Y'know what else gets tiring? Constantly being told that the only character archetype allowed to have an Intelligence score higher than 8 is the studious, snobby, noodle-armed and weak-spined Scholarly Archmage that hates leaving their stuffy, book-filled tower for any reason and constantly complains the entire campaign about how uncivilized the whole thing is.
Meanwhile half the game is mechanically required to be ranging pornhounds.
Love baked-in anti-intellectualism. Always makes a girl feel special, knowing that being intelligent and mentally capable is actively looked down upon as a detriment.
Y'know what else gets tiring? Constantly being told that the only character archetype allowed to have an Intelligence score higher than 8 is the studious, snobby, noodle-armed and weak-spined Scholarly Archmage that hates leaving their stuffy, book-filled tower for any reason and constantly complains the entire campaign about how uncivilized the whole thing is.
Have you considered the possibility that your play group is a bit toxic? Yeah, Int isn't terribly useful to most PCs, mostly because knowledge checks are routinely metagamed ("Your character has never met a troll before. Why don't you make a Nature check before you use your torch..."), but there's always going to be something plausible as a dump stat, dump stats aren't actually that critical, and IME Intelligence isn't a more common dump stat than Strength or Charisma.
1. Flexible casting only benefits multiclass. It has nothing to with style of play, and you don’t have to dump Int just because your Warlock is a Cha caster. Dumping Int is a personal choice.
It has everything to do with style of play for 95% of the tables. And with the stat system most people use, yeah you kind of have to dump int. Not as in forced to but in that it is really really mechanically bad not to. You can maybe swing a 12 but that wont fit the sage thing people are likely going for. And even if it were just one stat int just fits the class 1000000000X better.
I don't think there was ever true agreement, really. I know I just got tired of being accused of trying to run everyone else's tables and characters because I felt a class who is explicitly defined by a deal made by one means or another generally fits CHA more than INT, and that classes should have boundaries and fixed points rather than being "just do whatever".
And don't @ me over this, I have no interest in rehashing the same argument yet again. As I said, I'm tired of going over it.
Not all pacts are deals. That is the conflation you keep wrongly making. The PHB even gives multiple examples:
"Sometimes a traveler in the wilds comes to a strangely beautiful tower, meets its fey lord or lady, and stumbles into a pact without being fully aware of it."
"Sometimes, while poring over tomes of forbidden lore, a brilliant student’s mind is opened to realities beyond the material world and to the alien beings that dwell in the outer void."
"The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it."
You don't have to be a wheeling and dealing salesman or negotiator to be a Warlock; that is such an unnecessary limitation on what the class can be.
It has everything to do with style of play for 95% of the tables. And with the stat system most people use, yeah you kind of have to dump int. Not as in forced to but in that it is really really mechanically bad not to. You can maybe swing a 12 but that wont fit the sage thing people are likely going for. And even if it were just one stat int just fits the class 1000000000X better.
Ordinary stat optimization for a warlock on point build is 16 charisma, 14 dexterity, 14 constitution, and then either 12/12/8 or 12/10/10 for the remaining ability scores. Yes, you won't be a sage like that... but that's because that's not what the warlock is. The whole point of the warlock is taking shortcuts to power, a sage who carefully studied what they were going to do isn't a warlock.
I am sick of it, Rum. I'm sick of this horrible place actively sabotaging the One D&D cycle as hard as it possibly can, pushing and pushing and pushing to make sure that we get another ten years of the exact same dogshit we already have.
Even though I also feel quite disappointed with the conservatism of the D&D community (that is, any minimally significant change is heavily criticized), in all honesty I believe that the main reason why no changes can be made is not this forum. Neither is Reedit. The main cause is the "influencers" of D&D. In the same way that society in general looks at the mass media to know what to think, a very significant part of the D&D community watches YouTube to know what to think about the latest playtest. Almost no one tries anything. Many people don't even read the documents. They fill out the survey based on what someone says on YouTube.
The highlight of this was when J. Crawford met with several of them, and they literally cornered him to make everything "backwards compatible." And do you know how you can make something fully backward compatible? Not making significant changes.
It has everything to do with style of play for 95% of the tables. And with the stat system most people use, yeah you kind of have to dump int. Not as in forced to but in that it is really really mechanically bad not to. You can maybe swing a 12 but that wont fit the sage thing people are likely going for. And even if it were just one stat int just fits the class 1000000000X better.
Ordinary stat optimization for a warlock on point build is 16 charisma, 14 dexterity, 14 constitution, and then either 12/12/8 or 12/10/10 for the remaining ability scores. Yes, you won't be a sage like that... but that's because that's not what the warlock is. The whole point of the warlock is taking shortcuts to power, a sage who carefully studied what they were going to do isn't a warlock.
And, honestly, the DEX and CON are negotiable unless you're going Bladelock. Yes it's less than "strictly optimal", but as a backrow caster you shouldn't be looking at enough hits that 1 point of AC or a couple points of HP and 1 extra to your concentration saves is making that much difference for you in practical play as opposed to white room number crunching, especially if you make use of cover. If you want to play a bookish scholar Warlock, just drop DEX or CON to 12 or 10 and dump STR at 8, depending how many points you need to feel properly erudite. You can literally do STR 8, DEX 14/12, CON 12/14, INT 15, WIS 10, CHA 16 out of the gate with point-buy. If you can spare another two points somewhere, you can even hit 16 INT and CHA out of the gate.
Ordinary stat optimization for a warlock on point build is 16 charisma, 14 dexterity, 14 constitution, and then either 12/12/8 or 12/10/10 for the remaining ability scores. Yes, you won't be a sage like that... but that's because that's not what the warlock is. The whole point of the warlock is taking shortcuts to power, a sage who carefully studied what they were going to do isn't a warlock.
That's exactly the misconception we're challenging, yes. The class description literally says you can be a brilliant student poring over tomes.
Okay here are Faustian Bargain Feats. I gave it a name based on D&D lore.
BYSERAIN BARGAIN 1st-Level Feat Prerequisite: None Repeatable: No You have made a deal with a powerful, possibly otherworldly being(s) (work it out with your DM who or what this being may be) for the purpose of gaining knowledge, power, or riches. You gain one of the following benefits: Knowledge. You may choose to learn one 1st level spell from any spell list. You may cast that spell once without using a spell slot and may use any spell slots you have to cast the spell. You regain your ability to cast the spell without a spell slot when you complete a Long Rest. Your Spellcasting Ability for the spell is Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma. You choose when you select this feat. Additionally you gain proficiency in one skill of choice. When you gain a level you may change the the 1st level spell, your spellcasting ability for the spell, or your skill proficiency. Power. When you hit a creature with an attack roll or it fails a saving throw from one of your spells you can make that creature suffer 2d4 Force damage. You may only use this feature once per turn and a total number of times equal to your Proficiency bonus. You regain all uses when you complete a long rest. Riches. You gain 100 gold coins or a number of objects that cost up to 100 gold. These coins or objects all have a marking or symbol of the being(s) that granted them to you on them. These items are permanently cursed. If they are more than 100 ft from you for more than 10 days they appear within 100ft of you in the closest unoccupied space when you complete a long rest. A detect magic spell will identify that the gold or objects are magical and have a conjuration aura. An identify spell will Identify the nature of the curse that always returns the gold or objects to you in 10 days.
BYSERAIN CONTRACT 4th-Level Feat Prerequisite: Byserian Bargain Repeatable: No Ability Score Increase. Increase your Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma score by 1 Contract Boon. The terms of your deal improve for better or worse with the powerful, possibly otherworldly being(s). You gain one of the following benefits it does not have to be connected to your Byserian Bargain choice:
Whispered Knowledge: You gain expertise in one skill which you are proficient. Additionally you may use a reaction when you make an Arcana, History, Medicine, or Performance skill check to whisper a request for knowledge adding 1d4 to the roll. You must make the request before you roll and may do so Profeciency bonus times. You regain all uses when you finish a long rest.
Magical Power: If you have the ability to cast a spell of 1st level you gain a 1st level spell slot. After using this spell slot you regain it when you complete a Short Rest or Long Rest.
Personal Treasure: You gain a common or uncommon magic item of your choice. This object has a marking or symbol of the being that granted it to you on it. This item is permanently cursed. If it is more than 30ft from you for more than 5 days it appears within 30ft of you in the closest unoccupied space when you complete a long rest. A detect magic spell will identify that the object is magical and has a conjuration aura. An identify spell will Identify the nature of the curse that always returns the object to you in 5 days.
Ordinary stat optimization for a warlock on point build is 16 charisma, 14 dexterity, 14 constitution, and then either 12/12/8 or 12/10/10 for the remaining ability scores. Yes, you won't be a sage like that... but that's because that's not what the warlock is. The whole point of the warlock is taking shortcuts to power, a sage who carefully studied what they were going to do isn't a warlock.
That's exactly the misconception we're challenging, yes. The class description literally says you can be a brilliant student poring over tomes.
And having 14-16 INT doesn't count as "brilliant" when the average INT is 10? If you want to have a high INT score, you can! This has been repeatedly shown, and you can take INT skills as a Warlock and have a Sage/Scholar background if it means that much to you. And none of that will change the fact that the core trope of the class is making a deal with another being for power, even if that's not the only possible backstory you can give the character.
You know what I think is a super cool character concept that only really works, mechanically, on the warlock chassis? A Constantine-esque occultist that's devoted to hunting esoteric secrets beyond mortal ken - not necessarily Magical Knowledge, but secrets. They have an array of esoteric tricks, powers, and abilities even masters of magick can't properly replicate because you need to have Seen Shit and learned Things to gain the knowledge to do these things. Armed with Pacts, contacts, and knowledge of the hidden world, the occultist sets out to Adventure.
You know what you absolutely cannot play by the 2014 rules? That character I just outlined above. Because warlocks are required to be as horny as bards, and forbidden from being smarter than barbarians. They only just BARELY gain access to Arcana or Investigation, nor do they have consistent access to Religion so they can Know Things about gods, demons, and god-demons. Nope. ALL Warlocks are required to take Deception and Intimidation, and they are mechanically locked into making Intelligence their lowest score and Wisdom their second-lowest score, if they're not making both those numbers an 8 because Point Buy.
Want to be a canny, highly intelligent occultist who gets by in the world by learning, knowing, and using Secrets? Noooooooooooope. You're gonna be a rude lying oblivious moron horndog and like it. Period.
Yurei the hyperbole from you is crazy. I’ve literally read a post were you called the game in general “dogsh!t” and then in another post told someone you want to keep playing the D&D because it’s the game you and your table like.
Your character idea of an occultist can be play as a bunch of other classes. Honestly Warlock doesn’t sound like the class you should be playing except that you want a couple spells specific to Warlock. In 5e there is an occultist and haunted one Background, and I’m sure you can figure out how to make something similar, if not better in 5eR. Shadow and Divine Sorcerer would work well with some flavor, but you don’t want a 12 Int you want to be the smartest in the room. So I offer to you any Artificer. They have unique infusions that can’t be replicated that could be flavored as rare occult items or the imbuing of old Magics long lost. And you get to be a genius.
Let's be clear - the Mystic Arcanum changes are what "took away spell power" from non-Blade warlocks. Trading Pact Magic for half-casting is mostly a matter of kind, not degree - you trade an extremely small number of more intense spells for a much more reasonable number of lower-level casts. It's different casting, but it's not really worse casting. The Mystic Arcanum-as-Invocations bit was a noble experiment but didn't work as well as Wizards was thinking it would.
Let me be clear, you are wrong. The reason spell power was lacking is because you no longer had the same level of spells as full casters at the appropriate level and it got worse as you approached level 9. Then at 11th it goes away and you actually start catching a full caster. The reason MA had to be a part of Invocations is because if it wasn’t you need to give the Warlock almost no invocations or you end up with a literally overpowered mess. I know this because I literally took the time to write up the class in this format. It was bad. I even tried with 1/3 caster with MA slots that gave you access to one slot of full caster levels at the appropriate time and even that felt like too much if I still allowed 8 invocations.
Pact Boons as Invocations is a really interesting idea. That we're not going to keep because literally anything that makes Blade Pact even the slightest, tiniest bit better instantly earns the horrifying nerdrage of a roaring Mongol horde. Blade Pact is simply not allowed to be good/playable, because then paladin does Blade Pact things and everyone screams.
It’s not interesting when they admit all the boons weren’t of the same level of power and they have no intention of fixing that. It means you clearly are expected to take the more powerful boons or you are nerfing yourself
Blade Pact is not allowed to actually do its job and be useful/good, yep. People have in fact posted multiple times with multiple ways in which Blade Pact can be "tweaked" back to being a useless pointless noob trap option anyone with a clue doesn't touch with a ten-foot pole.
Blade Pact shouldn’t be the in the top 3 Martials in the game while having access to eldritch blast and spells. That’s horrendous design. Lifedrinker should be the invocation that improves the Bladelocks damage at 12th level. Just up it to a d12 and leave thirsting blade with two attacks. Also make it so Blade invocation only gives Cha to one attack and Thirsting blade is the only way to get extra attacks using Cha then you don’t have to worry about Paladins using it so they can supercharge their auras. You don’t have to nerf it into the bad Pact Boon from 2014, but you do need to balance it so it’s not simply superior to ever other build so much so that everyone dips Warlock to get some blade love. As of now it’s silly not to get at least 1 level of UA7 Warlock on you Paladin, Bard, or Sorcerer. Either for an extra spell slot with Tome or for Cha on weapon attacks with Blade.
3. UA7 Warlock is also very BladeLock focused and isn’t great for anyone who doesn’t want that invocation. If you take all the Pact Boon invocations UA7 warlock is very versatile, and relatively speaking it’s good, but in no form caster focused and making some of the best invocations unavailable because they can be taken used with ritual casting is bad.
Ummm... What. I have no idea where you're getting that idea from... wait, no, I do have an idea. This is from that crappy Treantmonk video, isn't it? This is pretty far from a "warlock fact."
5. Blade Lock shouldn’t be getting a 3rd attack at 11th, nor should it be allowed to be dipped for Cha attacks with weapons and all masteries. Multiple people have posted ways to fix that.
Eh, I mean, a second Extra Attack plus Lifedrinker is the equivalent of getting both the Paladin's and Fighter's level 11 bump, so that's admittedly a bit much, but the rest? Not a very big deal. Plus, there's a lot of flaws with the blade warlock you're massively glossing over. The lack of feats, the poor defenses that make being melee VERY dangerous, that Masteries generally aren't worth past getting one. Lets not even get into how Invocation hungry it is.
lol I’m shocked Treantmonk got something right if he agrees with my assessment. I haven’t watched one of his videos in years since I don’t agree with most of the stuff he says. He does a lot of white room theory crafting that doesn’t matter to actual play. I want you to take the time and play out a UA7 warlock without Blade and compare it to one with Blade. Just do 3 short battles with each.
11th level UA7 Bladelock is a better Nova than UA Paladin. Hex or Spirit Shroud, 3 attacks, Lifedrinker, Eldritch Smite. Or let’s really do something the Pally can’t. Summon something first round then use it for flanking second round and lay into the enemy with everything above minus the hex or spirit shroud.
3. UA7 Warlock is also very BladeLock focused and isn’t great for anyone who doesn’t want that invocation. If you take all the Pact Boon invocations UA7 warlock is very versatile, and relatively speaking it’s good, but in no form caster focused and making some of the best invocations unavailable because they can be taken used with ritual casting is bad.
Ummm... What. I have no idea where you're getting that idea from... wait, no, I do have an idea. This is from that crappy Treantmonk video, isn't it? This is pretty far from a "warlock fact."
5. Blade Lock shouldn’t be getting a 3rd attack at 11th, nor should it be allowed to be dipped for Cha attacks with weapons and all masteries. Multiple people have posted ways to fix that.
Eh, I mean, a second Extra Attack plus Lifedrinker is the equivalent of getting both the Paladin's and Fighter's level 11 bump, so that's admittedly a bit much, but the rest? Not a very big deal. Plus, there's a lot of flaws with the blade warlock you're massively glossing over. The lack of feats, the poor defenses that make being melee VERY dangerous, that Masteries generally aren't worth past getting one. Lets not even get into how Invocation hungry it is.
lol I’m shocked Treantmonk got something right if he agrees with my assessment. I haven’t watched one of his videos in years since I don’t agree with most of the stuff he says. He does a lot of white room theory crafting that doesn’t matter to actual play. I want you to take the time and play out a UA7 warlock without Blade and compare it to one with Blade. Just do 3 short battles with each.
11th level UA7 Bladelock is a better Nova than UA Paladin. Hex or Spirit Shroud, 3 attacks, Lifedrinker, Eldritch Smite. Or let’s really do something the Pally can’t. Summon something first round then use it for flanking second round and lay into the enemy with everything above minus the hex or spirit shroud.
He did a gameplay test as well at high level, and the Bladelock did almost double the damage as the Beserker Barbarian.
I don't think there was ever true agreement, really. I know I just got tired of being accused of trying to run everyone else's tables and characters because I felt a class who is explicitly defined by a deal made by one means or another generally fits CHA more than INT, and that classes should have boundaries and fixed points rather than being "just do whatever".
And don't @ me over this, I have no interest in rehashing the same argument yet again. As I said, I'm tired of going over it.
Not all pacts are deals. That is the conflation you keep wrongly making. The PHB even gives multiple examples:
"Sometimes a traveler in the wilds comes to a strangely beautiful tower, meets its fey lord or lady, and stumbles into a pact without being fully aware of it."
"Sometimes, while poring over tomes of forbidden lore, a brilliant student’s mind is opened to realities beyond the material world and to the alien beings that dwell in the outer void."
"The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it."
You don't have to be a wheeling and dealing salesman or negotiator to be a Warlock; that is such an unnecessary limitation on what the class can be.
Sure but you still have to be daring and brash (which is CHA), to seek out & read strange forbidden mysterious tomes and try to use the secrets within to draw power from an eldritch being who could squash you like a bug.
You not a careful, studious, methodological academic like an Artificer or Wizard.
3. UA7 Warlock is also very BladeLock focused and isn’t great for anyone who doesn’t want that invocation. If you take all the Pact Boon invocations UA7 warlock is very versatile, and relatively speaking it’s good, but in no form caster focused and making some of the best invocations unavailable because they can be taken used with ritual casting is bad.
Ummm... What. I have no idea where you're getting that idea from... wait, no, I do have an idea. This is from that crappy Treantmonk video, isn't it? This is pretty far from a "warlock fact."
5. Blade Lock shouldn’t be getting a 3rd attack at 11th, nor should it be allowed to be dipped for Cha attacks with weapons and all masteries. Multiple people have posted ways to fix that.
Eh, I mean, a second Extra Attack plus Lifedrinker is the equivalent of getting both the Paladin's and Fighter's level 11 bump, so that's admittedly a bit much, but the rest? Not a very big deal. Plus, there's a lot of flaws with the blade warlock you're massively glossing over. The lack of feats, the poor defenses that make being melee VERY dangerous, that Masteries generally aren't worth past getting one. Lets not even get into how Invocation hungry it is.
lol I’m shocked Treantmonk got something right if he agrees with my assessment. I haven’t watched one of his videos in years since I don’t agree with most of the stuff he says. He does a lot of white room theory crafting that doesn’t matter to actual play. I want you to take the time and play out a UA7 warlock without Blade and compare it to one with Blade. Just do 3 short battles with each.
11th level UA7 Bladelock is a better Nova than UA Paladin. Hex or Spirit Shroud, 3 attacks, Lifedrinker, Eldritch Smite. Or let’s really do something the Pally can’t. Summon something first round then use it for flanking second round and lay into the enemy with everything above minus the hex or spirit shroud.
He did a gameplay test as well at high level, and the Bladelock did almost double the damage as the Beserker Barbarian.
I can believe that. Maybe it was a test for us. “If they can’t tell how overpowered we made this thing these surveys are pointless.” Also I guess I owe treantmonk an apology if he is doing gameplay test now a days. It’s been so long I can’t remember what he said that made me no longer watch his videos. Not like I’m going to start watching them now, but I won’t criticize him as a white room only theory crafter since that is no longer true.
I don't think there was ever true agreement, really. I know I just got tired of being accused of trying to run everyone else's tables and characters because I felt a class who is explicitly defined by a deal made by one means or another generally fits CHA more than INT, and that classes should have boundaries and fixed points rather than being "just do whatever".
And don't @ me over this, I have no interest in rehashing the same argument yet again. As I said, I'm tired of going over it.
Not all pacts are deals. That is the conflation you keep wrongly making. The PHB even gives multiple examples:
"Sometimes a traveler in the wilds comes to a strangely beautiful tower, meets its fey lord or lady, and stumbles into a pact without being fully aware of it."
"Sometimes, while poring over tomes of forbidden lore, a brilliant student’s mind is opened to realities beyond the material world and to the alien beings that dwell in the outer void."
"The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it."
You don't have to be a wheeling and dealing salesman or negotiator to be a Warlock; that is such an unnecessary limitation on what the class can be.
Sure but you still have to be daring and brash (which is CHA), to seek out & read strange forbidden mysterious tomes and try to use the secrets within to draw power from an eldritch being who could squash you like a bug.
You not a careful, studious, methodological academic like an Artificer or Wizard.
daring and brash is chaotic alignment. i'll admit that 'confidence' is right in the charisma description, but 'easily bored' or 'sloppy' is not. an example of lawful high-CHA would be the trope of the tall, prim, narrow-eyed secondary anime guy as a secretary of some sort with the clipboard and always pushing their small eyeglasses back up the bridge of their nose, beloved by many but fending off all offers that are not strictly business related. a more neutral high-CHA might be a merchant, often dealing but never pulling [social] levers just to see what happens.
also, plenty of artificers are played as lego-master tornadoes. i think it's a failed wisdom check (not even low wisdom, necessarily) that leads someone to talk to the disembodied voices past the caution tape, the nailed boards, the locks, and the pleading ghosts of weaker-willed mages in the library's restricted section.
Ordinary stat optimization for a warlock on point build is 16 charisma, 14 dexterity, 14 constitution, and then either 12/12/8 or 12/10/10 for the remaining ability scores. Yes, you won't be a sage like that... but that's because that's not what the warlock is. The whole point of the warlock is taking shortcuts to power, a sage who carefully studied what they were going to do isn't a warlock.
That's exactly the misconception we're challenging, yes. The class description literally says you can be a brilliant student poring over tomes.
And having 14-16 INT doesn't count as "brilliant" when the average INT is 10? If you want to have a high INT score, you can! This has been repeatedly shown, and you can take INT skills as a Warlock and have a Sage/Scholar background if it means that much to you. And none of that will change the fact that the core trope of the class is making a deal with another being for power, even if that's not the only possible backstory you can give the character.
It also says your power can come FROM said tomes, or from the entities that you make contact with through them. You're not just smart incidentally or orthogonally to your power source, they can be directly linked. This is even more true with the OneD&D Warlock, which has you learning magical techniques before you pact with a patron.
My issue isn't that Warlocks can't have 14-16 Int, it's that having that benefits nothing they get from their class. Being able to choose Int as your casting stat would let you roleplay that kind of Warlock without ludonarrative dissonance.
I don't think there was ever true agreement, really. I know I just got tired of being accused of trying to run everyone else's tables and characters because I felt a class who is explicitly defined by a deal made by one means or another generally fits CHA more than INT, and that classes should have boundaries and fixed points rather than being "just do whatever".
And don't @ me over this, I have no interest in rehashing the same argument yet again. As I said, I'm tired of going over it.
Not all pacts are deals. That is the conflation you keep wrongly making. The PHB even gives multiple examples:
"Sometimes a traveler in the wilds comes to a strangely beautiful tower, meets its fey lord or lady, and stumbles into a pact without being fully aware of it."
"Sometimes, while poring over tomes of forbidden lore, a brilliant student’s mind is opened to realities beyond the material world and to the alien beings that dwell in the outer void."
"The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it."
You don't have to be a wheeling and dealing salesman or negotiator to be a Warlock; that is such an unnecessary limitation on what the class can be.
Sure but you still have to be daring and brash (which is CHA), to seek out & read strange forbidden mysterious tomes and try to use the secrets within to draw power from an eldritch being who could squash you like a bug.
You not a careful, studious, methodological academic like an Artificer or Wizard.
daring and brash is chaotic alignment. i'll admit that 'confidence' is right in the charisma description, but 'easily bored' or 'sloppy' is not. an example of lawful high-CHA would be the trope of the tall, prim, narrow-eyed secondary anime guy as a secretary of some sort with the clipboard and always pushing their small eyeglasses back up the bridge of their nose, beloved by many but fending off all offers that are not strictly business related. a more neutral high-CHA might be a merchant, often dealing but never pulling [social] levers just to see what happens.
also, plenty of artificers are played as lego-master tornadoes. i think it's a failed wisdom check (not even low wisdom, necessarily) that leads someone to talk to the disembodied voices past the caution tape, the nailed boards, the locks, and the pleading ghosts of weaker-willed mages in the library's restricted section.
However, the entire point of the Warlock is that you aren’t using power you’ve methodically conducted independent studies to acquire, as with a Wizard or Artificer. You have made contact with a being of power and- generally speaking because casting stats are general concepts- entered into a transactional relationship to ensure continued access to and development of the power. Which, despite certain strawman assertions to the contrary, does not compel anyone to play a village idiot. It’s just a matter of the fact that when taken as an archetype, the concepts for the class do not favor the interpretation that your proficiency with magic comes from rigorous study and research; they come from your relationship with another being and CHA is the stat most commonly associated with relationships. And not just the horny kind, so let’s please not invoke that strawman again either.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Y'know what else gets tiring? Constantly being told that the only character archetype allowed to have an Intelligence score higher than 8 is the studious, snobby, noodle-armed and weak-spined Scholarly Archmage that hates leaving their stuffy, book-filled tower for any reason and constantly complains the entire campaign about how uncivilized the whole thing is.
Meanwhile half the game is mechanically required to be ranging pornhounds.
Love baked-in anti-intellectualism. Always makes a girl feel special, knowing that being intelligent and mentally capable is actively looked down upon as a detriment.
Please do not contact or message me.
Have you considered the possibility that your play group is a bit toxic? Yeah, Int isn't terribly useful to most PCs, mostly because knowledge checks are routinely metagamed ("Your character has never met a troll before. Why don't you make a Nature check before you use your torch..."), but there's always going to be something plausible as a dump stat, dump stats aren't actually that critical, and IME Intelligence isn't a more common dump stat than Strength or Charisma.
It has everything to do with style of play for 95% of the tables. And with the stat system most people use, yeah you kind of have to dump int. Not as in forced to but in that it is really really mechanically bad not to. You can maybe swing a 12 but that wont fit the sage thing people are likely going for. And even if it were just one stat int just fits the class 1000000000X better.
Not all pacts are deals. That is the conflation you keep wrongly making. The PHB even gives multiple examples:
"Sometimes a traveler in the wilds comes to a strangely beautiful tower, meets its fey lord or lady, and stumbles into a pact without being fully aware of it."
"Sometimes, while poring over tomes of forbidden lore, a brilliant student’s mind is opened to realities beyond the material world and to the alien beings that dwell in the outer void."
"The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it."
You don't have to be a wheeling and dealing salesman or negotiator to be a Warlock; that is such an unnecessary limitation on what the class can be.
You know, I could have sworn I said don't @ me because I didn't want to run through the same circles again. Must have been hallucinating
If you don't want people replying to you, I would recommend posting on a blog instead of a public discussion forum.
Ordinary stat optimization for a warlock on point build is 16 charisma, 14 dexterity, 14 constitution, and then either 12/12/8 or 12/10/10 for the remaining ability scores. Yes, you won't be a sage like that... but that's because that's not what the warlock is. The whole point of the warlock is taking shortcuts to power, a sage who carefully studied what they were going to do isn't a warlock.
Even though I also feel quite disappointed with the conservatism of the D&D community (that is, any minimally significant change is heavily criticized), in all honesty I believe that the main reason why no changes can be made is not this forum. Neither is Reedit. The main cause is the "influencers" of D&D. In the same way that society in general looks at the mass media to know what to think, a very significant part of the D&D community watches YouTube to know what to think about the latest playtest. Almost no one tries anything. Many people don't even read the documents. They fill out the survey based on what someone says on YouTube.
The highlight of this was when J. Crawford met with several of them, and they literally cornered him to make everything "backwards compatible." And do you know how you can make something fully backward compatible? Not making significant changes.
And, honestly, the DEX and CON are negotiable unless you're going Bladelock. Yes it's less than "strictly optimal", but as a backrow caster you shouldn't be looking at enough hits that 1 point of AC or a couple points of HP and 1 extra to your concentration saves is making that much difference for you in practical play as opposed to white room number crunching, especially if you make use of cover. If you want to play a bookish scholar Warlock, just drop DEX or CON to 12 or 10 and dump STR at 8, depending how many points you need to feel properly erudite. You can literally do STR 8, DEX 14/12, CON 12/14, INT 15, WIS 10, CHA 16 out of the gate with point-buy. If you can spare another two points somewhere, you can even hit 16 INT and CHA out of the gate.
That's exactly the misconception we're challenging, yes. The class description literally says you can be a brilliant student poring over tomes.
Okay here are Faustian Bargain Feats. I gave it a name based on D&D lore.
BYSERAIN BARGAIN
1st-Level Feat
Prerequisite: None Repeatable: No
You have made a deal with a powerful, possibly otherworldly being(s) (work it out with your DM who or what this being may be) for the purpose of gaining knowledge, power, or riches. You gain one of the following benefits:
Knowledge. You may choose to learn one 1st level spell from any spell list. You may cast that spell once without using a spell slot and may use any spell slots you have to cast the spell. You regain your ability to cast the spell without a spell slot when you complete a Long Rest. Your Spellcasting Ability for the spell is Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma. You choose when you select this feat. Additionally you gain proficiency in one skill of choice. When you gain a level you may change the the 1st level spell, your spellcasting ability for the spell, or your skill proficiency.
Power. When you hit a creature with an attack roll or it fails a saving throw from one of your spells you can make that creature suffer 2d4 Force damage. You may only use this feature once per turn and a total number of times equal to your Proficiency bonus. You regain all uses when you complete a long rest.
Riches. You gain 100 gold coins or a number of objects that cost up to 100 gold. These coins or objects all have a marking or symbol of the being(s) that granted them to you on them. These items are permanently cursed. If they are more than 100 ft from you for more than 10 days they appear within 100ft of you in the closest unoccupied space when you complete a long rest. A detect magic spell will identify that the gold or objects are magical and have a conjuration aura. An identify spell will Identify the nature of the curse that always returns the gold or objects to you in 10 days.
BYSERAIN CONTRACT
4th-Level Feat
Prerequisite: Byserian Bargain Repeatable: No
Ability Score Increase. Increase your Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma score by 1
Contract Boon. The terms of your deal improve for better or worse with the powerful, possibly otherworldly being(s). You gain one of the following benefits it does not have to be connected to your Byserian Bargain choice:
And having 14-16 INT doesn't count as "brilliant" when the average INT is 10? If you want to have a high INT score, you can! This has been repeatedly shown, and you can take INT skills as a Warlock and have a Sage/Scholar background if it means that much to you. And none of that will change the fact that the core trope of the class is making a deal with another being for power, even if that's not the only possible backstory you can give the character.
Yurei the hyperbole from you is crazy. I’ve literally read a post were you called the game in general “dogsh!t” and then in another post told someone you want to keep playing the D&D because it’s the game you and your table like.
Your character idea of an occultist can be play as a bunch of other classes. Honestly Warlock doesn’t sound like the class you should be playing except that you want a couple spells specific to Warlock. In 5e there is an occultist and haunted one Background, and I’m sure you can figure out how to make something similar, if not better in 5eR. Shadow and Divine Sorcerer would work well with some flavor, but you don’t want a 12 Int you want to be the smartest in the room. So I offer to you any Artificer. They have unique infusions that can’t be replicated that could be flavored as rare occult items or the imbuing of old Magics long lost. And you get to be a genius.
Let me be clear, you are wrong. The reason spell power was lacking is because you no longer had the same level of spells as full casters at the appropriate level and it got worse as you approached level 9. Then at 11th it goes away and you actually start catching a full caster. The reason MA had to be a part of Invocations is because if it wasn’t you need to give the Warlock almost no invocations or you end up with a literally overpowered mess. I know this because I literally took the time to write up the class in this format. It was bad. I even tried with 1/3 caster with MA slots that gave you access to one slot of full caster levels at the appropriate time and even that felt like too much if I still allowed 8 invocations.
It’s not interesting when they admit all the boons weren’t of the same level of power and they have no intention of fixing that. It means you clearly are expected to take the more powerful boons or you are nerfing yourself
Blade Pact shouldn’t be the in the top 3 Martials in the game while having access to eldritch blast and spells. That’s horrendous design. Lifedrinker should be the invocation that improves the Bladelocks damage at 12th level. Just up it to a d12 and leave thirsting blade with two attacks. Also make it so Blade invocation only gives Cha to one attack and Thirsting blade is the only way to get extra attacks using Cha then you don’t have to worry about Paladins using it so they can supercharge their auras. You don’t have to nerf it into the bad Pact Boon from 2014, but you do need to balance it so it’s not simply superior to ever other build so much so that everyone dips Warlock to get some blade love. As of now it’s silly not to get at least 1 level of UA7 Warlock on you Paladin, Bard, or Sorcerer. Either for an extra spell slot with Tome or for Cha on weapon attacks with Blade.
lol I’m shocked Treantmonk got something right if he agrees with my assessment. I haven’t watched one of his videos in years since I don’t agree with most of the stuff he says. He does a lot of white room theory crafting that doesn’t matter to actual play. I want you to take the time and play out a UA7 warlock without Blade and compare it to one with Blade. Just do 3 short battles with each.
11th level UA7 Bladelock is a better Nova than UA Paladin. Hex or Spirit Shroud, 3 attacks, Lifedrinker, Eldritch Smite. Or let’s really do something the Pally can’t. Summon something first round then use it for flanking second round and lay into the enemy with everything above minus the hex or spirit shroud.
He did a gameplay test as well at high level, and the Bladelock did almost double the damage as the Beserker Barbarian.
Sure but you still have to be daring and brash (which is CHA), to seek out & read strange forbidden mysterious tomes and try to use the secrets within to draw power from an eldritch being who could squash you like a bug.
You not a careful, studious, methodological academic like an Artificer or Wizard.
I can believe that. Maybe it was a test for us. “If they can’t tell how overpowered we made this thing these surveys are pointless.” Also I guess I owe treantmonk an apology if he is doing gameplay test now a days. It’s been so long I can’t remember what he said that made me no longer watch his videos. Not like I’m going to start watching them now, but I won’t criticize him as a white room only theory crafter since that is no longer true.
daring and brash is chaotic alignment. i'll admit that 'confidence' is right in the charisma description, but 'easily bored' or 'sloppy' is not. an example of lawful high-CHA would be the trope of the tall, prim, narrow-eyed secondary anime guy as a secretary of some sort with the clipboard and always pushing their small eyeglasses back up the bridge of their nose, beloved by many but fending off all offers that are not strictly business related. a more neutral high-CHA might be a merchant, often dealing but never pulling [social] levers just to see what happens.
also, plenty of artificers are played as lego-master tornadoes. i think it's a failed wisdom check (not even low wisdom, necessarily) that leads someone to talk to the disembodied voices past the caution tape, the nailed boards, the locks, and the pleading ghosts of weaker-willed mages in the library's restricted section.
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!
It also says your power can come FROM said tomes, or from the entities that you make contact with through them. You're not just smart incidentally or orthogonally to your power source, they can be directly linked. This is even more true with the OneD&D Warlock, which has you learning magical techniques before you pact with a patron.
My issue isn't that Warlocks can't have 14-16 Int, it's that having that benefits nothing they get from their class. Being able to choose Int as your casting stat would let you roleplay that kind of Warlock without ludonarrative dissonance.
However, the entire point of the Warlock is that you aren’t using power you’ve methodically conducted independent studies to acquire, as with a Wizard or Artificer. You have made contact with a being of power and- generally speaking because casting stats are general concepts- entered into a transactional relationship to ensure continued access to and development of the power. Which, despite certain strawman assertions to the contrary, does not compel anyone to play a village idiot. It’s just a matter of the fact that when taken as an archetype, the concepts for the class do not favor the interpretation that your proficiency with magic comes from rigorous study and research; they come from your relationship with another being and CHA is the stat most commonly associated with relationships. And not just the horny kind, so let’s please not invoke that strawman again either.