got them yelled at.
But... you're a fish! How are you even holding that crowbar?
Did you... fin-agle some contraption?
I'd say I have some tricks up my sleeves but then you'd ask how I got those...
I think you're just angle-er-ing to be on my good side.
I still say that instead of forcing pact of the blade , the three current pacts were given meaningful level progression both inside and out of combat, and the warlock had more options in invocations (with an invocation that's just "pick a ritual spell from the list, you can now cast this at will" which you can pick multiple times as your invocation), then a LOT of the warlock's problems would be solved.
The slot allotment isn't a lot for a reason. You get trade offs for your pact and spammables and it's a deal when you consider you ignore casting levels and you get them back after taking a breather.
You're not supposed to play a 1 for 1 wizard that wields a sword or permanently has a familiar. Sorcerers are already too same-y to the wizards. Be different. Be Different. Be the soulless caster you were meant to be.
I don't mind secondary resources refilling on a short rest - things like Channel Divinity and Wild Shape and Bardic Inspiration.
But spell slots and ki discipline shouldn't rely on begging the rest of the party to stop for an entire pace-killing hour - Yurei is completely right about that. And the alternative solution of making SRs shorter than an hour would mean a lot of unintended consequences all over the rest of the system, from spells to features to racials to magic items.
But it seems WotC plans to ignore the feedback they themselves acknowledged getting about classes begging for a SR feeling bad, simply because their first draft attempt at fixing the problem got them yelled at.
Agreed. But unlike the casters, I don't mind the monks getting rid of their resource pool and getting an actual list of options they can use. Or at the very least give them more points and more options.
Druids on the other hand... wildshapes druids and caster druids have two different sets of needs, almost to being different classes than just flavors of subclass. I don't know what to do with them
Sometimes it is interesting to put yourself in someone else's shoes and try to understand what they are arguing, instead of wanting to bash them.
I will say at first I was arguing because 1 short rest per day is not ideal, but it works and I can understand that, sometimes people push until they are all super low and then spend almost all their hit dice in one go.
Afterwards though. I was genuinely confused and was trying to understand. Once I did understand I was trying to help fix the issue so that the classes that rely on short rests, that will likely continue to rely on short rests, can function and be satisfying to play.
At the end of the day the issue is the nomenclature and the DMG. I have known many tables that say they only have one or 2 fights a day and that makes long rest characters broken and doesn't really give short rest classes a chance to shine. Immediately the question is "why aren't you using the gritty realism rest rules". "Well we aren't running a gritty realistic game, we aren't really tracking ammo or carry capacity and are a bit more loose with the rules" Ok, but gritty realism rest rule doesn't mean you have to run a gritty game, the nomenclature is off what it does is allow for slower paced games that only have one or 2 fights a day.
The claim that "medicine and healers kit is useless as written" is another example of this. The rules do not specify everything you can do with every skill. It is the medicine skill it is the healers kit there is no reason you can't do out of combat healing. The healer feat just lets you do it as an action. There is no list of everything you can do with sleight of hand. Why do we expect it for other skills.
The DMG needs to better explain the game design to the Dungeon masters. This can give them an understanding of when to tweak the rules and HOW to tweak the rules while fitting within that framework.
The issue Rei was having was based on nomenclature and a poor explanation in the book of what a short rest is. It isn't she is bad, or her dm is bad. DM may be inexperienced, or maybe they are experienced with a different game, or maybe they are just experienced with this one and don't have a broader understanding of game design. In any case the problem isn't with the mechanics or the narrative functions of short rests, the issue is with poor nomenclature and explanations for GM's and Players about what a short rest is narratively and how they function mechanically.
Ultimately, this warlock is mathematically equal to full casters with just 1 short rest at all levels except 8,9, and 10, and I proved that with the math a few pages back. Since every character has hit dice and needs to spend them to continue the "adventuring day" (note that doesn't necessarily mean a 24 hour period) there should never be a day where one short rest isn't taken. If there is, the table needs to consider adjusting short rest lengths and flavor to better fit with the narrative flow of the game.
I still say that instead of forcing pact of the blade , the three current pacts were given meaningful level progression both inside and out of combat, and the warlock had more options in invocations (with an invocation that's just "pick a ritual spell from the list, you can now cast this at will" which you can pick multiple times as your invocation), then a LOT of the warlock's problems would be solved.
The slot allotment isn't a lot for a reason. You get trade offs for your pact and spammables and it's a deal when you consider you ignore casting levels and you get them back after taking a breather.
I believe that there would be a lot less grousing among slot-starved warlocks if, like you say, invocations could do a bit more of the heavy lifting. If pact slots were mostly for show off and tide-turning tricks, with invocations making up for the majority of utility use. The rebalanced Otherworldly Leap is an excellent example of this, as is Visions of Distant Realms.
In a perfect world, the warlock would be able to treat their pact slots like a fighter would their action surge, knowing that they still had the means to do their job just fine after spending it.
I don't mind secondary resources refilling on a short rest - things like Channel Divinity and Wild Shape and Bardic Inspiration.
But spell slots and ki discipline shouldn't rely on begging the rest of the party to stop for an entire pace-killing hour - Yurei is completely right about that. And the alternative solution of making SRs shorter than an hour would mean a lot of unintended consequences all over the rest of the system, from spells to features to racials to magic items.
But it seems WotC plans to ignore the feedback they themselves acknowledged getting about classes begging for a SR feeling bad, simply because their first draft attempt at fixing the problem got them yelled at.
It doesn't have to be an hour, and it doesn't have to kill the pace. The monk needs help and further revision. The Warlock needs some extra tweaks, but this warlock is functional with just 1 short rest per adventuring day. Everyone needs one short rest to spend hit dice to continue the adventure.
I still say that instead of forcing pact of the blade , the three current pacts were given meaningful level progression both inside and out of combat, and the warlock had more options in invocations (with an invocation that's just "pick a ritual spell from the list, you can now cast this at will" which you can pick multiple times as your invocation), then a LOT of the warlock's problems would be solved.
The slot allotment isn't a lot for a reason. You get trade offs for your pact and spammables and it's a deal when you consider you ignore casting levels and you get them back after taking a breather.
I believe that there would be a lot less grousing among slot-starved warlocks if, like you say, invocations could do a bit more of the heavy lifting. If pact slots were mostly for show off and tide-turning tricks, with invocations making up for the majority of utility use. The rebalanced Otherworldly Leap is an excellent example of this, as is Visions of Distant Realms.
In a perfect world, the warlock would be able to treat their pact slots like a fighter would their action surge, knowing that they still had the means to do their job just fine after spending it.
Sometimes it is interesting to put yourself in someone else's shoes and try to understand what they are arguing, instead of wanting to bash them.
I will say at first I was arguing because 1 short rest per day is not ideal, but it works and I can understand that, sometimes people push until they are all super low and then spend almost all their hit dice in one go.
Afterwards though. I was genuinely confused and was trying to understand. Once I did understand I was trying to help fix the issue so that the classes that rely on short rests, that will likely continue to rely on short rests, can function and be satisfying to play.
At the end of the day the issue is the nomenclature and the DMG. I have known many tables that say they only have one or 2 fights a day and that makes long rest characters broken and doesn't really give short rest classes a chance to shine. Immediately the question is "why aren't you using the gritty realism rest rules". "Well we aren't running a gritty realistic game, we aren't really tracking ammo or carry capacity and are a bit more loose with the rules" Ok, but gritty realism rest rule doesn't mean you have to run a gritty game, the nomenclature is off what it does is allow for slower paced games that only have one or 2 fights a day.
The claim that "medicine and healers kit is useless as written" is another example of this. The rules do not specify everything you can do with every skill. It is the medicine skill it is the healers kit there is no reason you can't do out of combat healing. The healer feat just lets you do it as an action. There is no list of everything you can do with sleight of hand. Why do we expect it for other skills.
The DMG needs to better explain the game design to the Dungeon masters. This can give them an understanding of when to tweak the rules and HOW to tweak the rules while fitting within that framework.
The issue Rei was having was based on nomenclature and a poor explanation in the book of what a short rest is. It isn't she is bad, or her dm is bad. DM may be inexperienced, or maybe they are experienced with a different game, or maybe they are just experienced with this one and don't have a broader understanding of game design. In any case the problem isn't with the mechanics or the narrative functions of short rests, the issue is with poor nomenclature and explanations for GM's and Players about what a short rest is narratively and how they function mechanically.
Ultimately, this warlock is mathematically equal to full casters with just 1 short rest at all levels except 8,9, and 10, and I proved that with the math a few pages back. Since every character has hit dice and needs to spend them to continue the "adventuring day" (note that doesn't necessarily mean a 24 hour period) there should never be a day where one short rest isn't taken. If there is, the table needs to consider adjusting short rest lengths and flavor to better fit with the narrative flow of the game.
The dmg is just bad for 5e as it's about world building for most of its pages.
And world building is mostly imagination anyhow. Just DM support is kinda low
I don't mind secondary resources refilling on a short rest - things like Channel Divinity and Wild Shape and Bardic Inspiration.
But spell slots and ki discipline shouldn't rely on begging the rest of the party to stop for an entire pace-killing hour - Yurei is completely right about that. And the alternative solution of making SRs shorter than an hour would mean a lot of unintended consequences all over the rest of the system, from spells to features to racials to magic items.
But it seems WotC plans to ignore the feedback they themselves acknowledged getting about classes begging for a SR feeling bad, simply because their first draft attempt at fixing the problem got them yelled at.
It doesn't have to be an hour, and it doesn't have to kill the pace. The monk needs help and further revision. The Warlock needs some extra tweaks, but this warlock is functional with just 1 short rest per adventuring day. Everyone needs one short rest to spend hit dice to continue the adventure.
Everything is currently balanced around it being an hour. Less than that, and Warlocks will be able to do things like cast an hour long summon or buff and immediately recover their spell slots, or "sacrifice" their pact slots to recharge an item and then quickly get them back, etc.
I don't mind secondary resources refilling on a short rest - things like Channel Divinity and Wild Shape and Bardic Inspiration.
But spell slots and ki discipline shouldn't rely on begging the rest of the party to stop for an entire pace-killing hour - Yurei is completely right about that. And the alternative solution of making SRs shorter than an hour would mean a lot of unintended consequences all over the rest of the system, from spells to features to racials to magic items.
But it seems WotC plans to ignore the feedback they themselves acknowledged getting about classes begging for a SR feeling bad, simply because their first draft attempt at fixing the problem got them yelled at.
It doesn't have to be an hour, and it doesn't have to kill the pace. The monk needs help and further revision. The Warlock needs some extra tweaks, but this warlock is functional with just 1 short rest per adventuring day. Everyone needs one short rest to spend hit dice to continue the adventure.
Everything is currently balanced around it being an hour. Less than that, and Warlocks will be able to do things like cast an hour long summon or buff and immediately recover their spell slots, or "sacrifice" their pact slots to recharge an item and then quickly get them back, etc.
Correction, everything is currently balanced around there being a set number of encounters per adventuring day. Because if the 1 minute recovery was the true issue that Magical cunning would be much more problematic.
The DMG lists rests as being flexible, the encounter expectations less so (minus adjusting numbers up and down to account for change in encounter DIFFICULTY).
Taking the risk of giving WotC more monetising opportunities (hi guys! send me my cheque later, yeah?), but would it be a good or bad idea to split the DMG into two books instead? The Worldbuilder's Guide, on how to make your campaign world, filling it with interesting history and events, NPCs, the big picture stuff. And then The Dungeonmaster's Guide that focuses on adventure design, pacing, constructing challenges and encounters, treasure and rewards, the nitty gritty stuff.
I don't mind secondary resources refilling on a short rest - things like Channel Divinity and Wild Shape and Bardic Inspiration.
But spell slots and ki discipline shouldn't rely on begging the rest of the party to stop for an entire pace-killing hour - Yurei is completely right about that. And the alternative solution of making SRs shorter than an hour would mean a lot of unintended consequences all over the rest of the system, from spells to features to racials to magic items.
But it seems WotC plans to ignore the feedback they themselves acknowledged getting about classes begging for a SR feeling bad, simply because their first draft attempt at fixing the problem got them yelled at.
It doesn't have to be an hour, and it doesn't have to kill the pace. The monk needs help and further revision. The Warlock needs some extra tweaks, but this warlock is functional with just 1 short rest per adventuring day. Everyone needs one short rest to spend hit dice to continue the adventure.
Everything is currently balanced around it being an hour. Less than that, and Warlocks will be able to do things like cast an hour long summon or buff and immediately recover their spell slots, or "sacrifice" their pact slots to recharge an item and then quickly get them back, etc.
The first issue can easily be solved by either making short rests break concentration, or at least doing so for the Warlock - and I will admit I exploited that loophole with Armor of Agathys when I played a hexblade and the GM used 15 minute short rests.
Taking the risk of giving WotC more monetising opportunities (hi guys! send me my cheque later, yeah?), but would it be a good or bad idea to split the DMG into two books instead? The Worldbuilder's Guide, on how to make your campaign world, filling it with interesting history and events, NPCs, the big picture stuff. And then The Dungeonmaster's Guide that focuses on adventure design, pacing, constructing challenges and encounters, treasure and rewards, the nitty gritty stuff.
They did say they will be pushing the world building stuff later in the book for a better focus on all the basic nitty gritty stuff first, but I could definitely see another book that fleshes out more ideas and options for world building.
Taking the risk of giving WotC more monetising opportunities (hi guys! send me my cheque later, yeah?), but would it be a good or bad idea to split the DMG into two books instead? The Worldbuilder's Guide, on how to make your campaign world, filling it with interesting history and events, NPCs, the big picture stuff. And then The Dungeonmaster's Guide that focuses on adventure design, pacing, constructing challenges and encounters, treasure and rewards, the nitty gritty stuff.
The non-module books in general (Tasha's Xanathar's mordenkeinen's bigby's etc.) are equally all over the place and it's not a flaw, but by design. A little bit of everything means you need to buy them if you're a player or a DM.
The dmg is the way it is because 5e is rules light with the rules mostly about combat and in the phb. Chapter 8 is about combat in the dmg, and it's a short one.
If they split the book, they wouldn't have enough to fill the book, unless like now, the compiled all the dm related materials from Tasha's and so on. Which in itself is a bit sparse.
There's huge holes in homebrew support in the dmg and mostly the mechanics of how to homebrew, as you said, game theory and design, and filling in for crap like unarmed combat that are just left unfinished.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The bards are the slotty ones. Warlocks are happy to be left alone with their invocations...
I'm afraid of what you've come up with, but I'll check it out.
I was hoping you'd say that Artificers are better left to their own devices (ba-dum-pish) while the warlocks get up to no good!
Also, my little idea is mostly harmless. Just a simple way to unnecessarily complicate things. You know. The usual :)
The simplest solutions are usually the most beautiful and elegant, and I'm a rogue main. I like simple and elegant.
And to steal the show... as anything else not nailed down.. and if have a crowbar...
But... you're a fish! How are you even holding that crowbar?
Did you... fin-agle some contraption?
Please stop slot-shaming warlocks. There's nothing wrong with them exploiting their slots as much as they want!
Hey, I'm all for supporting our hard-working hexworkers.
I don't mind secondary resources refilling on a short rest - things like Channel Divinity and Wild Shape and Bardic Inspiration.
But spell slots and
kidiscipline shouldn't rely on begging the rest of the party to stop for an entire pace-killing hour - Yurei is completely right about that. And the alternative solution of making SRs shorter than an hour would mean a lot of unintended consequences all over the rest of the system, from spells to features to racials to magic items.But it seems WotC plans to ignore the feedback they themselves acknowledged getting about classes begging for a SR feeling bad, simply because their first draft attempt at fixing the problem got them yelled at.
I'd say I have some tricks up my sleeves but then you'd ask how I got those...
I think you're just angle-er-ing to be on my good side.
I still say that instead of forcing pact of the blade , the three current pacts were given meaningful level progression both inside and out of combat, and the warlock had more options in invocations (with an invocation that's just "pick a ritual spell from the list, you can now cast this at will" which you can pick multiple times as your invocation), then a LOT of the warlock's problems would be solved.
The slot allotment isn't a lot for a reason. You get trade offs for your pact and spammables and it's a deal when you consider you ignore casting levels and you get them back after taking a breather.
You're not supposed to play a 1 for 1 wizard that wields a sword or permanently has a familiar. Sorcerers are already too same-y to the wizards. Be different. Be Different. Be the soulless caster you were meant to be.
Agreed. But unlike the casters, I don't mind the monks getting rid of their resource pool and getting an actual list of options they can use. Or at the very least give them more points and more options.
Druids on the other hand... wildshapes druids and caster druids have two different sets of needs, almost to being different classes than just flavors of subclass. I don't know what to do with them
I will say at first I was arguing because 1 short rest per day is not ideal, but it works and I can understand that, sometimes people push until they are all super low and then spend almost all their hit dice in one go.
Afterwards though. I was genuinely confused and was trying to understand. Once I did understand I was trying to help fix the issue so that the classes that rely on short rests, that will likely continue to rely on short rests, can function and be satisfying to play.
At the end of the day the issue is the nomenclature and the DMG. I have known many tables that say they only have one or 2 fights a day and that makes long rest characters broken and doesn't really give short rest classes a chance to shine. Immediately the question is "why aren't you using the gritty realism rest rules". "Well we aren't running a gritty realistic game, we aren't really tracking ammo or carry capacity and are a bit more loose with the rules" Ok, but gritty realism rest rule doesn't mean you have to run a gritty game, the nomenclature is off what it does is allow for slower paced games that only have one or 2 fights a day.
The claim that "medicine and healers kit is useless as written" is another example of this. The rules do not specify everything you can do with every skill. It is the medicine skill it is the healers kit there is no reason you can't do out of combat healing. The healer feat just lets you do it as an action. There is no list of everything you can do with sleight of hand. Why do we expect it for other skills.
The DMG needs to better explain the game design to the Dungeon masters. This can give them an understanding of when to tweak the rules and HOW to tweak the rules while fitting within that framework.
The issue Rei was having was based on nomenclature and a poor explanation in the book of what a short rest is. It isn't she is bad, or her dm is bad. DM may be inexperienced, or maybe they are experienced with a different game, or maybe they are just experienced with this one and don't have a broader understanding of game design. In any case the problem isn't with the mechanics or the narrative functions of short rests, the issue is with poor nomenclature and explanations for GM's and Players about what a short rest is narratively and how they function mechanically.
Ultimately, this warlock is mathematically equal to full casters with just 1 short rest at all levels except 8,9, and 10, and I proved that with the math a few pages back. Since every character has hit dice and needs to spend them to continue the "adventuring day" (note that doesn't necessarily mean a 24 hour period) there should never be a day where one short rest isn't taken. If there is, the table needs to consider adjusting short rest lengths and flavor to better fit with the narrative flow of the game.
I believe that there would be a lot less grousing among slot-starved warlocks if, like you say, invocations could do a bit more of the heavy lifting. If pact slots were mostly for show off and tide-turning tricks, with invocations making up for the majority of utility use. The rebalanced Otherworldly Leap is an excellent example of this, as is Visions of Distant Realms.
In a perfect world, the warlock would be able to treat their pact slots like a fighter would their action surge, knowing that they still had the means to do their job just fine after spending it.
It doesn't have to be an hour, and it doesn't have to kill the pace. The monk needs help and further revision. The Warlock needs some extra tweaks, but this warlock is functional with just 1 short rest per adventuring day. Everyone needs one short rest to spend hit dice to continue the adventure.
Exactly.
The dmg is just bad for 5e as it's about world building for most of its pages.
And world building is mostly imagination anyhow. Just DM support is kinda low
Everything is currently balanced around it being an hour. Less than that, and Warlocks will be able to do things like cast an hour long summon or buff and immediately recover their spell slots, or "sacrifice" their pact slots to recharge an item and then quickly get them back, etc.
Correction, everything is currently balanced around there being a set number of encounters per adventuring day. Because if the 1 minute recovery was the true issue that Magical cunning would be much more problematic.
The DMG lists rests as being flexible, the encounter expectations less so (minus adjusting numbers up and down to account for change in encounter DIFFICULTY).
Taking the risk of giving WotC more monetising opportunities (hi guys! send me my cheque later, yeah?), but would it be a good or bad idea to split the DMG into two books instead? The Worldbuilder's Guide, on how to make your campaign world, filling it with interesting history and events, NPCs, the big picture stuff. And then The Dungeonmaster's Guide that focuses on adventure design, pacing, constructing challenges and encounters, treasure and rewards, the nitty gritty stuff.
The first issue can easily be solved by either making short rests break concentration, or at least doing so for the Warlock - and I will admit I exploited that loophole with Armor of Agathys when I played a hexblade and the GM used 15 minute short rests.
They did say they will be pushing the world building stuff later in the book for a better focus on all the basic nitty gritty stuff first, but I could definitely see another book that fleshes out more ideas and options for world building.
The non-module books in general (Tasha's Xanathar's mordenkeinen's bigby's etc.) are equally all over the place and it's not a flaw, but by design. A little bit of everything means you need to buy them if you're a player or a DM.
The dmg is the way it is because 5e is rules light with the rules mostly about combat and in the phb. Chapter 8 is about combat in the dmg, and it's a short one.
If they split the book, they wouldn't have enough to fill the book, unless like now, the compiled all the dm related materials from Tasha's and so on. Which in itself is a bit sparse.
There's huge holes in homebrew support in the dmg and mostly the mechanics of how to homebrew, as you said, game theory and design, and filling in for crap like unarmed combat that are just left unfinished.