I mean, you can get casting stat to attack even without a dip now thanks to the new Shillelagh (and possibly True Strike depending on where they land with it.)
Also, potentially, via Eldritch Adept. It definitely seems like they are moving in the direction of "SAD gish isn't so special." Which does mean it can't be the primary concept for a whole subclass, but maybe that was never a good idea.
I think dipping for cha being sad is fine. I think only having to dip 1 level for it is not fine. That should require 3 levels like most other good things to poach. Having paladin auras be as good as they are AND enable their melee attacks is...not ok. Of course, if Warlocks were INT like they were originally designed to be, rather than CHA, this would not be as major of an issue.
I mean, you can get casting stat to attack even without a dip now thanks to the new Shillelagh (and possibly True Strike depending on where they land with it.) So I still don't think a level 1 dip for it is a big deal; I just want a weapon restriction and to leave masteries with the martials where they belong.
Shillelagh is just such a poorly designed spell, and is really a class feature masquerading as a spell. But because of its existence, and the free 1st level feat, we're going to see so many builds based on it now. Bladesingers will become Staff-Dancers, Swords-Bards will be Nunchuck-Bards, while Valor Bards will be Flag pole-Bards, Clerics and Druids will be staff users, and probably even a number of Rangers will wield a walking stick.
I think you vastly overestimate how many people will look at the spell and think “I want to use that on my martial character”; it’s been an option for Monks for a decade already and I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone float it as an option.
Also, this is a great argument for why keeping the casting stat tied to the spell list on Magic Initiate is mechanically helpful as well as thematically on point.
I think dipping for cha being sad is fine. I think only having to dip 1 level for it is not fine. That should require 3 levels like most other good things to poach. Having paladin auras be as good as they are AND enable their melee attacks is...not ok. Of course, if Warlocks were INT like they were originally designed to be, rather than CHA, this would not be as major of an issue.
I mean, you can get casting stat to attack even without a dip now thanks to the new Shillelagh (and possibly True Strike depending on where they land with it.) So I still don't think a level 1 dip for it is a big deal; I just want a weapon restriction and to leave masteries with the martials where they belong.
To be fair, I mentioned this earlier in this thread or maybe the paladin one. It's starting to run together. I had forgotten about paladins using a feat to pick up true strike too. SAD paladins are just pure power creep, but here we are.
EDIT: Should clarify that True Strike would prevent multi-attack, so that's really not so bad.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
If a SAD Paladin is an example of power creep, then it’s creeping with all the speed of a glacier; straight Divine Smite remains the best damage option and ties up the Bonus Action, and you still need to invest enough points for AC that the difference in spread is not dramatic, particularly when there’s little to nothing else in the kit to synergize with it. Probably the most direct benefit you can get is an extra +1 from CON, except Paladins already are covering both the save and the HP angles with other features, so the boost is underwhelming.
I think you vastly overestimate how many people will look at the spell and think “I want to use that on my martial character”; it’s been an option for Monks for a decade already and I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone float it as an option.
Also, this is a great argument for why keeping the casting stat tied to the spell list on Magic Initiate is mechanically helpful as well as thematically on point.
monk can't really give up dex, its tied to AC as well as damage.
Plus monks BA is high value, and many subclasses are tied to FOB which has nothing for shillelag
for monk its not really a serious option
I might use it on an Astral monk early on while my dex is is low, but its not a great fit, and they made it one minute instead of 10, so less precasting potential.
I think you vastly overestimate how many people will look at the spell and think “I want to use that on my martial character”; it’s been an option for Monks for a decade already and I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone float it as an option.
Also, this is a great argument for why keeping the casting stat tied to the spell list on Magic Initiate is mechanically helpful as well as thematically on point.
I agree with the former, and a big reason why it's not seen as a big deal is the weapon restrictions. Well, that and the fact that you have to turn it on every combat. They've overtuned it with double-scaling in the latest UA though to Greataxe/Greatsword damage, so if it goes live that way I'd expect to see it show up in more builds. Rather than Monk, I'd expect it to show up on a melee ranger, especially Fey Wanderer which will be core now, as unlike monk they can get by with 14 Dex and medium armor to focus on Wis. Though it's worth noting that quarterstaffs don't work with Polearm Master anymore.
Regarding the latter, I disagree - I don't think fearing shillelagh is a good enough reason to make the new Magic Initiate work differently than literally every other "learn more spells" feat they've been designing since Tasha's. This kind of consistency in design is important.
The other "learn more spells" feats aren't explicitly drawing on class spell lists; if the whole point of the feat is you're learning to cast a spell like that class, then why aren't you using the ability that class uses to cast spells, aside from the fact it doesn't let you make as many optimized builds? Plus the other options are far less versatile; you're usually restricted to a specific pool of spells, and in the few cases you're not it's still restricted by school. Plus it will curtail these concerns that making the casting stat wildcard creates broken combinations.
The other "learn more spells" feats aren't explicitly drawing on class spell lists; if the whole point of the feat is you're learning to cast a spell like that class, then why aren't you using the ability that class uses to cast spells, aside from the fact it doesn't let you make as many optimized builds? Plus the other options are far less versatile; you're usually restricted to a specific pool of spells, and in the few cases you're not it's still restricted by school. Plus it will curtail these concerns that making the casting stat wildcard creates broken combinations.
I have to agree with this. While letting you use your caster stat to juice those cantrips up is nice, you should be playing it as though it's part of that class. That's a sacrifice that should be made when you pick the feat.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
The other "learn more spells" feats aren't explicitly drawing on class spell lists; if the whole point of the feat is you're learning to cast a spell like that class, then why aren't you using the ability that class uses to cast spells, aside from the fact it doesn't let you make as many optimized builds? Plus the other options are far less versatile; you're usually restricted to a specific pool of spells, and in the few cases you're not it's still restricted by school. Plus it will curtail these concerns that making the casting stat wildcard creates broken combinations.
I don't share those concerns about "broken combinations," I think they're overblown. As far as why you should be allowed to cast those low-level spells with any stat - they're low-level spells, they don't need a lot of orthodoxy to learn.
I don't think we're going to see eye to eye so best for us to just wait and see what version of Magic Initiate (and Eldritch Adept for that matter) end up in the new PHB.
I think you vastly overestimate how many people will look at the spell and think “I want to use that on my martial character”; it’s been an option for Monks for a decade already and I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone float it as an option.
Also, this is a great argument for why keeping the casting stat tied to the spell list on Magic Initiate is mechanically helpful as well as thematically on point.
There are two reasons why Monks currently don't use it (1) It will never affect their unarmed strikes which are 1/3-1/2 of their damage per turn, (2) it would cost them an ASI which they really want to boost their DEX/WIS.
The new Magic Initiate is so broken. I expect at least 50% of characters to be taking it as their 1st level feat. Everyone who doesn't have Shield on their spell list will take it to get Shield (and probably pick up True Strike at the same time), and everyone who doesn't have Healing Word on their spell list will take it to get Healing Word (and probably pick up Shillelagh & either Guidance or Resistance at the same time).
I think you vastly overestimate how many people will look at the spell and think “I want to use that on my martial character”; it’s been an option for Monks for a decade already and I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone float it as an option.
Also, this is a great argument for why keeping the casting stat tied to the spell list on Magic Initiate is mechanically helpful as well as thematically on point.
There are two reasons why Monks currently don't use it (1) It will never affect their unarmed strikes which are 1/3-1/2 of their damage per turn, (2) it would cost them an ASI which they really want to boost their DEX/WIS.
The new Magic Initiate is so broken. I expect at least 50% of characters to be taking it as their 1st level feat. Everyone who doesn't have Shield on their spell list will take it to get Shield (and probably pick up True Strike at the same time), and everyone who doesn't have Healing Word on their spell list will take it to get Healing Word (and probably pick up Shillelagh & either Guidance or Resistance at the same time).
I disagree because Lucky, alert, and getting medium armor and a shield are all options as well.
I'll say one more time; Finesse needs a little more support in the Mastery system, because essentially your only options are TWF with a Scimitar and a Shortsword if you need to free up your Bonus Action, TWF with two Shortswords otherwise, or use a Rapier with pretty much only Vex. The Whip with Slow technically exists, but Whips have always been niche and Slow is probably the least engaging mastery option atm. Getting one more mastery option on the table would do a lot to allow finesse Fighters to properly embrace the modularity of the system.
Unarmed should be finesse. Just because every damn action movie for 20 years had a scene where the commando hero sneaks up on a enemy and snapped their neck. Rogues need to get neck snapping powers.
Narratively it doesn’t make any more sense for Warlocks to not “officially” make their Pact until 3rd level than it does for Clerics to not “officially” have their Domain until then; both classes are strongly if not wholly defined by sourcing their magic from a particular being, and the “you’re working up to it” argument doesn’t really hold up for the same reason that Fighters aren’t treated as squires for their first two levels, Bards aren’t still considered apprentices, etc. Level 1 in a class is supposed to be a fully fledged character in all of the truly basic/core components of the class, which is why you pick all of your skills and get all of your other profs out of the gate. Now, mechanically I understand it can frontload the features too much, although the current Pact of the Blade format still leaves one of the biggest reasons to dip Warlock nearly unchanged.
Regarding Short Rests, imo part of the problem is honestly that people take “there’s no right way to play D&D” a little too far. As much as the game is freeform- which is definitely a positive- it’s still a hard RPG and therefore built around certain assumptions and checks and balances. One of those is that sequences of multiple encounters per Long Rest will be broken up by one or more Short Rests. This is not a fundamentally unreasonable assumption for game design; most video games use the same principle, particularly before a major fight. That short rests exist and are expected to be utilized at least once during most multi-encounter days is not a flaw. Now, the degree to which Monks and Warlocks can be handicapped without any Short Rests has proven to be a flaw, but the secondary refresh features are doing a lot to address that. That said, at least 1 Short Rest in a typical 3+ encounter day is not an unreasonable or unworkable baseline assumption for game design and balance purposes. Game features exist to be used, and if either of the table is choosing not to utilize them, then it’s not surprising if some elements of play start to break down.
Everything is base din how its written. There is nothing wrong with using the fluff to make levels 1-2 a arcanist without a patron, they just have to write it that way. The weirdness comes from the pacts of the blade etc being level 1. But that can be written into the fluff as well.
Oaths have some wiggle room, like Druid Circles; they’re more philosophical than directly representative of discrete beings, whereas a Warlock or Cleric is supposed to be very closely tied to their patron/deity as the direct source of their powers. I understand the mechanical reasoning behind the decision, but it bugs me some.
The idea is that the Warlock does not get all their powers from the Patron. The Cleric does, but deities have access to multiple overlapping areas of focus, and the Domain represents the one they've chosen (or that you've asked) to be aligned to you.
Some of the abilities are very express about not being from the patron in the 2014 version. We wont know how the fluff of the warlock pans out in one for a bit.
I don't want AB to require level 5, that's overly punishing.
They just need to stop EB from scaling with character level like other cantrips.
The issue is then it would be very unique text by comparison.
Unique text wouldn't be an issue if they just made it a class feature, and that seems to be what they've been pushing towards it being lately anyway.
Not that I'm a fan of eldritch blast being a core feature, as I've wanted Warlocks to become less single cantrip focused, i.e- make Agonizing Blast once per turn damage rather than per attack so it works for any cantrip, making repulsing blast etc. cantrip agnostic and so-on.
I was much more interested by the idea of hex as a core Warlock feature, i.e- grant it as standard, make it once per turn scaled damage, add in some invocations specific to it (improved maddening and relentless hex, maybe a higher level one to lift the concentration, another to add extra debuffs etc.) so it becomes a real part of the toolkit, as it's a spell that any Warlock could use.
With 3-4 good invocations it would mean a good number of new options alongside EB invocations becoming cantrip agnostic. While a lot of Warlocks might still be mostly cantrip blasters, at least it could be a different cantrip, and they could bolster them in more interesting ways.
I want eldritch blast to become a cantrip modifier instead of its own cantrip. Basically make it an ability to split cantrips damage into multiple attacks instead of its own cantrip. They would gain another level of eldritch blast at each die up level of cantrips. So like maybe fiend locks would learn fire bolt or poison spray and at level 5 shoot 2 fire bolts, that shove people back 10 feet each.
I think you vastly overestimate how many people will look at the spell and think “I want to use that on my martial character”; it’s been an option for Monks for a decade already and I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone float it as an option.
Also, this is a great argument for why keeping the casting stat tied to the spell list on Magic Initiate is mechanically helpful as well as thematically on point.
There are two reasons why Monks currently don't use it (1) It will never affect their unarmed strikes which are 1/3-1/2 of their damage per turn, (2) it would cost them an ASI which they really want to boost their DEX/WIS.
The new Magic Initiate is so broken. I expect at least 50% of characters to be taking it as their 1st level feat. Everyone who doesn't have Shield on their spell list will take it to get Shield (and probably pick up True Strike at the same time), and everyone who doesn't have Healing Word on their spell list will take it to get Healing Word (and probably pick up Shillelagh & either Guidance or Resistance at the same time).
I disagree because Lucky, alert, and getting medium armor and a shield are all options as well.
Not to mention Fighting Styles (I'll happily start the game with TWF and Blind Fighting on several builds, or Defense and Archery), or the plethora of other Background feats we've gotten since Strixhaven.
Besides which, Shillelagh on a monk isn't nearly as good as it sounds - your bonus action attacks are still unarmed strikes, which still use Dex, so you need to keep that high anyway so you might as well just... stick with Dex. And the one true Wis-based Monk, Astral Self, doesn't need a quarterstaff at all.
On the subject of Fighting Styles, they should drop the requirement for the feature. It's not like the vast majority of classes that don't get the feature would benefit much from one, and there's no pressing need to fence Barbarians away from them. Plus, making Fighting Styles accessible provides a backdoor option for meeting Bastion pre-reqs outside of your class without sacrificing level progression. I remember there were a few people who were very loudly upset that a Monk couldn't access the Divine facilities or an Arcana Cleric couldn't access the Mage ones. Setting up 1st level feats to backdoor into them seems like a good way to allow for that kind of customization while still maintaining a simple but clear degree of separation for the specialized facilities. Having Magic Initiate give use of the corresponding foci covers the magic facilities; granted, there's currently no option for Expertise in the UA. Skill Expert does exist, though it's not in core and you'd be getting into a grey area of RAW; honestly, I'm surprised they never gave an Expertise option for a feat. Really though, I've never been fully clear on what the state of feats is.
More reasons why agonizing blast doesn't really need to be a first level thing. True strike works with bows. A warlock can just use a crossbow and true strike if it wants to do damage that way. Or a decent dex and just a crossbow does fine as well.
Even with AB being a level 5 feature I do think Tome based warlock needs more than just EB to be enticing to higher levels (that isn't the blade lock, I feel blade lock is sufficiently enticed....).
I'll say one more time; Finesse needs a little more support in the Mastery system, because essentially your only options are TWF with a Scimitar and a Shortsword if you need to free up your Bonus Action, TWF with two Shortswords otherwise, or use a Rapier with pretty much only Vex. The Whip with Slow technically exists, but Whips have always been niche and Slow is probably the least engaging mastery option atm. Getting one more mastery option on the table would do a lot to allow finesse Fighters to properly embrace the modularity of the system.
Unarmed should be finesse. Just because every damn action movie for 20 years had a scene where the commando hero sneaks up on a enemy and snapped their neck. Rogues need to get neck snapping powers.
That's covered under the "coup de grace" rules (I think that's what it's called) which is among the optional rules in the DMG if I remember correctly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Also, potentially, via Eldritch Adept. It definitely seems like they are moving in the direction of "SAD gish isn't so special." Which does mean it can't be the primary concept for a whole subclass, but maybe that was never a good idea.
Shillelagh is just such a poorly designed spell, and is really a class feature masquerading as a spell. But because of its existence, and the free 1st level feat, we're going to see so many builds based on it now. Bladesingers will become Staff-Dancers, Swords-Bards will be Nunchuck-Bards, while Valor Bards will be Flag pole-Bards, Clerics and Druids will be staff users, and probably even a number of Rangers will wield a walking stick.
I think you vastly overestimate how many people will look at the spell and think “I want to use that on my martial character”; it’s been an option for Monks for a decade already and I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone float it as an option.
Also, this is a great argument for why keeping the casting stat tied to the spell list on Magic Initiate is mechanically helpful as well as thematically on point.
To be fair, I mentioned this earlier in this thread or maybe the paladin one. It's starting to run together. I had forgotten about paladins using a feat to pick up true strike too. SAD paladins are just pure power creep, but here we are.
EDIT: Should clarify that True Strike would prevent multi-attack, so that's really not so bad.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
If a SAD Paladin is an example of power creep, then it’s creeping with all the speed of a glacier; straight Divine Smite remains the best damage option and ties up the Bonus Action, and you still need to invest enough points for AC that the difference in spread is not dramatic, particularly when there’s little to nothing else in the kit to synergize with it. Probably the most direct benefit you can get is an extra +1 from CON, except Paladins already are covering both the save and the HP angles with other features, so the boost is underwhelming.
monk can't really give up dex, its tied to AC as well as damage.
Plus monks BA is high value, and many subclasses are tied to FOB which has nothing for shillelag
for monk its not really a serious option
I might use it on an Astral monk early on while my dex is is low, but its not a great fit, and they made it one minute instead of 10, so less precasting potential.
I agree with the former, and a big reason why it's not seen as a big deal is the weapon restrictions. Well, that and the fact that you have to turn it on every combat. They've overtuned it with double-scaling in the latest UA though to Greataxe/Greatsword damage, so if it goes live that way I'd expect to see it show up in more builds. Rather than Monk, I'd expect it to show up on a melee ranger, especially Fey Wanderer which will be core now, as unlike monk they can get by with 14 Dex and medium armor to focus on Wis. Though it's worth noting that quarterstaffs don't work with Polearm Master anymore.
Regarding the latter, I disagree - I don't think fearing shillelagh is a good enough reason to make the new Magic Initiate work differently than literally every other "learn more spells" feat they've been designing since Tasha's. This kind of consistency in design is important.
The other "learn more spells" feats aren't explicitly drawing on class spell lists; if the whole point of the feat is you're learning to cast a spell like that class, then why aren't you using the ability that class uses to cast spells, aside from the fact it doesn't let you make as many optimized builds? Plus the other options are far less versatile; you're usually restricted to a specific pool of spells, and in the few cases you're not it's still restricted by school. Plus it will curtail these concerns that making the casting stat wildcard creates broken combinations.
I have to agree with this. While letting you use your caster stat to juice those cantrips up is nice, you should be playing it as though it's part of that class. That's a sacrifice that should be made when you pick the feat.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I don't share those concerns about "broken combinations," I think they're overblown. As far as why you should be allowed to cast those low-level spells with any stat - they're low-level spells, they don't need a lot of orthodoxy to learn.
I don't think we're going to see eye to eye so best for us to just wait and see what version of Magic Initiate (and Eldritch Adept for that matter) end up in the new PHB.
There are two reasons why Monks currently don't use it (1) It will never affect their unarmed strikes which are 1/3-1/2 of their damage per turn, (2) it would cost them an ASI which they really want to boost their DEX/WIS.
The new Magic Initiate is so broken. I expect at least 50% of characters to be taking it as their 1st level feat. Everyone who doesn't have Shield on their spell list will take it to get Shield (and probably pick up True Strike at the same time), and everyone who doesn't have Healing Word on their spell list will take it to get Healing Word (and probably pick up Shillelagh & either Guidance or Resistance at the same time).
I disagree because Lucky, alert, and getting medium armor and a shield are all options as well.
Unarmed should be finesse. Just because every damn action movie for 20 years had a scene where the commando hero sneaks up on a enemy and snapped their neck. Rogues need to get neck snapping powers.
Everything is base din how its written. There is nothing wrong with using the fluff to make levels 1-2 a arcanist without a patron, they just have to write it that way. The weirdness comes from the pacts of the blade etc being level 1. But that can be written into the fluff as well.
Some of the abilities are very express about not being from the patron in the 2014 version. We wont know how the fluff of the warlock pans out in one for a bit.
I want eldritch blast to become a cantrip modifier instead of its own cantrip. Basically make it an ability to split cantrips damage into multiple attacks instead of its own cantrip. They would gain another level of eldritch blast at each die up level of cantrips. So like maybe fiend locks would learn fire bolt or poison spray and at level 5 shoot 2 fire bolts, that shove people back 10 feet each.
Not to mention Fighting Styles (I'll happily start the game with TWF and Blind Fighting on several builds, or Defense and Archery), or the plethora of other Background feats we've gotten since Strixhaven.
Besides which, Shillelagh on a monk isn't nearly as good as it sounds - your bonus action attacks are still unarmed strikes, which still use Dex, so you need to keep that high anyway so you might as well just... stick with Dex. And the one true Wis-based Monk, Astral Self, doesn't need a quarterstaff at all.
On the subject of Fighting Styles, they should drop the requirement for the feature. It's not like the vast majority of classes that don't get the feature would benefit much from one, and there's no pressing need to fence Barbarians away from them. Plus, making Fighting Styles accessible provides a backdoor option for meeting Bastion pre-reqs outside of your class without sacrificing level progression. I remember there were a few people who were very loudly upset that a Monk couldn't access the Divine facilities or an Arcana Cleric couldn't access the Mage ones. Setting up 1st level feats to backdoor into them seems like a good way to allow for that kind of customization while still maintaining a simple but clear degree of separation for the specialized facilities. Having Magic Initiate give use of the corresponding foci covers the magic facilities; granted, there's currently no option for Expertise in the UA. Skill Expert does exist, though it's not in core and you'd be getting into a grey area of RAW; honestly, I'm surprised they never gave an Expertise option for a feat. Really though, I've never been fully clear on what the state of feats is.
More reasons why agonizing blast doesn't really need to be a first level thing. True strike works with bows. A warlock can just use a crossbow and true strike if it wants to do damage that way. Or a decent dex and just a crossbow does fine as well.
Even with AB being a level 5 feature I do think Tome based warlock needs more than just EB to be enticing to higher levels (that isn't the blade lock, I feel blade lock is sufficiently enticed....).
That's covered under the "coup de grace" rules (I think that's what it's called) which is among the optional rules in the DMG if I remember correctly.