So Pact Magic is here to stay, but still doesn't address the issues around slot hoarding, rest-begging, multiclassing, nonscaling spells, and other interactions that WotC sought to fix in the first place. How would this work as a compromise?
Keep Pact Slots as 2014
Keep Mystic Arcanum as 2014
Give Warlocks actual Spellcasting on top of #1 and #2, either ½ or ⅓ progression. (I'd prefer ½, but if people think Pact Slots + ½ Spellcasting is too much, I'm open to ⅓.)
This should solve the issues noted with Warlock casting previously:
Between low level slots and invocations, Warlocks should have more than enough ammunition to conserve their Pact Slots and Arcanum even at tables where SRs are inconsistent.
Multiclassing becomes clear/beneficial - Spellcasting would progress, Pact Magic would not - and you'd still be weaker than a straight-classed full caster.
Warlocks would have a handful of slots they can use on good low level spells like Shield, Absorb Elements, Misty Step etc - and not burn their pact slots on these.
Pact Slots interaction with other things that are fueled by slots, like Smiting or recharging items, can be tailored appropriately without hosing Warlocks. For example, you could rule that only Spellcasting slots can be used to recharge magic items, not slots gained via Pact Magic, Book of Ancient Secrets etc.
Would this be an okay compromise to keep Warlocks unique, but strengthen their interactions with the rest of the system?
So Pact Magic is here to stay, but still doesn't address the issues around slot hoarding, rest-begging, multiclassing, nonscaling spells, and other interactions that WotC sought to fix in the first place. How would this work as a compromise?
Keep Pact Slots as 2014
Keep Mystic Arcanum as 2014
Give Warlocks actual Spellcasting on top of #1 and #2, either ½ or ⅓ progression. (I'd prefer ½, but if people think Pact Slots + ½ Spellcasting is too much, I'm open to ⅓.)
This should solve the issues noted with Warlock casting previously:
Between low level slots and invocations, Warlocks should have more than enough ammunition to conserve their Pact Slots and Arcanum even at tables where SRs are inconsistent.
Multiclassing becomes clear/beneficial - Spellcasting would progress, Pact Magic would not - and you'd still be weaker than a straight-classed full caster.
Warlocks would have a handful of slots they can use on good low level spells like Shield, Absorb Elements, Misty Step etc - and not burn their pact slots on these.
Pact Slots interaction with other things that are fueled by slots, like Smiting or recharging items, can be tailored appropriately without hosing Warlocks. For example, you could rule that only Spellcasting slots can be used to recharge magic items, not slots gained via Pact Magic, Book of Ancient Secrets etc.
Would this be an okay compromise to keep Warlocks unique, but strengthen their interactions with the rest of the system?
The consensus seems to be that if Warlocks were to keep both Pact Magic AND gain Half-Caster slots, then something else has to give to kEeP tHiNgS bAlAnCeD, and the thing to go would be Invocations.
That's a No-Go for me.
If Pact Magic is truly so problematic that it has to go, then kill both it and any attempts at Half/Full-Caster spell slots and go all in on Eldritch Invocations in the form of "At-Will" casting of chosen spells and Mystic Arcanums.
The consensus seems to be that if Warlocks were to keep both Pact Magic AND gain Half-Caster slots, then something else has to give to kEeP tHiNgS bAlAnCeD, and the thing to go would be Invocations.
That's a No-Go for me.
I don't think Pact Slots + Invocations + ½ casting would be unbalanced, but how would you feel about Pact Slots + Invocations + ⅓ casting then?
(⅓ casting = Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster progression for anyone unaware.)
The consensus seems to be that if Warlocks were to keep both Pact Magic AND gain Half-Caster slots, then something else has to give to kEeP tHiNgS bAlAnCeD, and the thing to go would be Invocations.
That's a No-Go for me.
I don't think Pact Slots + Invocations + ½ casting would be unbalanced, but how would you feel about Pact Slots + Invocations + ⅓ casting then?
(⅓ casting = Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster progression for anyone unaware.)
I mean, sure, if it is fine for other people, but I got the impression from the threads around UA5 that asking for two spell slots systems is too tall of an order for non-warlock players to accept.
Assuming the spells recharge on long rest and 1/long rest magical cunning I think 1/2 + Pacts is reasonable.
The finicky thing here is the Warlock spell list. When the UA5 playtest was done Warlocks shared the "Arcane" spell list. Now that we're back to individual lists the inclusions and exclusions there are going to make a huge difference.
Shield and Haste are the immediate stand-outs, but I'm sure there are others that wouldn't be fair to give the Warlock, especially if they keep the PotB changes.
I could live with 1/3 casting and pacts as they are on LR, but would need to see Tome/Blade made into exclusive buys with considerable beefing up of Tome.
The consensus seems to be that if Warlocks were to keep both Pact Magic AND gain Half-Caster slots, then something else has to give to kEeP tHiNgS bAlAnCeD, and the thing to go would be Invocations.
That's a No-Go for me.
I don't think Pact Slots + Invocations + ½ casting would be unbalanced, but how would you feel about Pact Slots + Invocations + ⅓ casting then?
(⅓ casting = Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster progression for anyone unaware.)
i like pact slots, but ehh spellcasting slots (#3) and pact slots (#1) do seem a little much together.
recently i got to thinkin about what UA5 half-caster was really missing: Magical Cunning. why? to refresh uses of Mystic Arcanum! the low level ones, anyway. so maybe if we rename UA5 '3rd-/4th-/5th MA' as 'Low Arcanum,' and add some additional Magical Cunning points: refill on long rest a number of MC uses equal to warlock's PB, and get one expended use back every time warlock completes a short rest. if you have 'n' remaining MC uses, then the max level Low Arcanum you could refresh would be the 'n-th' LA, costing one use per one refresh. therefore, at lv.9 at full 4 MC uses you could refresh one expended 4th-LA or refresh 3rd-LA twice. from the math, that means you wouldn't have a second 5th-level cast until lv.13... too much? just right?
no change from 2014 access to the 6th-/7th-/8th-/9th- High Arcanum. but adding a 2nd-LA might be nice. also, for preference, we'd still include a pact magic feature which states that all warlock spells are upcast (to max 5th-level, yatta yatta) in order to retain full use of Armor of Agathys, Hex, and whatever else i'm forgetting. or give it a number of uses, why not. my understanding of the problem with pact slots was that a warlock could get many more 5th-level spells than a wizard, not that the upcasting itself was the foil.
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!
Pact magic on it's own isn't enough. 1/2 caster plus pact magic imo, would be overpowered. 1/3 + pact magic I think is workable. It might need a bit of tuning, but I think the idea is promising.
What I think more likely to pass muster are invocations that allow you to cast <choose warlock spell> perf bonus times/day. I really like your 1/3 caster idea, but I don't think that WotC would bite on it. Realistically, I think warlocks will get told to get bent.
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.
Is the underlying issue the lack of low level spell slots or that Warlock is Short Rest based? If the issue is lacking low level spell slots, then Pact Magic + 1/2 or 1/3 caster could fix it. But adding 1/2 or 1/3 spellcasting to Warlocks would be complicated and difficult to balance. WoTC seems to be shying away from difficult tasks.
I am of the opinion that the underlying issue is Warlock (and Monk) being Short Rest based. On adventuring days with a single large battle or no narrative availability of Short Rests (storming a castle), they run out of fuel faster than other classes. On long dungeon crawls with several Short Rests, they recover almost 100% of resources at the end of the last Short Rest while other classes have to manage fewer resources.
My proposed fix is to double the resources (Pact Magic slots + Ki/Discipline Points), make them refresh on a Long Rest, and restore a small number (roughly half of 2014 amounts) on a Short Rest. So a level 5 Warlock would have 4 Pact Magic slots and regain 1 Pact Magic slot on a Short Rest. The net effect is the same for a "Standard" Adventuring day with 2 Short Rests. This makes the Warlock comparable to other classes in terms of balance with different numbers of Short Rests. It would be simple for WoTC to implement with less likelihood of backlash.
Is the underlying issue the lack of low level spell slots or that Warlock is Short Rest based? If the issue is lacking low level spell slots, then Pact Magic + 1/2 or 1/3 caster could fix it. But adding 1/2 or 1/3 spellcasting to Warlocks would be complicated and difficult to balance. WoTC seems to be shying away from difficult tasks.
I am of the opinion that the underlying issue is Warlock (and Monk) being Short Rest based. On adventuring days with a single large battle or no narrative availability of Short Rests (storming a castle), they run out of fuel faster than other classes. On long dungeon crawls with several Short Rests, they recover almost 100% of resources at the end of the last Short Rest while other classes have to manage fewer resources.
My proposed fix is to double the resources (Pact Magic slots + Ki/Discipline Points), make them refresh on a Long Rest, and restore a small number (roughly half of 2014 amounts) on a Short Rest. So a level 5 Warlock would have 4 Pact Magic slots and regain 1 Pact Magic slot on a Short Rest. The net effect is the same for a "Standard" Adventuring day with 2 Short Rests. This makes the Warlock comparable to other classes in terms of balance with different numbers of Short Rests. It would be simple for WoTC to implement with less likelihood of backlash.
The issue there is that a Warlock could conceivably cast all 4 or 6 of their highest level spell slots in the same encounter. Sure you'll often want to conserve your spells to stretch across the day, but if you're in clutch situation or fighting the end of campaign villain you're casting 4-6 of some of the most powerful spells in game.
I think this could be balanced by limiting your spell slots to 1-3 per encounter and giving the warlock a 1 minute ritual action get access to the next 1-3, but it cpuld get pretty complicated pretty quick.
Pact magic on it's own isn't enough. 1/2 caster plus pact magic imo, would be overpowered. 1/3 + pact magic I think is workable. It might need a bit of tuning, but I think the idea is promising.
What I think more likely to pass muster are invocations that allow you to cast <choose warlock spell> perf bonus times/day. I really like your 1/3 caster idea, but I don't think that WotC would bite on it. Realistically, I think warlocks will get told to get bent.
That could be workable. Would those prof/day spells be at your nax casting level or a reduction?
To me, the core issue is the lack of low level slots. Short rest based is problematic (I've played several warlocks and the only one that regularly got short rests was my celestial because people really liked those chunky cure wounds), but is not what makes me MC all of my warlocks. Lack of low level spell slots for utility does that. Blowing 3rd and 4th level slots on a shield or misty step feels AWFUL. Concentrating on hex feels awful (so I don't ever upcast hex). Access to low level spell slots opens up that utility. Hell, I'd spend invocations to cast some of those spells slot-less, even if it was a limited time per day for combat focused spells.
Honestly, I can live with not being able to cast my pact spells at highest level all the time. It can be fun to walk into an encounter and not have my full repertoire available, and try to have to figure out how to make the battle work with what I have. Constantly asking for an hour long break while exploring feels crunchy, and when my group or DM tells me "that doesn't make sense" I can't even blame them because I agree. Trying to pass off Rod of the Pact Keeper as a class feature to solve the issue is a slap in the face.
For the record: "In addition, you can regain 1 warlock spell slot as an action while holding the rod. You can’t use this property again until you finish a long rest." is exactly what they are trying to give us to "let us cast our spells more". Come on JC, you are better than this. Aren't you?
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.
Pact of the blade should do increased damage or give more flexibility the more you level in warlock.
Pact of the chain should get more than just fancy "find familiar" which isn't even a damned at will. Especially when other classes has access to the full lists of conjure and summon spells.
Pact of the Tome should have extra slots gained and DEFINITELY extra spells over the other two varieties of pacts, and/or more free cast invocations.
Flavor AND more oomph, especially at later levels.
Pact of the blade should do increased damage or give more flexibility the more you level in warlock.
Pact of the chain should get more than just fancy "find familiar" which isn't even a damned at will. Especially when other classes has access to the full lists of conjure and summon spells.
Pact of the Tome should have extra slots gained and DEFINITELY extra spells over the other two varieties of pacts, and/or more free cast invocations.
Flavor AND more oomph, especially at later levels.
out of curiosity, of the three PsyrenXY listed (#1 2014 pact slots, #2 UA7 MA, or #3 UA5 half-caster (or UA7 EK 1/3-caster)) or maybe (#4) some invocations, what goes away to afford increased pact boons?
i assume pact of the tome is the #3 in your scenario, but blade and chain would be adding more oomf on top of a 1+2+4 class that can already bring substantial oomf in some not especially niche cases.
Pact of the blade should do increased damage or give more flexibility the more you level in warlock.
Pact of the chain should get more than just fancy "find familiar" which isn't even a damned at will. Especially when other classes has access to the full lists of conjure and summon spells.
Pact of the Tome should have extra slots gained and DEFINITELY extra spells over the other two varieties of pacts, and/or more free cast invocations.
Flavor AND more oomph, especially at later levels.
out of curiosity, of the three PsyrenXY listed (#1 2014 pact slots, #2 UA7 MA, or #3 UA5 half-caster (or UA7 EK 1/3-caster)) or maybe (#4) some invocations, what goes away to afford increased pact boons?
i assume pact of the tome is the #3 in your scenario, but blade and chain would be adding more oomf on top of a 1+2+4 class that can already bring substantial oomf in some not especially niche cases.
Get rid of the mystic arcanum (highest 3- 4 level slots)
Also spread the love a bit more to fix balance.
Ok, so my main class to play is rogue. A lot of people dip, mostly for the class features and maybe a subclass feature at level 3. The subclasses need some fixing for the rogue as well because they're all SEVERELY front loaded with the crappiest features at 10 and 14. (Panache is a joke).
The exception though is rogue's sneak attack. To.be of any use really, you need to stay in the class as long as possible.
You COULD do something not as powerful as SA, but along the same lines with blade pact. If the increments of improvement are small but over time substantial, it does help. A d4 extra here, a d4 there. A little bit of range or a tiny booming blade like improvement there...I feel like the devs forget that. It's very all or nothing with improvements and too many classes/subclasses are front loaded. I'm not 100% sure on how to do it within the usual subclass feature levels.
Chain I see more as a 4/7/10/14/17 (or what the subclass feature levels are) level up increments in CR of the summon.
But all would lose mystic arcanum (top 3) for improvements on the abilities.
I said it in the other thread, and I'll stand by the idea: Pact Magic plus half-caster slots, but limited to two pact slots and restoring them on short rest requires sacrificing other spell slots equal to the pact slot's level.
It balances how often Warlocks can use higher-level casts between rests and restore pact slots on rest, while giving them lower-level slots to work with.
First of all, the warlock doesn't exist in a vacuum. Other classes are getting short rest benefits. They're increasing short rest usage that way. The recharge isn't going to be a big deal
But honestly, how often is a blade-lock casting level 7 spells? Level 6? I can see it with a tome lock, and the chain lock is just f***ed so it uses what it can.
And tome lock is probably going to be conserving those precious precious resources so tightly....
And in effect their equally useless.
Invocations and pact magic is the way to go, with slots being a bit of icing on the top.
I vote pacts because pacts pack FLAVOR and the warlock is an insipid class without the pacts. (insipid meaning flavorless in this context. If they just have the invocations you get a lot of samey...)
Half-caster + Pact Magic/Long Rest. Mystic Arcanum is fueled by Pact Magic slots to cast level 6-9 spells, each once/long rest. Just two resources. Your own spellcasting ability as an aspiring occultist, and your patron's power in form of Pact Magic.
Pact magic on it's own isn't enough. 1/2 caster plus pact magic imo, would be overpowered. 1/3 + pact magic I think is workable. It might need a bit of tuning, but I think the idea is promising.
What I think more likely to pass muster are invocations that allow you to cast <choose warlock spell> perf bonus times/day. I really like your 1/3 caster idea, but I don't think that WotC would bite on it. Realistically, I think warlocks will get told to get bent.
That could be workable. Would those prof/day spells be at your nax casting level or a reduction?
I would think that it has to be at the level you get it. Warlock 3 for example qualifies you to get a first level spell, cast at first level. Warlock 5 allows you to pick a 2nd level spell, cast at 2nd level.
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.
Half-caster + Pact Magic/Long Rest. Mystic Arcanum is fueled by Pact Magic slots to cast level 6-9 spells, each once/long rest. Just two resources. Your own spellcasting ability as an aspiring occultist, and your patron's power in form of Pact Magic.
I'd 100% play this.
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 was thinking about it earlier and pretty sure there is a potential in an invocation. My suggestion would be an invocation like this:
Tutelage of the Patron
Prerequisite: Warlock Level 5
Through service to your Patron, you have gained a deeper understanding of the knowledge that they have granted you, allowing you to more often recite the spells that they have taught you.
Patron Pact Slots. you gain a 1st level and 2nd level Patron Pact Slot. Additionally you gain a 3rd level Patron Pact Slot at warlock level 9, a 4th level Patron Pact Slot at warlock level 13 and a 5th level Patron Pact slot at warlock level 17. Patron Pact Slots operate similarly to your Warlock Spell Slots but can only be used for casting spells from your Patron Spells feature for your chosen Patron Subclass.
No Upcasting. With the Patron Pact Slots, you can not upcast spells, you can only cast a Patron Spell of the same level as the Patron Pact Slot being expanded.
Recovery. All Patron Pact Slots recover on a short or long rest.
Spellcasting Only. The Patron Pact slots of this invocation can not be used by other features such as a Sorcerer's Font of Magic or by another Invocation such as Eldritch Smite.
It's a dual purpose invocation, one to make the link to your patron just that much stronger with more specific reasons to use your Patron Spells and the 2nd to open up some more ability to actually cast spells. It's not necessarily must have, the choice is limited by Patron Spells and still costs an invocation, so Pact of the Blade might be less interested in this as might those that really are just after the old Hex+Eldritch Blast combo. However for a lot of people it'd be quiet a nice Invocation which opens up a lot of spell casting. Thematically it matches both your patron choice and how Warlock Spell Slots work.
The problem is sort rests. They just don't happen with any kind of regularity. And they shouldn't narratively. A short rest is a lunch break. I know how to clear a house, and I don't take a lunch break to reload magazines in between rooms.
In play, I have played several warlocks. The only one that my group wanted to short rest for with any sort of regularity was my celestial bardlock. When we're doing a resource check and I say I can recover 2 third level cure wounds if we short rest, the group's been much more amendable than to pausing for the fiend or genie. The game might be balanced around 2 short rests a day but neither of the groups I have played 5e with have ever done that. I see nearly as many LONG RESTS as I do short rests, because the true casters are wanting to long rest at the least amount of justification possible. It's a design flaw that many classes can't compensate for a table not playing out precisely how WotC thinks it should (but doesn't).
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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So Pact Magic is here to stay, but still doesn't address the issues around slot hoarding, rest-begging, multiclassing, nonscaling spells, and other interactions that WotC sought to fix in the first place. How would this work as a compromise?
This should solve the issues noted with Warlock casting previously:
Would this be an okay compromise to keep Warlocks unique, but strengthen their interactions with the rest of the system?
The consensus seems to be that if Warlocks were to keep both Pact Magic AND gain Half-Caster slots, then something else has to give to kEeP tHiNgS bAlAnCeD, and the thing to go would be Invocations.
That's a No-Go for me.
If Pact Magic is truly so problematic that it has to go, then kill both it and any attempts at Half/Full-Caster spell slots and go all in on Eldritch Invocations in the form of "At-Will" casting of chosen spells and Mystic Arcanums.
I don't think Pact Slots + Invocations + ½ casting would be unbalanced, but how would you feel about Pact Slots + Invocations + ⅓ casting then?
(⅓ casting = Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster progression for anyone unaware.)
I mean, sure, if it is fine for other people, but I got the impression from the threads around UA5 that asking for two spell slots systems is too tall of an order for non-warlock players to accept.
Assuming the spells recharge on long rest and 1/long rest magical cunning I think 1/2 + Pacts is reasonable.
The finicky thing here is the Warlock spell list. When the UA5 playtest was done Warlocks shared the "Arcane" spell list. Now that we're back to individual lists the inclusions and exclusions there are going to make a huge difference.
Shield and Haste are the immediate stand-outs, but I'm sure there are others that wouldn't be fair to give the Warlock, especially if they keep the PotB changes.
I could live with 1/3 casting and pacts as they are on LR, but would need to see Tome/Blade made into exclusive buys with considerable beefing up of Tome.
i like pact slots, but ehh spellcasting slots (#3) and pact slots (#1) do seem a little much together.
recently i got to thinkin about what UA5 half-caster was really missing: Magical Cunning. why? to refresh uses of Mystic Arcanum! the low level ones, anyway. so maybe if we rename UA5 '3rd-/4th-/5th MA' as 'Low Arcanum,' and add some additional Magical Cunning points: refill on long rest a number of MC uses equal to warlock's PB, and get one expended use back every time warlock completes a short rest. if you have 'n' remaining MC uses, then the max level Low Arcanum you could refresh would be the 'n-th' LA, costing one use per one refresh. therefore, at lv.9 at full 4 MC uses you could refresh one expended 4th-LA or refresh 3rd-LA twice. from the math, that means you wouldn't have a second 5th-level cast until lv.13... too much? just right?
no change from 2014 access to the 6th-/7th-/8th-/9th- High Arcanum. but adding a 2nd-LA might be nice. also, for preference, we'd still include a pact magic feature which states that all warlock spells are upcast (to max 5th-level, yatta yatta) in order to retain full use of Armor of Agathys, Hex, and whatever else i'm forgetting. or give it a number of uses, why not. my understanding of the problem with pact slots was that a warlock could get many more 5th-level spells than a wizard, not that the upcasting itself was the foil.
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!
Pact magic on it's own isn't enough. 1/2 caster plus pact magic imo, would be overpowered. 1/3 + pact magic I think is workable. It might need a bit of tuning, but I think the idea is promising.
What I think more likely to pass muster are invocations that allow you to cast <choose warlock spell> perf bonus times/day. I really like your 1/3 caster idea, but I don't think that WotC would bite on it. Realistically, I think warlocks will get told to get bent.
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
Is the underlying issue the lack of low level spell slots or that Warlock is Short Rest based? If the issue is lacking low level spell slots, then Pact Magic + 1/2 or 1/3 caster could fix it. But adding 1/2 or 1/3 spellcasting to Warlocks would be complicated and difficult to balance. WoTC seems to be shying away from difficult tasks.
I am of the opinion that the underlying issue is Warlock (and Monk) being Short Rest based. On adventuring days with a single large battle or no narrative availability of Short Rests (storming a castle), they run out of fuel faster than other classes. On long dungeon crawls with several Short Rests, they recover almost 100% of resources at the end of the last Short Rest while other classes have to manage fewer resources.
My proposed fix is to double the resources (Pact Magic slots + Ki/Discipline Points), make them refresh on a Long Rest, and restore a small number (roughly half of 2014 amounts) on a Short Rest. So a level 5 Warlock would have 4 Pact Magic slots and regain 1 Pact Magic slot on a Short Rest. The net effect is the same for a "Standard" Adventuring day with 2 Short Rests. This makes the Warlock comparable to other classes in terms of balance with different numbers of Short Rests. It would be simple for WoTC to implement with less likelihood of backlash.
The issue there is that a Warlock could conceivably cast all 4 or 6 of their highest level spell slots in the same encounter. Sure you'll often want to conserve your spells to stretch across the day, but if you're in clutch situation or fighting the end of campaign villain you're casting 4-6 of some of the most powerful spells in game.
I think this could be balanced by limiting your spell slots to 1-3 per encounter and giving the warlock a 1 minute ritual action get access to the next 1-3, but it cpuld get pretty complicated pretty quick.
That could be workable. Would those prof/day spells be at your nax casting level or a reduction?
To me, the core issue is the lack of low level slots. Short rest based is problematic (I've played several warlocks and the only one that regularly got short rests was my celestial because people really liked those chunky cure wounds), but is not what makes me MC all of my warlocks. Lack of low level spell slots for utility does that. Blowing 3rd and 4th level slots on a shield or misty step feels AWFUL. Concentrating on hex feels awful (so I don't ever upcast hex). Access to low level spell slots opens up that utility. Hell, I'd spend invocations to cast some of those spells slot-less, even if it was a limited time per day for combat focused spells.
Honestly, I can live with not being able to cast my pact spells at highest level all the time. It can be fun to walk into an encounter and not have my full repertoire available, and try to have to figure out how to make the battle work with what I have. Constantly asking for an hour long break while exploring feels crunchy, and when my group or DM tells me "that doesn't make sense" I can't even blame them because I agree. Trying to pass off Rod of the Pact Keeper as a class feature to solve the issue is a slap in the face.
For the record: "In addition, you can regain 1 warlock spell slot as an action while holding the rod. You can’t use this property again until you finish a long rest." is exactly what they are trying to give us to "let us cast our spells more". Come on JC, you are better than this. Aren't you?
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
Repeat after me: Pacts. Should. Scale.
Pact of the blade should do increased damage or give more flexibility the more you level in warlock.
Pact of the chain should get more than just fancy "find familiar" which isn't even a damned at will. Especially when other classes has access to the full lists of conjure and summon spells.
Pact of the Tome should have extra slots gained and DEFINITELY extra spells over the other two varieties of pacts, and/or more free cast invocations.
Flavor AND more oomph, especially at later levels.
out of curiosity, of the three PsyrenXY listed (#1 2014 pact slots, #2 UA7 MA, or #3 UA5 half-caster (or UA7 EK 1/3-caster)) or maybe (#4) some invocations, what goes away to afford increased pact boons?
i assume pact of the tome is the #3 in your scenario, but blade and chain would be adding more oomf on top of a 1+2+4 class that can already bring substantial oomf in some not especially niche cases.
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!
Get rid of the mystic arcanum (highest 3- 4 level slots)
Also spread the love a bit more to fix balance.
Ok, so my main class to play is rogue. A lot of people dip, mostly for the class features and maybe a subclass feature at level 3. The subclasses need some fixing for the rogue as well because they're all SEVERELY front loaded with the crappiest features at 10 and 14. (Panache is a joke).
The exception though is rogue's sneak attack. To.be of any use really, you need to stay in the class as long as possible.
You COULD do something not as powerful as SA, but along the same lines with blade pact. If the increments of improvement are small but over time substantial, it does help. A d4 extra here, a d4 there. A little bit of range or a tiny booming blade like improvement there...I feel like the devs forget that. It's very all or nothing with improvements and too many classes/subclasses are front loaded. I'm not 100% sure on how to do it within the usual subclass feature levels.
Chain I see more as a 4/7/10/14/17 (or what the subclass feature levels are) level up increments in CR of the summon.
But all would lose mystic arcanum (top 3) for improvements on the abilities.
First of all, the warlock doesn't exist in a vacuum. Other classes are getting short rest benefits. They're increasing short rest usage that way. The recharge isn't going to be a big deal
But honestly, how often is a blade-lock casting level 7 spells? Level 6? I can see it with a tome lock, and the chain lock is just f***ed so it uses what it can.
And tome lock is probably going to be conserving those precious precious resources so tightly....
And in effect their equally useless.
Invocations and pact magic is the way to go, with slots being a bit of icing on the top.
I vote pacts because pacts pack FLAVOR and the warlock is an insipid class without the pacts. (insipid meaning flavorless in this context. If they just have the invocations you get a lot of samey...)
Half-caster + Pact Magic/Long Rest. Mystic Arcanum is fueled by Pact Magic slots to cast level 6-9 spells, each once/long rest. Just two resources. Your own spellcasting ability as an aspiring occultist, and your patron's power in form of Pact Magic.
I would think that it has to be at the level you get it. Warlock 3 for example qualifies you to get a first level spell, cast at first level. Warlock 5 allows you to pick a 2nd level spell, cast at 2nd level.
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'd 100% play this.
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 was thinking about it earlier and pretty sure there is a potential in an invocation. My suggestion would be an invocation like this:
It's a dual purpose invocation, one to make the link to your patron just that much stronger with more specific reasons to use your Patron Spells and the 2nd to open up some more ability to actually cast spells. It's not necessarily must have, the choice is limited by Patron Spells and still costs an invocation, so Pact of the Blade might be less interested in this as might those that really are just after the old Hex+Eldritch Blast combo. However for a lot of people it'd be quiet a nice Invocation which opens up a lot of spell casting. Thematically it matches both your patron choice and how Warlock Spell Slots work.
The problem is sort rests. They just don't happen with any kind of regularity. And they shouldn't narratively. A short rest is a lunch break. I know how to clear a house, and I don't take a lunch break to reload magazines in between rooms.
In play, I have played several warlocks. The only one that my group wanted to short rest for with any sort of regularity was my celestial bardlock. When we're doing a resource check and I say I can recover 2 third level cure wounds if we short rest, the group's been much more amendable than to pausing for the fiend or genie. The game might be balanced around 2 short rests a day but neither of the groups I have played 5e with have ever done that. I see nearly as many LONG RESTS as I do short rests, because the true casters are wanting to long rest at the least amount of justification possible. It's a design flaw that many classes can't compensate for a table not playing out precisely how WotC thinks it should (but doesn't).
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