If there is a single combat with a single BBEG then the Warlock massively outperforms the Wizard in terms of damage because the best Wizard damage spells are AoE saves which are generally ineffective against singular BBEGs who probably have legendary resistances at this level (to avoid being Hypnotic Patterned or Polymorphed) which means the Hex + EB or Greatsword + Hex is equally effective to what the Wizard has to offer, but the Fighter end up on top assuming they can stay in melee:
Warlock: 65% chance to hit, 2d10+10+2d6 damage at range with attack rolls = 18.2 dpr Warlock: 65% chance to hit, 4d6+10+2d6 damage in melee with attack rolls = 20.15 dpr Wizard: 30% chance enemy fails a save vs fireball b/c of legendary resistances = 18.2 dpr Fighter: 65% chance to hit, (4d6+10+2)*1.2 + (4+0.2*4.5) damage in melee with attack rolls = 24.6 dpr
You keep using greatsword damage for melee Warlock with a full progression stat, those numbers don't track on a standard point buy. You can get Cha to 20 or you can have the 13 required strength for a heavy weapon or you can get a decent split for Dex & Con, but you can't do all three.
With point buy with a +2 +1. 13 str, 13 dex, 14 con, 8 int, 8 wis, and 14 cha and then apply the +1 to dex and +2 to cha for 13, 14,14,8,8,16. Then 2 +2 ASI for 20 CHA at the same time everyone else would get there as well. So it is doable. and no feats were applied which taking no feats would be needed to get this line as you see.
If there is a single combat with a single BBEG then the Warlock massively outperforms the Wizard in terms of damage because the best Wizard damage spells are AoE saves which are generally ineffective against singular BBEGs who probably have legendary resistances at this level (to avoid being Hypnotic Patterned or Polymorphed) which means the Hex + EB or Greatsword + Hex is equally effective to what the Wizard has to offer, but the Fighter end up on top assuming they can stay in melee:
Warlock: 65% chance to hit, 2d10+10+2d6 damage at range with attack rolls = 18.2 dpr Warlock: 65% chance to hit, 4d6+10+2d6 damage in melee with attack rolls = 20.15 dpr Wizard: 30% chance enemy fails a save vs fireball b/c of legendary resistances = 18.2 dpr Fighter: 65% chance to hit, (4d6+10+2)*1.2 + (4+0.2*4.5) damage in melee with attack rolls = 24.6 dpr
You keep using greatsword damage for melee Warlock with a full progression stat, those numbers don't track on a standard point buy. You can get Cha to 20 or you can have the 13 required strength for a heavy weapon or you can get a decent split for Dex & Con, but you can't do all three.
With point buy with a +2 +1. 13 str, 13 dex, 14 con, 8 int, 8 wis, and 14 cha and then apply the +1 to dex and +2 to cha for 13, 14,14,8,8,16. Then 2 +2 ASI for 20 CHA at the same time everyone else would get there as well. So it is doable. and no feats were applied which taking no feats would be needed to get this line as you see.
Your build is dumping wisdom? Ooof. Not a choice I would have made, but I admit already having the proficiency in Wisdom saves helps even it out. Fair enough though, you're right that it can be done.
If there is a single combat with a single BBEG then the Warlock massively outperforms the Wizard in terms of damage because the best Wizard damage spells are AoE saves which are generally ineffective against singular BBEGs who probably have legendary resistances at this level (to avoid being Hypnotic Patterned or Polymorphed) which means the Hex + EB or Greatsword + Hex is equally effective to what the Wizard has to offer, but the Fighter end up on top assuming they can stay in melee:
Warlock: 65% chance to hit, 2d10+10+2d6 damage at range with attack rolls = 18.2 dpr Warlock: 65% chance to hit, 4d6+10+2d6 damage in melee with attack rolls = 20.15 dpr Wizard: 30% chance enemy fails a save vs fireball b/c of legendary resistances = 18.2 dpr Fighter: 65% chance to hit, (4d6+10+2)*1.2 + (4+0.2*4.5) damage in melee with attack rolls = 24.6 dpr
You keep using greatsword damage for melee Warlock with a full progression stat, those numbers don't track on a standard point buy. You can get Cha to 20 or you can have the 13 required strength for a heavy weapon or you can get a decent split for Dex & Con, but you can't do all three.
With point buy with a +2 +1. 13 str, 13 dex, 14 con, 8 int, 8 wis, and 14 cha and then apply the +1 to dex and +2 to cha for 13, 14,14,8,8,16. Then 2 +2 ASI for 20 CHA at the same time everyone else would get there as well. So it is doable. and no feats were applied which taking no feats would be needed to get this line as you see.
Your build is dumping wisdom? Ooof. Not a choice I would have made, but I admit already having the proficiency in Wisdom saves helps even it out. Fair enough though, you're right that it can be done.
I actually have 1 point left over too, just forgot to place it. I personally might be willing to go to 18 in cha at level 8 though personally to get a feat like resilient con saving 2 points and put wisdom to 11, but mostly just wanted to show that it is doable.
Why do you even discuss the UA if you believe nothing can be known from reading the class descriptions?
Numbers aren't the problem.
BAD numbers are the problem.
Your math is hard to follow and makes a very large number of assumptions that all lean heavily, heavily, HEAVILY towards your goal of getting the already-dogshit UA7 warlock nerfed into unplayability. Your numbers are, frankly, incredibly biased and intentionally ignore table realities that point away from your desired conclusion. You get too deep into the minutiae chasing some obscure pseudofact that Proves The Point while missing the forest through the trees.
You say Pact of the Blade is too strong and makes fighters feel bad. Question: why? Does the Blade warlock being actually semi-serviceable in its role as an eldritch warrior take away from the fighter's role as a mundane master of arms and armor? No. Who cares what the damage numbers come out to be? People don't play fighter to be Damage Masters, they play fighter because they want the class fantasy of a mundane warrior getting by with blade, armor, and wits rather than magic.
Blade warlocks are looking for a very different vibe that has little overlap with base fighters, especially since their offensive might is predicted on using all their spells to bolster their damage in your math. If they do that? They're using 100% of their class resources on damage and should absolutely be getting the same general return that a fighter does for using 100% of its class resources on damage. If you're going to blow everything you have on being a damage monkey, you deserve to be a good damage monkey.
As for the *excellent* question posed earlier: "does the warlock feel like a class that can solve problems with magic?" The answer is very much "No", in my case. The UA7 warlock, as presented, has too little magic to feel like a spellcaster that can expend magic to solve problems. It honestly feels more like someone with magic tattoos than a spellcaster with arcane knowledge - they have an extremely small number of extremely specific tricks they can do to provide narrow solutions to problems most campaigns don't face, and the rest of the time they resort to Eldritch Blast whether EB Zis the right solution or not. Because EB Zis the ONLY thing they can freely rely on. Pact Magic is so limited it's NEVER the answer to a problem, because no problem is ever severe enough to be worth expending a precious Pact slot on unless someone is actually single-digit count seconds from dying. Many of the best at-will Invocations were removed "bcuz richoolz", without an acknowledgement that A.) warlocks will NEVER be wizards' equals as ritual casters without the arguably overpowered 2014 version of Book of Ancient Secrets, and B.) ritual casting isn't fun. It never has been. Nobody likes ritual casting, nobody goes out of their way to make ritual specialists. Ritual casting is just a way to let spellcasters waste time to solve minor issues if they have an overabundance of time to waste.
The UA7 warlock does not feel like a class that can engage with the world using magic. And that means it's bad. No amount of slanted math that makes assumptions that will never hold up at real tables will fix that.
Why do you even discuss the UA if you believe nothing can be known from reading the class descriptions?
Numbers aren't the problem.
BAD numbers are the problem.
Your math is hard to follow and makes a very large number of assumptions that all lean heavily, heavily, HEAVILY towards your goal of getting the already-dogshit UA7 warlock nerfed into unplayability. Your numbers are, frankly, incredibly biased and intentionally ignore table realities that point away from your desired conclusion. You get too deep into the minutiae chasing some obscure pseudofact that Proves The Point while missing the forest through the trees.
You say Pact of the Blade is too strong and makes fighters feel bad. Question: why? Does the Blade warlock being actually semi-serviceable in its role as an eldritch warrior take away from the fighter's role as a mundane master of arms and armor? No. Who cares what the damage numbers come out to be? People don't play fighter to be Damage Masters, they play fighter because they want the class fantasy of a mundane warrior getting by with blade, armor, and wits rather than magic.
Blade warlocks are looking for a very different vibe that has little overlap with base fighters, especially since their offensive might is predicted on using all their spells to bolster their damage in your math. If they do that? They're using 100% of their class resources on damage and should absolutely be getting the same general return that a fighter does for using 100% of its class resources on damage. If you're going to blow everything you have on being a damage monkey, you deserve to be a good damage monkey.
As for the *excellent* question posed earlier: "does the warlock feel like a class that can solve problems with magic?" The answer is very much "No", in my case. The UA7 warlock, as presented, has too little magic to feel like a spellcaster that can expend magic to solve problems. It honestly feels more like someone with magic tattoos than a spellcaster with arcane knowledge - they have an extremely small number of extremely specific tricks they can do to provide narrow solutions to problems most campaigns don't face, and the rest of the time they resort to Eldritch Blast whether EB Zis the right solution or not. Because EB Zis the ONLY thing they can freely rely on. Pact Magic is so limited it's NEVER the answer to a problem, because no problem is ever severe enough to be worth expending a precious Pact slot on unless someone is actually single-digit count seconds from dying. Many of the best at-will Invocations were removed "bcuz richoolz", without an acknowledgement that A.) warlocks will NEVER be wizards' equals as ritual casters without the arguably overpowered 2014 version of Book of Ancient Secrets, and B.) ritual casting isn't fun. It never has been. Nobody likes ritual casting, nobody goes out of their way to make ritual specialists. Ritual casting is just a way to let spellcasters waste time to solve minor issues if they have an overabundance of time to waste.
The UA7 warlock does not feel like a class that can engage with the world using magic. And that means it's bad. No amount of slanted math that makes assumptions that will never hold up at real tables will fix that.
The problem with warlocks being better at weapons than a fighter can be summed up by what people call the caster/martial divide. Which can be summed up in just one sentence
"Anything you can do I can do better, I can do anything better than you".
And in this case the blade warlock can do anything the fighter can do, but better and then still has spells left over.
Also it is funny that you say no this doesn't solve problems and then go on to make excuses about how the magic the warlock is using doesn't count as using magic to solve problems. But of course, we have established already you aren't using the system as it is designed to be used and short rests don't exist in your world and they are supposed to exist in D&D.
Of course! It's a warlock, selling your soul for power is about the least wise thing someone can do, so I always assume warlocks dump wisdom. Bards often dump wisdom for the same reason, because it's hard to justify trying to seduce a dragon unless you have a negative mod for your wisdom. I deliberately didn't try to super optimize the builds : otherwise the Wizard would have taken Lightly Armoured at level 1, and both the bladelock and the fighter would have PAM. Instead aiming for what I would build if I wanted a good character that would fit in at my tables. If you would have made different choices, feel free to post what you would build for each of the classes and we can compare the numbers.
Counterpoint: if the Blace warlock, after doing absolutely everything it possibly can to be a powerful weapon user, is still an absolute dogshit weapon user that cannot compete with a fighter that doesn't have to do ANYTHING to get what it does? Why does the Blade warlock exist? The Blade Pact becomes a trap option.
Again - fighter players who're playing for the feel rather than the math *don't care* that Blade warlocks can equal or even better their sword damage. Fighters are in it to be cool mundane heroes - so long as their damage is good enough, they won't feel "left out" by the warlock. They're more likely to lean into the in-character scorn a warrior would feel for someone who "cheats" and fights with power and false skill they didn't earn.
As for people who play solely to the math? They won't care either. They'll play whatever the math tells them to play and invent a story around it, same as they always do. They've never cared about the fluff in the first place, why assume they would now?
As for the short rest dig? Again - white room math. Even if your table makes it a rule that you can't long rest until after you've short-rested, or even if you twist and jangle the rest rules specifically to unfairly stuff long-rest characters and ensure short rests are the ONLY rests anyone EVER gets because long rests take a year of downtime? Warlocks aren't going to perfectly cast their overly-limited spells in the exact order required to 100% maximize resource use between long rests every single time. The very nature of Pact Magic, giving the warlock extremely scarce resources that theoretically recharge more quickly, means warlock players are going to be more paranoid about keeping something in reserve.
Remember, once you cast your last Pact Magic spell? You are 100% banking on there being absolutely NOTHING else of any threat in your future until your next rest, because you have given up any ability *whatsoever* to solve your problems with magic. If you can't fix the problem with Eldritch Blast, *you can't fix the problem*. That means you're very strongly incentivized to keep that last slot in reserve to ensure you have at least some ability to deal with the unexpected, which means a steady stream of unused/"wasted" spell slots that Agilemind's math steadfastly refuses to account for.
It's why warlock players always complain about not being able to cast enough spells. It doesn't matter that the white-room math says you have as much spellcasting as a long-rest caster because the fundamental way Pact Magic is built punishes you for not being able to divine the future and know beforehand when you're allowed to cast your spells. A long-rest caster knows how much ammo they have and can plan around it, spending spells where they need to, not being wasteful and simple hoping it's enough. A warlock cannot do that. Or rather, the warlock has to assume that its two whole spells per day are the sum totality of its ammo because it cannot *know* it's going to get a huge surplus of short rests to rehuff off of.
It's why the white-room math is useless. It fails to account for the most important variable of all - the human player running the character and how they're likely to make decisions to try and survive the adventuring day.
Remember, once you cast your last Pact Magic spell? You are 100% banking on there being absolutely NOTHING else of any threat in your future
You are not because you are completely serviceable as a character without levelled spells. A warlock without Pact Magic slots is in a MUCH better place than a Barbarian without Rage and Barbarians only get 4 rages per day at 8th level.
a fighter that doesn't have to do ANYTHING to get what it does?
A fighter has to use their class features and their ASIs for weapon feats just like a blade warlock - Fightersdon't get anything else other than their weapon abilities. A blade warlock cannot be equal to a fighter AND have pact magic on top. A bladelock should be REQUIRED to use their pact magic to reach parity with a fighter in terms of weapon damage.
Fighters absolutely get things other than their weapon abilities. Higher base health, native heavy armor and shield proficiencies, additional feat/ASI selections, built-in nonmagical healing via Second Wind, the powerful burst of Action Surge, their Indomitable feature, a predilection towards physical stats that allows them to interact with the world better as some players desire... Fighters really only have a few class features that directly relate to their weapon use.
You're boiling fighter down to nothing but damage numbers and demanding that warlocks be strictly worse in all ways, chasing numerical parity while completely and intentionally ignoring feeling, flow, and fantasy. Sorry AM, but a game with perfect numerical balance and dogshit game flow, gameplay experience, and game feel is a dogshit game. We don't play games to do math problems, we do math problems in our games in pursuit of enhancing the subjective, squishy human experience of playing those games. You CANNOT ignore flow and feel when suggesting balance adjustments, and saying "everybody has different feelings so there's no use in thinking about them!" is an amateur copout.
If a Blade warlock cannot perform as a swordsman as well as a regular swordsman does no matter how much of their soul they sell, why did they bother selling their soul in the first place? Same with Tome and Chain, and the warlock class in general. If you're going to give people a character option that insists they take on additional story debt and (generally) mandates that they shackle themselves to an antagonistic entity working against the interests of both the party and the warlock at all times? You'd better gorram well make sure that deal doesn't feel lame. "Worth it" isn't necessary, warlocks struggling with regrets is good for narrative, but "man, this deal sucks so much ass, why would anyone ever think this is a good trade for their soul?" is unacceptable.
If a Blade warlock cannot perform as a swordsman as well as a regular swordsman does no matter how much of their soul they sell
See this here, this is the really problem. Warlock players feel entitled to be the best at everything because the fluff text says they sold their soul for power despite this not having any mechanical consequences at all. But I mean, the reason you sold your soul is so you can get this power overnight instead of having to spend 10 years training with weapons and armour of every kind like a Fighter did.
If warlocks want a mechanical advantage over all other classes b/c they "sold their soul" then there needs to be mechanical repercussions of doing so.
E.g. if you sold your soul to a Fiend, you should have to make a Wisdom saving throw before taking any action that directly harms a creature with the fiend type that is not an enemy of your patron. Or if you're a Hexblade, you have disadvantage on all attacks that aren't made with your Hex weapon.
You're overcorrecting. Nobody said Blade warlocks have to be "The Best" swordsmen. I said they should be *comparable*. That the Blade player shouldn't feel like he made a terrible mistake trying to play his awesome eldritch samurai bearing a cursed sword his family has safeguarded for centuries because it turns out the mechanics behind it are so dogshit that there's no reason for him to be in the party, i.e. the 2014 Blade pact. You're the one pushing for Blade pact to be a complete and utter waste of time and ink because it somehow steps on the fighter's tors if anyone else in the game can use a sword.
Your argument that the warlock's "soul selling" should have no weight also falls short. There's no mechanical benefit for/from training on armor and weapons for ten years, either, and you can acquire the benefit of that training with just a single multiclass level into fighter. Fighters also aren't required to give their DM a built-in way to freely **** over the party whenever the DM wants the way warlocks are.
Fighters also aren't required to give their DM a built-in way to freely **** over the party whenever the DM wants the way warlocks are.
Sure they are! Every character needs a reason to become an adventurer and that reason can (and should) be used by the DM to bite them in the rump down the line. Whether that is a noble you pissed off and exiled you, or a monastic order that commanded you to go out into the word to spread their ideology, or an overbearing parent you are trying to escape from, or a haunting prophetic dream, or whatever it was that murdered your parents.
If a Blade warlock cannot perform as a swordsman as well as a regular swordsman does no matter how much of their soul they sell
See this here, this is the really problem. Warlock players feel entitled to be the best at everything because the fluff text says they sold their soul for power despite this not having any mechanical consequences at all. But I mean, the reason you sold your soul is so you can get this power overnight instead of having to spend 10 years training with weapons and armour of every kind like a Fighter did.
If warlocks want a mechanical advantage over all other classes b/c they "sold their soul" then there needs to be mechanical repercussions of doing so.
E.g. if you sold your soul to a Fiend, you should have to make a Wisdom saving throw before taking any action that directly harms a creature with the fiend type that is not an enemy of your patron. If you're a Hexblade, you have disadvantage on all attacks that aren't made with your Hex weapon.
ooh, permanently charmed by your patron's typing. that's some fine fine print. i hope that makes it into a lore blurb in the PHB.
hmm, a question... and i do hope this is moderately derailing, should there be any mechanical detriment or impediment to resurrection for a fallen warlock? sure, not every warlock sells their soul, but with the fiend patron in particular it seems rather central to their interests. a celestial or fey patron might be inclined to steer things their own lawful or chaotic direction. key in the process is the phrase "If the creature's soul is both willing and at liberty to rejoin the body," in raise dead. obviously this is a dm's fiat area, but should it be written down, even if only in a lore blurb, just so players aren't surprised?
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!
should there be any mechanical detriment or impediment to resurrection for a fallen warlock? sure, not every warlock sells their soul, but with the fiend patron in particular it seems rather central to their interests. a celestial or fey patron might be inclined to steer things their own lawful or chaotic direction. key in the process is the phrase "If the creature's soul is both willing and at liberty to rejoin the body," in raise dead.
Fiend patrons are of course eager to send the warlock back to the material world, since section 3, sub-section 11, clause 2 clearly stipulates that every third entity slain by the warlock is preferentially earmarked for the Nine Hells. Having their pet (and blissfully legalese illiterate) warlock continue rampaging is all part of the business plan, after all!
Turning the idea around a bit, it would be fun if some of the warlock's patron-granted powers were actually presented as the beneficial aspects of a curse (Power at a Price). Like, Great Old One pawns warlocks suffer horrible nightmares, that they may share with others in their various psychic maledictions. Archfey teleporting everywhere, but also getting increasingly uneasy remaining in the same settlement for long. Fiend-bound warlocks gaining that sweet, sweet health from the nearby dying? They're actually taking from the living too. Most don't notice, but the sick start coughing more, and flowers wilt in their presence.
This is my current Warlock Compromise. Invocations go back to level two, and “Pact of” go back to being a feature that you can only have one at a time (you can change your “pact of” when you gain a level). You gain your “Pact of” at 1st level. We go back down to 8 invocations.
All the spell invocations that dropped to lower level prerequisites in UA7 maintain those lower levels. Also invocations that were removed because they were added to the spell list are returned allowing players a choice of how to obtain the spell.
UA7 Pact of the Blade is fine except as above it’s not an invocation. UA7 Thirsting Blade is broken. It loses that third attack at 11th. UA7 Lifedrinker goes up to 12th and increases its damage to a d10
UA7 Pact of the Tome loses that first level spell slot and is a feature. Bring Book of Ancient Secrets Invocation to the PHB.
UA7 Pact of the Chain absorbs Voice of the Chain Master becoming one feature. Make new invocation that makes your chain familiar transform temporarily into a proper combat pet when it’s within 60ft of you at the cost of a spell slot. (Scale it to a Tasha’s summons) Even more options for familiars. They are still missing a good one for celestial.
2 spellcasting invocations that give you spell slot progression. First a 5th level prerequisite granting 1st level Spellcasting spell slots (two 1st level slots). Second is a 12th level prerequisite improving your Spellcasting slots to 3rd level (four 1st level slots, two second level slots). This assumes you don’t have Spellcasting from another source. Basically 1 level of Spellcaster for the 5th level invocation and 2 more levels of spellcaster from the 12th level invocation.
What was given up for all these gains, how is this a compromise? Nothing should be given to bring weak things up to par. Also for the spell slots you are giving up invocations which I lowered back to 8. I also returned the “Pact of”/Pact Boons to one at a time. If this rubs someone the wrong way maybe a new 9th level invocation that lets you pick another one.
This is my current Warlock Compromise. Invocations go back to level two, and “Pact of” go back to being a feature that you can only have one at a time (you can change your “pact of” when you gain a level). You gain your “Pact of” at 1st level. We go back down to 8 invocations.
All the spell invocations that dropped to lower level prerequisites in UA7 maintain those lower levels. Also invocations that were removed because they were added to the spell list are returned allowing players a choice of how to obtain the spell.
UA7 Pact of the Blade is fine except as above it’s not an invocation. UA7 Thirsting Blade is broken. It loses that third attack at 11th. UA7 Lifedrinker goes up to 12th and increases its damage to a d10
UA7 Pact of the Tome loses that first level spell slot and is a feature. Bring Book of Ancient Secrets Invocation to the PHB.
UA7 Pact of the Chain absorbs Voice of the Chain Master becoming one feature. Make new invocation that makes your chain familiar transform temporarily into a proper combat pet when it’s within 60ft of you at the cost of a spell slot. (Scale it to a Tasha’s summons) Even more options for familiars. They are still missing a good one for celestial.
2 spellcasting invocations that give you spell slot progression. First a 5th level prerequisite granting 1st level Spellcasting spell slots (two 1st level slots). Second is a 12th level prerequisite improving your Spellcasting slots to 3rd level (four 1st level slots, two second level slots). This assumes you don’t have Spellcasting from another source. Basically 1 level of Spellcaster for the 5th level invocation and 2 more levels of spellcaster from the 12th level invocation.
What was given up for all these gains, how is this a compromise? Nothing should be given to bring weak things up to par. Also for the spell slots you are giving up invocations which I lowered back to 8. I also returned the “Pact of”/Pact Boons to one at a time. If this rubs someone the wrong way maybe a new 9th level invocation that lets you pick another one.
The reason there’s no true celestial option for Pact of the Chain is that currently the lowest CR for a celestial is 2. WotC would have to make a celestial creature with a CR lower than 2.
Remember, once you cast your last Pact Magic spell? You are 100% banking on there being absolutely NOTHING else of any threat in your future
You are not because you are completely serviceable as a character without levelled spells. A warlock without Pact Magic slots is in a MUCH better place than a Barbarian without Rage and Barbarians only get 4 rages per day at 8th level.
a fighter that doesn't have to do ANYTHING to get what it does?
A fighter has to use their class features and their ASIs for weapon feats just like a blade warlock - Fightersdon't get anything else other than their weapon abilities. A blade warlock cannot be equal to a fighter AND have pact magic on top. A bladelock should be REQUIRED to use their pact magic to reach parity with a fighter in terms of weapon damage.
Weapon Damage isn't the only thing in the game - even in a pure combat scenario. There is a reason why many players consider the Paladin to be a better tank than the Barbarian despite the latter having more HP and better DR, and that is that the Paladin can withstand attacks other than damage better, like those Save or Go Grab a Snack spells. Or, if we compare two characters where one has marginally better DPR but has notably lower HP, AC, and resistance to effects that render them a non-participant, is the first one really more powerful?
Of course, I don't expect the Warlock to be the best at stuff, just good enough so that (barring a run of exceptionally bad luck) I am having fun and not wishing I had played something else. My first try with a Warlock went that way because the DM never allowed a short rest - it was all 5 minute workdays or the next encounter was coming before we could even search the bodies from the last one, and I would have been happier having played any other spellcaster than the Warlock. The next time was under a different GM and he made sure we could occasionally take a short rest, enough so that I didn't feel like I had made the worst choice possible. I did feel more powerful than most other party members, but that was more because two of them were basically anti-optimisers (Our cleric SHOULD have been playing a Paladin based on how he approached combat) than the class benefiting too much from shortening the time required for short rests (down to 15 minutes).
With point buy with a +2 +1. 13 str, 13 dex, 14 con, 8 int, 8 wis, and 14 cha and then apply the +1 to dex and +2 to cha for 13, 14,14,8,8,16. Then 2 +2 ASI for 20 CHA at the same time everyone else would get there as well. So it is doable. and no feats were applied which taking no feats would be needed to get this line as you see.
Your build is dumping wisdom? Ooof. Not a choice I would have made, but I admit already having the proficiency in Wisdom saves helps even it out. Fair enough though, you're right that it can be done.
I actually have 1 point left over too, just forgot to place it. I personally might be willing to go to 18 in cha at level 8 though personally to get a feat like resilient con saving 2 points and put wisdom to 11, but mostly just wanted to show that it is doable.
Numbers aren't the problem.
BAD numbers are the problem.
Your math is hard to follow and makes a very large number of assumptions that all lean heavily, heavily, HEAVILY towards your goal of getting the already-dogshit UA7 warlock nerfed into unplayability. Your numbers are, frankly, incredibly biased and intentionally ignore table realities that point away from your desired conclusion. You get too deep into the minutiae chasing some obscure pseudofact that Proves The Point while missing the forest through the trees.
You say Pact of the Blade is too strong and makes fighters feel bad. Question: why? Does the Blade warlock being actually semi-serviceable in its role as an eldritch warrior take away from the fighter's role as a mundane master of arms and armor? No. Who cares what the damage numbers come out to be? People don't play fighter to be Damage Masters, they play fighter because they want the class fantasy of a mundane warrior getting by with blade, armor, and wits rather than magic.
Blade warlocks are looking for a very different vibe that has little overlap with base fighters, especially since their offensive might is predicted on using all their spells to bolster their damage in your math. If they do that? They're using 100% of their class resources on damage and should absolutely be getting the same general return that a fighter does for using 100% of its class resources on damage. If you're going to blow everything you have on being a damage monkey, you deserve to be a good damage monkey.
As for the *excellent* question posed earlier: "does the warlock feel like a class that can solve problems with magic?" The answer is very much "No", in my case. The UA7 warlock, as presented, has too little magic to feel like a spellcaster that can expend magic to solve problems. It honestly feels more like someone with magic tattoos than a spellcaster with arcane knowledge - they have an extremely small number of extremely specific tricks they can do to provide narrow solutions to problems most campaigns don't face, and the rest of the time they resort to Eldritch Blast whether EB Zis the right solution or not. Because EB Zis the ONLY thing they can freely rely on. Pact Magic is so limited it's NEVER the answer to a problem, because no problem is ever severe enough to be worth expending a precious Pact slot on unless someone is actually single-digit count seconds from dying. Many of the best at-will Invocations were removed "bcuz richoolz", without an acknowledgement that A.) warlocks will NEVER be wizards' equals as ritual casters without the arguably overpowered 2014 version of Book of Ancient Secrets, and B.) ritual casting isn't fun. It never has been. Nobody likes ritual casting, nobody goes out of their way to make ritual specialists. Ritual casting is just a way to let spellcasters waste time to solve minor issues if they have an overabundance of time to waste.
The UA7 warlock does not feel like a class that can engage with the world using magic. And that means it's bad. No amount of slanted math that makes assumptions that will never hold up at real tables will fix that.
Please do not contact or message me.
The problem with warlocks being better at weapons than a fighter can be summed up by what people call the caster/martial divide. Which can be summed up in just one sentence
"Anything you can do I can do better, I can do anything better than you".
And in this case the blade warlock can do anything the fighter can do, but better and then still has spells left over.
Also it is funny that you say no this doesn't solve problems and then go on to make excuses about how the magic the warlock is using doesn't count as using magic to solve problems. But of course, we have established already you aren't using the system as it is designed to be used and short rests don't exist in your world and they are supposed to exist in D&D.
Of course! It's a warlock, selling your soul for power is about the least wise thing someone can do, so I always assume warlocks dump wisdom. Bards often dump wisdom for the same reason, because it's hard to justify trying to seduce a dragon unless you have a negative mod for your wisdom. I deliberately didn't try to super optimize the builds : otherwise the Wizard would have taken Lightly Armoured at level 1, and both the bladelock and the fighter would have PAM. Instead aiming for what I would build if I wanted a good character that would fit in at my tables. If you would have made different choices, feel free to post what you would build for each of the classes and we can compare the numbers.
Your answer is "No", my answer is "Yes". That is the problem with relying on feelings to balance a game.
Counterpoint: if the Blace warlock, after doing absolutely everything it possibly can to be a powerful weapon user, is still an absolute dogshit weapon user that cannot compete with a fighter that doesn't have to do ANYTHING to get what it does? Why does the Blade warlock exist? The Blade Pact becomes a trap option.
Again - fighter players who're playing for the feel rather than the math *don't care* that Blade warlocks can equal or even better their sword damage. Fighters are in it to be cool mundane heroes - so long as their damage is good enough, they won't feel "left out" by the warlock. They're more likely to lean into the in-character scorn a warrior would feel for someone who "cheats" and fights with power and false skill they didn't earn.
As for people who play solely to the math? They won't care either. They'll play whatever the math tells them to play and invent a story around it, same as they always do. They've never cared about the fluff in the first place, why assume they would now?
As for the short rest dig? Again - white room math. Even if your table makes it a rule that you can't long rest until after you've short-rested, or even if you twist and jangle the rest rules specifically to unfairly stuff long-rest characters and ensure short rests are the ONLY rests anyone EVER gets because long rests take a year of downtime? Warlocks aren't going to perfectly cast their overly-limited spells in the exact order required to 100% maximize resource use between long rests every single time. The very nature of Pact Magic, giving the warlock extremely scarce resources that theoretically recharge more quickly, means warlock players are going to be more paranoid about keeping something in reserve.
Remember, once you cast your last Pact Magic spell? You are 100% banking on there being absolutely NOTHING else of any threat in your future until your next rest, because you have given up any ability *whatsoever* to solve your problems with magic. If you can't fix the problem with Eldritch Blast, *you can't fix the problem*. That means you're very strongly incentivized to keep that last slot in reserve to ensure you have at least some ability to deal with the unexpected, which means a steady stream of unused/"wasted" spell slots that Agilemind's math steadfastly refuses to account for.
It's why warlock players always complain about not being able to cast enough spells. It doesn't matter that the white-room math says you have as much spellcasting as a long-rest caster because the fundamental way Pact Magic is built punishes you for not being able to divine the future and know beforehand when you're allowed to cast your spells. A long-rest caster knows how much ammo they have and can plan around it, spending spells where they need to, not being wasteful and simple hoping it's enough. A warlock cannot do that. Or rather, the warlock has to assume that its two whole spells per day are the sum totality of its ammo because it cannot *know* it's going to get a huge surplus of short rests to rehuff off of.
It's why the white-room math is useless. It fails to account for the most important variable of all - the human player running the character and how they're likely to make decisions to try and survive the adventuring day.
Please do not contact or message me.
You are not because you are completely serviceable as a character without levelled spells. A warlock without Pact Magic slots is in a MUCH better place than a Barbarian without Rage and Barbarians only get 4 rages per day at 8th level.
A fighter has to use their class features and their ASIs for weapon feats just like a blade warlock - Fighters don't get anything else other than their weapon abilities. A blade warlock cannot be equal to a fighter AND have pact magic on top. A bladelock should be REQUIRED to use their pact magic to reach parity with a fighter in terms of weapon damage.
Fighters absolutely get things other than their weapon abilities. Higher base health, native heavy armor and shield proficiencies, additional feat/ASI selections, built-in nonmagical healing via Second Wind, the powerful burst of Action Surge, their Indomitable feature, a predilection towards physical stats that allows them to interact with the world better as some players desire... Fighters really only have a few class features that directly relate to their weapon use.
You're boiling fighter down to nothing but damage numbers and demanding that warlocks be strictly worse in all ways, chasing numerical parity while completely and intentionally ignoring feeling, flow, and fantasy. Sorry AM, but a game with perfect numerical balance and dogshit game flow, gameplay experience, and game feel is a dogshit game. We don't play games to do math problems, we do math problems in our games in pursuit of enhancing the subjective, squishy human experience of playing those games. You CANNOT ignore flow and feel when suggesting balance adjustments, and saying "everybody has different feelings so there's no use in thinking about them!" is an amateur copout.
If a Blade warlock cannot perform as a swordsman as well as a regular swordsman does no matter how much of their soul they sell, why did they bother selling their soul in the first place? Same with Tome and Chain, and the warlock class in general. If you're going to give people a character option that insists they take on additional story debt and (generally) mandates that they shackle themselves to an antagonistic entity working against the interests of both the party and the warlock at all times? You'd better gorram well make sure that deal doesn't feel lame. "Worth it" isn't necessary, warlocks struggling with regrets is good for narrative, but "man, this deal sucks so much ass, why would anyone ever think this is a good trade for their soul?" is unacceptable.
Please do not contact or message me.
See this here, this is the really problem. Warlock players feel entitled to be the best at everything because the fluff text says they sold their soul for power despite this not having any mechanical consequences at all. But I mean, the reason you sold your soul is so you can get this power overnight instead of having to spend 10 years training with weapons and armour of every kind like a Fighter did.
If warlocks want a mechanical advantage over all other classes b/c they "sold their soul" then there needs to be mechanical repercussions of doing so.
E.g. if you sold your soul to a Fiend, you should have to make a Wisdom saving throw before taking any action that directly harms a creature with the fiend type that is not an enemy of your patron. Or if you're a Hexblade, you have disadvantage on all attacks that aren't made with your Hex weapon.
You're overcorrecting. Nobody said Blade warlocks have to be "The Best" swordsmen. I said they should be *comparable*. That the Blade player shouldn't feel like he made a terrible mistake trying to play his awesome eldritch samurai bearing a cursed sword his family has safeguarded for centuries because it turns out the mechanics behind it are so dogshit that there's no reason for him to be in the party, i.e. the 2014 Blade pact. You're the one pushing for Blade pact to be a complete and utter waste of time and ink because it somehow steps on the fighter's tors if anyone else in the game can use a sword.
Your argument that the warlock's "soul selling" should have no weight also falls short. There's no mechanical benefit for/from training on armor and weapons for ten years, either, and you can acquire the benefit of that training with just a single multiclass level into fighter. Fighters also aren't required to give their DM a built-in way to freely **** over the party whenever the DM wants the way warlocks are.
Please do not contact or message me.
Sure they are! Every character needs a reason to become an adventurer and that reason can (and should) be used by the DM to bite them in the rump down the line. Whether that is a noble you pissed off and exiled you, or a monastic order that commanded you to go out into the word to spread their ideology, or an overbearing parent you are trying to escape from, or a haunting prophetic dream, or whatever it was that murdered your parents.
ooh, permanently charmed by your patron's typing. that's some fine fine print. i hope that makes it into a lore blurb in the PHB.
hmm, a question... and i do hope this is moderately derailing, should there be any mechanical detriment or impediment to resurrection for a fallen warlock? sure, not every warlock sells their soul, but with the fiend patron in particular it seems rather central to their interests. a celestial or fey patron might be inclined to steer things their own lawful or chaotic direction. key in the process is the phrase "If the creature's soul is both willing and at liberty to rejoin the body," in raise dead. obviously this is a dm's fiat area, but should it be written down, even if only in a lore blurb, just so players aren't surprised?
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
I think it would be very cool if there was a Box explaining how there might be specific challenges to resurrecting a warlock in the PHB.
Fiend patrons are of course eager to send the warlock back to the material world, since section 3, sub-section 11, clause 2 clearly stipulates that every third entity slain by the warlock is preferentially earmarked for the Nine Hells. Having their pet (and blissfully legalese illiterate) warlock continue rampaging is all part of the business plan, after all!
Turning the idea around a bit, it would be fun if some of the warlock's patron-granted powers were actually presented as the beneficial aspects of a curse (Power at a Price). Like, Great Old One
pawnswarlocks suffer horrible nightmares, that they may share with others in their various psychic maledictions. Archfey teleporting everywhere, but also getting increasingly uneasy remaining in the same settlement for long. Fiend-bound warlocks gaining that sweet, sweet health from the nearby dying? They're actually taking from the living too. Most don't notice, but the sick start coughing more, and flowers wilt in their presence.Small things like that :)
All that hexin' business cuts both ways!
This is my current Warlock Compromise.
Invocations go back to level two, and “Pact of” go back to being a feature that you can only have one at a time (you can change your “pact of” when you gain a level). You gain your “Pact of” at 1st level. We go back down to 8 invocations.
All the spell invocations that dropped to lower level prerequisites in UA7 maintain those lower levels. Also invocations that were removed because they were added to the spell list are returned allowing players a choice of how to obtain the spell.
UA7 Pact of the Blade is fine except as above it’s not an invocation.
UA7 Thirsting Blade is broken. It loses that third attack at 11th.
UA7 Lifedrinker goes up to 12th and increases its damage to a d10
UA7 Pact of the Tome loses that first level spell slot and is a feature.
Bring Book of Ancient Secrets Invocation to the PHB.
UA7 Pact of the Chain absorbs Voice of the Chain Master becoming one feature.
Make new invocation that makes your chain familiar transform temporarily into a proper combat pet when it’s within 60ft of you at the cost of a spell slot. (Scale it to a Tasha’s summons)
Even more options for familiars. They are still missing a good one for celestial.
2 spellcasting invocations that give you spell slot progression. First a 5th level prerequisite granting 1st level Spellcasting spell slots (two 1st level slots). Second is a 12th level prerequisite improving your Spellcasting slots to 3rd level (four 1st level slots, two second level slots). This assumes you don’t have Spellcasting from another source. Basically 1 level of Spellcaster for the 5th level invocation and 2 more levels of spellcaster from the 12th level invocation.
What was given up for all these gains, how is this a compromise? Nothing should be given to bring weak things up to par. Also for the spell slots you are giving up invocations which I lowered back to 8. I also returned the “Pact of”/Pact Boons to one at a time. If this rubs someone the wrong way maybe a new 9th level invocation that lets you pick another one.
The reason there’s no true celestial option for Pact of the Chain is that currently the lowest CR for a celestial is 2. WotC would have to make a celestial creature with a CR lower than 2.
Weapon Damage isn't the only thing in the game - even in a pure combat scenario. There is a reason why many players consider the Paladin to be a better tank than the Barbarian despite the latter having more HP and better DR, and that is that the Paladin can withstand attacks other than damage better, like those Save or Go Grab a Snack spells. Or, if we compare two characters where one has marginally better DPR but has notably lower HP, AC, and resistance to effects that render them a non-participant, is the first one really more powerful?
Of course, I don't expect the Warlock to be the best at stuff, just good enough so that (barring a run of exceptionally bad luck) I am having fun and not wishing I had played something else. My first try with a Warlock went that way because the DM never allowed a short rest - it was all 5 minute workdays or the next encounter was coming before we could even search the bodies from the last one, and I would have been happier having played any other spellcaster than the Warlock. The next time was under a different GM and he made sure we could occasionally take a short rest, enough so that I didn't feel like I had made the worst choice possible. I did feel more powerful than most other party members, but that was more because two of them were basically anti-optimisers (Our cleric SHOULD have been playing a Paladin based on how he approached combat) than the class benefiting too much from shortening the time required for short rests (down to 15 minutes).
Could give Warlocks access to Catnap and/or make a potion that gives the benefit’s of a short rest.