Do a mental exercise. Read the class description again as if you didn't know what the class's main score ability is. Would you think it's Char? I highly doubt it, frankly. You would think it was Int.
It's as simple as that.
I mean, if we’re white rooming this I wouldn’t attribute any printed attributes to the class.
So, the class reads like it could have a flexible casting stat then? Great, that's what the point of this thread was.
But, then, I’m not reading it looking for confirmation that it should be INT, so that might be skewing my perception.
No, but you've definitely been reading it (or in my suspicion just not reading it) looking for confirmation that intelligence doesn't....no not doesn't...CAN'T matter to it at all. So far you've provided nada. I had to kind of laugh at this one too btw; we've only read it "looking for confirmation that it should be INT" to provide because of all the blatantly ignoring of the glaring examples that are throughout the entire class. I mean, as has been demonstrated, the class was WRITTEN in 5e to be intelligence originally. But you're gonna go "nah...not valid...you must just be intentionally looking for those things"?
He is introduced to you as a bookworm whose only goal in life is to gain knowledge and power. Could you introduce a Warlock archetype that is a mass leader, for example? Could. And that would be a logical character to have char as his main ability score. But that is not the warlock that the game proposes. And he's not the archetypal warlock of the collective subconscious either, to be frank.
That is not at all what I took away from the description of the warlock, a bookworm that seeks to just gain knowledge and power is a Wizard. Warlocks always felt like the Goths of the D&D world, just really into crazy weird stuff because it makes them feel cool, and special, and powerful. They are cultists, cult-leaders, proselytizers for their patron. The people with pink mohawks, and too much eyeliner that you can't help staring at, just cause they're so weird and have to confidence to show their weirdness.
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A multitude of examples of the warlock class being directly described as driven by a hunger for knowledge have already been provided (pulled straight from the class description). If you say you read the warlock's class text and missed all of those descriptions then you didn't actually read the class.
Being a cult leader is referenced as a possibility literally only once. The rest of your impression provided is pulled from absolutely nowhere but yourself. I have no problem with those warlocks, but there is nothing to support that that is what a warlock IS.
Also, wisdom (arguably stupidly named) has nothing to do in dnd with how wise or what common sense one has; let alone that there is also nothing in the class description or mechanics that states or even implies making a pact with another being is inherently a dumb, lazy, or even risky thing or bad idea to do. The people that argue that it is are also just pulling that from their biased preconceptions and then trying to force those preconceptions on others.
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
No stat would require one of two options. The easiest to balance is likely tying it to the highest stat on the character, forcing them to try to max at least one stat out. The other way is to match what is typical for a caster. +3 at level 1, +4 at level 4, and +5 at level 8 (with +6 coming on line at higher levels when stats above 20 are allowed). Forcing them to lag too far behind what is typical would result in Warlock becoming a class people avoid.
If warlocks have the option of using intelligence for their spell casting ability, what impact does that have on multiclass for possible OP combinations that would exceed current Cha multiclass situations?
Assuming flexible casting score as the only change from 5e, then this would just give Wisdom and Intelligence casters access to most of the same exploits as Charisma characters. The big ones would probably still be Hexblade for a single level dip allowing you to use your casting ability for melee attacks…
….the bigger beneficiaries are probably Eldritch Knight and Ranger, and most potentially broken might be Blade Singer who would not only have solid defence via Blade Song, better melee offence via Hexblade and more spell slots for casting shield etc. Might not be that broken given the delay in Wizard progression, but it would make Warlock an easy multiclass to recommend on basically every class
Going by the two Warlock playtests, the earlier one (half-caster and choice of scores) it doesn't matter that sub-class is delayed until 3rd-level because you don't need Hexblade for the quick benefits, as you get them from Pact of the Blade at 1st-level instead (though without Hexblade's Curse so it's not quite so bad). The later playtest (back to pact magic, boons as invocations) you can also get Pact of the Blade at first level, and by 2nd-level you can get all three pact boons which is pretty silly (as they're so much better than other invocations) but I'm not sure that's going to survive as-is (I'd wager they go back to one boon as before, and maybe a later level invocation can grant an optional second).
I’m heading out on a limb and going to say wisdom will not return if they allow flexible casting with Int.
Pacts will go back to being pacts at L1 (possibly L2), subclass at L3 - able to choose all three pacts as invocations was… interesting
if the warlock sees little change from 2014 (too hard basket) and only gains Int as a variable, what are OP multiclass builds that equal or exceed existing Cha multiclasses?
arcane trickster, eldritch knight, blade singer, what else and how crazy good could it be made with some warlock dips, or conversely how good could you make a warlock with a dip or two to any other Int subclass?
an intelligence Warlock also easily makes a dip to Wizard viable for the versatile additional spell slots like many people want.
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
No stat would require one of two options. The easiest to balance is likely tying it to the highest stat on the character, forcing them to try to max at least one stat out. The other way is to match what is typical for a caster. +3 at level 1, +4 at level 4, and +5 at level 8 (with +6 coming on line at higher levels when stats above 20 are allowed). Forcing them to lag too far behind what is typical would result in Warlock becoming a class people avoid.
No stat would clearly incentivise Warlock players to max out CON and DEX which, in my opinion, is not desired at all!
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
No stat would require one of two options. The easiest to balance is likely tying it to the highest stat on the character, forcing them to try to max at least one stat out. The other way is to match what is typical for a caster. +3 at level 1, +4 at level 4, and +5 at level 8 (with +6 coming on line at higher levels when stats above 20 are allowed). Forcing them to lag too far behind what is typical would result in Warlock becoming a class people avoid.
No stat would clearly incentivise Warlock players to max out CON and DEX which, in my opinion, is not desired at all!
Why? I'd personally be more inclined to take more feats rather than max out CON, Inspiring Leader is way more potent than increasing your Constitution modifier by 1.
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
No stat would require one of two options. The easiest to balance is likely tying it to the highest stat on the character, forcing them to try to max at least one stat out. The other way is to match what is typical for a caster. +3 at level 1, +4 at level 4, and +5 at level 8 (with +6 coming on line at higher levels when stats above 20 are allowed). Forcing them to lag too far behind what is typical would result in Warlock becoming a class people avoid.
No stat would clearly incentivise Warlock players to max out CON and DEX which, in my opinion, is not desired at all!
Why? I'd personally be more inclined to take more feats rather than max out CON, Inspiring Leader is way more potent than increasing your Constitution modifier by 1.
For a class that’s strongly dependent on holding concentration? In raw number crunching, DEX and CON are both fairly desirable stats. And being able to take more feats would arguably be fairly lopsided as well, particularly on a class that already comes with a utility suite baked into the main class.
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
No stat would require one of two options. The easiest to balance is likely tying it to the highest stat on the character, forcing them to try to max at least one stat out. The other way is to match what is typical for a caster. +3 at level 1, +4 at level 4, and +5 at level 8 (with +6 coming on line at higher levels when stats above 20 are allowed). Forcing them to lag too far behind what is typical would result in Warlock becoming a class people avoid.
No stat would clearly incentivise Warlock players to max out CON and DEX which, in my opinion, is not desired at all!
Why? I'd personally be more inclined to take more feats rather than max out CON, Inspiring Leader is way more potent than increasing your Constitution modifier by 1.
Ok maybe not max out but definitely prioritise them. So they would usually have at least 16 in both DEX and CON.
Really the only thing a Warlock should need to have is low Wisdom, though I personally favour the "I suck at everything, so begged a powerful being for power" type backstories for them. Warlock shouldn't use any ability attribute.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
No stat would require one of two options. The easiest to balance is likely tying it to the highest stat on the character, forcing them to try to max at least one stat out. The other way is to match what is typical for a caster. +3 at level 1, +4 at level 4, and +5 at level 8 (with +6 coming on line at higher levels when stats above 20 are allowed). Forcing them to lag too far behind what is typical would result in Warlock becoming a class people avoid.
No stat would clearly incentivise Warlock players to max out CON and DEX which, in my opinion, is not desired at all!
Why? I'd personally be more inclined to take more feats rather than max out CON, Inspiring Leader is way more potent than increasing your Constitution modifier by 1.
For a class that’s strongly dependent on holding concentration? In raw number crunching, DEX and CON are both fairly desirable stats. And being able to take more feats would arguably be fairly lopsided as well, particularly on a class that already comes with a utility suite baked into the main class.
Invocations are already basically feats so simply reduce the number of Invocations by 2 in order to account for them not needing to use 2 ASIs to boost their casting stat.
What I find funny having watched something on it - the 3rd party class the Apothecary is essentially built on the chassis of the Warlock as an Int caster.
I personally liked the idea of multiple options for casting stat in the UA5 Warlock, but wasn't a fan of the specific choices they made - specifically removing Cha casting as an option AT ALL for the Tomelock, but I readily admit that's because of the Tomelock I had been playing. No one wants to be told that the character they have will be either illegal or hamstrung as built by the new rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, the class reads like it could have a flexible casting stat then? Great, that's what the point of this thread was.
No, but you've definitely been reading it (or in my suspicion just not reading it) looking for confirmation that intelligence doesn't....no not doesn't...CAN'T matter to it at all. So far you've provided nada. I had to kind of laugh at this one too btw; we've only read it "looking for confirmation that it should be INT" to provide because of all the blatantly ignoring of the glaring examples that are throughout the entire class. I mean, as has been demonstrated, the class was WRITTEN in 5e to be intelligence originally. But you're gonna go "nah...not valid...you must just be intentionally looking for those things"?
A multitude of examples of the warlock class being directly described as driven by a hunger for knowledge have already been provided (pulled straight from the class description). If you say you read the warlock's class text and missed all of those descriptions then you didn't actually read the class.
Being a cult leader is referenced as a possibility literally only once. The rest of your impression provided is pulled from absolutely nowhere but yourself. I have no problem with those warlocks, but there is nothing to support that that is what a warlock IS.
Also, wisdom (arguably stupidly named) has nothing to do in dnd with how wise or what common sense one has; let alone that there is also nothing in the class description or mechanics that states or even implies making a pact with another being is inherently a dumb, lazy, or even risky thing or bad idea to do. The people that argue that it is are also just pulling that from their biased preconceptions and then trying to force those preconceptions on others.
A pact isn't necessarily hazardous to the warlock, though. Your warlock could very well be in an entirely mutually beneficial arrangement with a fey countess or genie king who has made clear, concise demands of their warlock in exchange for ancient knowledge and wisdom. I mean heck, one of the warlock patrons is a Celestial. I don't see a literal angel being particularly duplicitous with their dealings.
That said, warlock not having an ability attribute at all could be interesting. Might be the best way to interpret the class too if you really lean into the "borrowed power" warlock concept. It achieves the same flexibility that flexible casting stats allow. The only downside would be trying to balance it.
No stat would require one of two options. The easiest to balance is likely tying it to the highest stat on the character, forcing them to try to max at least one stat out. The other way is to match what is typical for a caster. +3 at level 1, +4 at level 4, and +5 at level 8 (with +6 coming on line at higher levels when stats above 20 are allowed). Forcing them to lag too far behind what is typical would result in Warlock becoming a class people avoid.
I’m heading out on a limb and going to say wisdom will not return if they allow flexible casting with Int.
Pacts will go back to being pacts at L1 (possibly L2), subclass at L3 - able to choose all three pacts as invocations was… interesting
if the warlock sees little change from 2014 (too hard basket) and only gains Int as a variable, what are OP multiclass builds that equal or exceed existing Cha multiclasses?
arcane trickster, eldritch knight, blade singer, what else and how crazy good could it be made with some warlock dips, or conversely how good could you make a warlock with a dip or two to any other Int subclass?
an intelligence Warlock also easily makes a dip to Wizard viable for the versatile additional spell slots like many people want.
No stat would clearly incentivise Warlock players to max out CON and DEX which, in my opinion, is not desired at all!
Why? I'd personally be more inclined to take more feats rather than max out CON, Inspiring Leader is way more potent than increasing your Constitution modifier by 1.
For a class that’s strongly dependent on holding concentration? In raw number crunching, DEX and CON are both fairly desirable stats. And being able to take more feats would arguably be fairly lopsided as well, particularly on a class that already comes with a utility suite baked into the main class.
Ok maybe not max out but definitely prioritise them. So they would usually have at least 16 in both DEX and CON.
Invocations are already basically feats so simply reduce the number of Invocations by 2 in order to account for them not needing to use 2 ASIs to boost their casting stat.
What I find funny having watched something on it - the 3rd party class the Apothecary is essentially built on the chassis of the Warlock as an Int caster.
I personally liked the idea of multiple options for casting stat in the UA5 Warlock, but wasn't a fan of the specific choices they made - specifically removing Cha casting as an option AT ALL for the Tomelock, but I readily admit that's because of the Tomelock I had been playing. No one wants to be told that the character they have will be either illegal or hamstrung as built by the new rules.