it's plausible for a master craftsperson to have not-sold-in-stores chemistry-adjacent trade secrets and the rogue is, as they level up, becoming a master at the craft of being a rogue (whatever that means to them). graphite for quiet door hinges, chalk powder for climbing grip, deicing for locks in winter, peroxide for tracking blood, adhesive solvent, adhesive fixative, smoke grenades, insect repellent, etc... a non-exhaustive list of chemistry potentially connected to rogue activities. the path forward to a mundane rogue having stuff isn't impossible to imagine even if sticky fingers and underworld contacts aren't accounted for. what fun.
I'm fine with all that stuff, but abstracting them into being contents of {insert tool kit} seems to me to be the way to go. I certainly have no desire to track individual sticks of chalk etc.
I wish they would replace celestial pack warlock. The whole hell so we need heaven, nature so we need aberrations thing did not land with me. I'm fine with the other 3, they were in the PH from the getgo, so it works. But I have no interest in celestial and outside a small handful of people on forums I have never seen anyone clamoring to play the celestial warlock. I'd rather have a brand new sub class than this.
<----Clamoring to play Celestial Warlock
I for one love every single non-cleric "healer" option, because there's still a lot of tables that come to D&D from other RPGs with the "we need a healer" mindset (we all know that isn't true in D&D, but it's still pervasive from other games) and having options for those new players to choose from so they don't feel locked into a single class are good. And even for experienced players, having those options is fun. I love that Stars Druid and Celestial Warlock made it into core, I only wish Divine Soul Sorcerer had made it alongside them, but that's going to be a big draw for their next subclass book.
the worst part about celestials (in general, not the warlock) is that if they were competent, manipulative, and effective then surely they could just defeat evil, right? demons and devils are locked in the blood war. instead we're left to believe they're either really subtle or else avoiding even a single other Zariel situation. and, really, sending your immortal soul to the good place sorta sells itself. lazy! gods can be complicated but celestials are alien (to me). how do you play a celestial warlock patron any other way than a boss who doesn't know what your job description is but still insists you meet some arbitrary quotas so their insatiable bosses will be pleased in them?
Do you not realize how badly outnumbered the Good Guys are? The Abyss is literally infinite, and the one thing the folks down there can agree on is destroying everyone and everything else. That's the whole reason everybody signed onto the Pact Primeval in the first place; even with Baator helping due to the Blood War, the Great Wheel is barely holding on. If the Upper planes were winning, they wouldn't need heroes like us all the time.
Keep in mind “celestials” /= “deities”, and it’s usually framed that being an actual spellcasting Cleric requires an innate quality as opposed to just being a member of the appropriate clergy, so if something like an angel, coatl, kirin, etc needs an agent they can’t give someone Cleric powers and might not have someone with the potential at hand in the first place.
Except most non-deity celestials are significantly less powerful than a level 20 Celestial Warlock would be which doesn't make a lot of sense. Fey-locks don't get their power from a random Eladrin or Satyr, they get it from an ArchFey. GOOlocks don't get their power from a Cloaker or Illithid, or Aboleth, they get is from Elder Beings in the far realms the size of planets or stars. Fiendlocks don't get their power from a Cambion or Chain Devil but from a ArchDevil or ArchDemon.
Keep in mind “celestials” /= “deities”, and it’s usually framed that being an actual spellcasting Cleric requires an innate quality as opposed to just being a member of the appropriate clergy, so if something like an angel, coatl, kirin, etc needs an agent they can’t give someone Cleric powers and might not have someone with the potential at hand in the first place.
Except most non-deity celestials are significantly less powerful than a level 20 Celestial Warlock would be which doesn't make a lot of sense. Fey-locks don't get their power from a random Eladrin or Satyr, they get it from an ArchFey. GOOlocks don't get their power from a Cloaker or Illithid, or Aboleth, they get is from Elder Beings in the far realms the size of planets or stars. Fiendlocks don't get their power from a Cambion or Chain Devil but from a ArchDevil or ArchDemon.
...now i want to hear a story about a warlock growing powerful, sneakily becoming equal, and eventually draining their CR<20 patron-turned-spellfocus to a husk.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
Keep in mind “celestials” /= “deities”, and it’s usually framed that being an actual spellcasting Cleric requires an innate quality as opposed to just being a member of the appropriate clergy, so if something like an angel, coatl, kirin, etc needs an agent they can’t give someone Cleric powers and might not have someone with the potential at hand in the first place.
Except most non-deity celestials are significantly less powerful than a level 20 Celestial Warlock would be which doesn't make a lot of sense. Fey-locks don't get their power from a random Eladrin or Satyr, they get it from an ArchFey. GOOlocks don't get their power from a Cloaker or Illithid, or Aboleth, they get is from Elder Beings in the far realms the size of planets or stars. Fiendlocks don't get their power from a Cambion or Chain Devil but from a ArchDevil or ArchDemon.
In point of fact, example patrons for subclasses like Fiend include sub-20 CR creatures like Ultroloths and Pit Fiends, Genies of all flavors are naturally cited for their specific subclass while being low teens CR, and Sea Hag covens are cited for Fathomless despite having a collective CR of 12. Not every patron is a god-tier unstatted entity.
I for one love every single non-cleric "healer" option, because there's still a lot of tables that come to D&D from other RPGs with the "we need a healer" mindset (we all know that isn't true in D&D, but it's still pervasive from other games) and having options for those new players to choose from so they don't feel locked into a single class are good. And even for experienced players, having those options is fun. I love that Stars Druid and Celestial Warlock made it into core, I only wish Divine Soul Sorcerer had made it alongside them, but that's going to be a big draw for their next subclass book.
There are already so many non-cleric "healer" options though : Ranger, Paladin, Bard, Druid, even Alchemist Artificer or in a pinch Thief Rogue can act as the party healer. And that's in the context of a system where a healer isn't even necessary. The Dungeon Dudes ran a full campaign with 3 characters and 0 healing spells just fine.
There are already so many non-cleric "healer" options though : Ranger, Paladin, Bard, Druid, even Alchemist Artificer or in a pinch Thief Rogue can act as the party healer. And that's in the context of a system where a healer isn't even necessary. The Dungeon Dudes ran a full campaign with 3 characters and 0 healing spells just fine.
I don't care that it's not "necessary," it's fun. You are free to ban Celestial Warlock at your table if you don't like it existing.
In point of fact, example patrons for subclasses like Fiend include sub-20 CR creatures like Ultroloths and Pit Fiends, Genies of all flavors are naturally cited for their specific subclass while being low teens CR, and Sea Hag covens are cited for Fathomless despite having a collective CR of 12. Not every patron is a god-tier unstatted entity.
Archfey patrons can be Hags as well, and IIRC we don't have any of them above 10.
There is a common concept that often gets lost with patrons/Devine/nature "power sources" for adventurers. The lost concept is multiple sources. Either by moving up the chain as the adventurer becomes more powerful or the adventurer becomes the focus for adding the magics together.
Druid groves come as the closest example to multiple natural sources adding to a great whole but realistically why not the same with fiends, Djinn, celestials etc.
But we have gotten kinda close to derailing the thread. So I'll stear back.....
As long as there's an interesting story that can be told it has a Game space and I really thing a decent breadth of options is more important than popularity with the final decision on subclasses that make the cut.
Plus if someone hasn’t mentioned it yet, having a strongly Good oriented option for the class helps highlight that it’s not all Faustian and provides a good vehicle for someone who likes the core features but doesn’t want to risk the hang-ups classically associated with the other three character-wise.
Plus if someone hasn’t mentioned it yet, having a strongly Good oriented option for the class helps highlight that it’s not all Faustian and provides a good vehicle for someone who likes the core features but doesn’t want to risk the hang-ups classically associated with the other three character-wise.
fiend remains the main bargain subclass. fey is mostly (but not exclusively) for the tricked or saved from peril, while goo is the industrial accident (whether caused or caught up in). i don't think they're adding celestial to provide alignment symmetry (kinda judgy vs all the non-evil players) so much as planar symmetry: lower planes, fey realms, far realms, and now upper realms.
Plus if someone hasn’t mentioned it yet, having a strongly Good oriented option for the class helps highlight that it’s not all Faustian and provides a good vehicle for someone who likes the core features but doesn’t want to risk the hang-ups classically associated with the other three character-wise.
fiend remains the main bargain subclass. fey is mostly (but not exclusively) for the tricked or saved from peril, while goo is the industrial accident (whether caused or caught up in). i don't think they're adding celestial to provide alignment symmetry (kinda judgy vs all the non-evil players) so much as planar symmetry: lower planes, fey realms, far realms, and now upper realms.
Mmm, I think you’re underestimating how Faustian the other options are in a lot of contemporary pop fiction.
Keep in mind “celestials” /= “deities”, and it’s usually framed that being an actual spellcasting Cleric requires an innate quality as opposed to just being a member of the appropriate clergy, so if something like an angel, coatl, kirin, etc needs an agent they can’t give someone Cleric powers and might not have someone with the potential at hand in the first place.
Except most non-deity celestials are significantly less powerful than a level 20 Celestial Warlock would be which doesn't make a lot of sense. Fey-locks don't get their power from a random Eladrin or Satyr, they get it from an ArchFey. GOOlocks don't get their power from a Cloaker or Illithid, or Aboleth, they get is from Elder Beings in the far realms the size of planets or stars. Fiendlocks don't get their power from a Cambion or Chain Devil but from a ArchDevil or ArchDemon.
In point of fact, example patrons for subclasses like Fiend include sub-20 CR creatures like Ultroloths and Pit Fiends, Genies of all flavors are naturally cited for their specific subclass while being low teens CR, and Sea Hag covens are cited for Fathomless despite having a collective CR of 12. Not every patron is a god-tier unstatted entity.
Not really, it lists specific demons that are above CR 20 and says pit fiends that are especially mighty and the basic pit fiend is CR 20. The closest example might be the genie as the only princes stated out are CR 18-20. But its for an adventure and I don't think you are fighting there true form anymore than you fight whatever gods true form in icewind dale. That being said I'd assume the same here, its not a random unicorn but some embodiment of unicorns that is making the pact.
There are already so many non-cleric "healer" options though : Ranger, Paladin, Bard, Druid, even Alchemist Artificer or in a pinch Thief Rogue can act as the party healer. And that's in the context of a system where a healer isn't even necessary. The Dungeon Dudes ran a full campaign with 3 characters and 0 healing spells just fine.
I don't care that it's not "necessary," it's fun. You are free to ban Celestial Warlock at your table if you don't like it existing.
Its not fun. And its not about banning it or not but what would be best for the limited 4 slots. And one of the 4 should not go to a sub class almost no one takes.
Presumably a warlock patron gets something of value out of the pact. Increased power is certainly a possibility; just because your genie patron was CR 11 when you were level 1 doesn't mean it's still CR 11 when you're level 20.
Plus if someone hasn’t mentioned it yet, having a strongly Good oriented option for the class helps highlight that it’s not all Faustian and provides a good vehicle for someone who likes the core features but doesn’t want to risk the hang-ups classically associated with the other three character-wise.
fiend remains the main bargain subclass. fey is mostly (but not exclusively) for the tricked or saved from peril, while goo is the industrial accident (whether caused or caught up in). i don't think they're adding celestial to provide alignment symmetry (kinda judgy vs all the non-evil players) so much as planar symmetry: lower planes, fey realms, far realms, and now upper realms.
Mmm, I think you’re underestimating how Faustian the other options are in a lot of contemporary pop fiction.
i accept that fey don't shy away from a bargain. however, since you've invoked faust twice, i don't know how readily fey lords would accept to playing the part of servant (without a terrible twist). great old one (or their cult?) being a servant seems off as well. but if faustian bargains are good for the goose, then so too with the gander: bring on the celestials chaining themselves to service a capricious mortal's thirst for power... and then calling it in later for duties more harsh than the bargainer bargained for. although, i feel like that indentured service model fits genies better.
...unless you meant faustian bargains as simply power from distasteful origins. in which case, extra great: let's have some unkind celestial stories! bring on the sacrifice and toil that the faithful contribute gladly, but now neatly packaged for faithless warlocks who thought a handshake agreement wouldn't come to this. subvert those expectations!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
There are already so many non-cleric "healer" options though : Ranger, Paladin, Bard, Druid, even Alchemist Artificer or in a pinch Thief Rogue can act as the party healer. And that's in the context of a system where a healer isn't even necessary. The Dungeon Dudes ran a full campaign with 3 characters and 0 healing spells just fine.
I don't care that it's not "necessary," it's fun. You are free to ban Celestial Warlock at your table if you don't like it existing.
Its not fun. And its not about banning it or not but what would be best for the limited 4 slots. And one of the 4 should not go to a sub class almost no one takes.
"Almost no one takes" would require a hig burden of proof from my perspective.
However fiend, old one and even fey in some settings have dark undertones. Where is the playspace for someone who wants a wholesome warlock? Djinn I suppose but I've seen that one actively banned because it's mechanics can interfere with certain stories/tables. Now that's just my perspective from dm complaints I've seen and genie might be a better choice but I'd say both are fair contenders.
I do like healer/support options for every class from a playstyle balance perspective rather than a narrative balance perspective.
Plus if someone hasn’t mentioned it yet, having a strongly Good oriented option for the class helps highlight that it’s not all Faustian and provides a good vehicle for someone who likes the core features but doesn’t want to risk the hang-ups classically associated with the other three character-wise.
fiend remains the main bargain subclass. fey is mostly (but not exclusively) for the tricked or saved from peril, while goo is the industrial accident (whether caused or caught up in). i don't think they're adding celestial to provide alignment symmetry (kinda judgy vs all the non-evil players) so much as planar symmetry: lower planes, fey realms, far realms, and now upper realms.
Mmm, I think you’re underestimating how Faustian the other options are in a lot of contemporary pop fiction.
i accept that fey don't shy away from a bargain. however, since you've invoked faust twice, i don't know how readily fey lords would accept to playing the part of servant (without a terrible twist). great old one (or their cult?) being a servant seems off as well. but if faustian bargains are good for the goose, then so too with the gander: bring on the celestials chaining themselves to service a capricious mortal's thirst for power... and then calling it in later for duties more harsh than the bargainer bargained for. although, i feel like that indentured service model fits genies better.
...unless you meant faustian bargains as simply power from distasteful origins. in which case, extra great: let's have some unkind celestial stories! bring on the sacrifice and toil that the faithful contribute gladly, but now neatly packaged for faithless warlocks who thought a handshake agreement wouldn't come to this. subvert those expectations!
I was using "Faustian Bargain" in the broad sense of "pact for power that ultimately costs the mortal a great deal"; and of course there's no hard reason a Celestial can't do the same thing, but it lacks the innate connotation of "literal deal with a devil", "Cthulu cultist", or "tricked out of something precious by faeries" the other three have.
I was using "Faustian Bargain" in the broad sense of "pact for power that ultimately costs the mortal a great deal"; and of course there's no hard reason a Celestial can't do the same thing, but it lacks the innate connotation of "literal deal with a devil", "Cthulu cultist", or "tricked out of something precious by faeries" the other three have.
i've done what i could to set the field but still you come at this with "no reason they can't do the same, but" and "lacks this and that." you're right, of course: celestial isn't there to add nuance. it's there because some people, when confronted with flavors and toppings and cones still ask for vanilla plain in a cup.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
I was using "Faustian Bargain" in the broad sense of "pact for power that ultimately costs the mortal a great deal"; and of course there's no hard reason a Celestial can't do the same thing, but it lacks the innate connotation of "literal deal with a devil", "Cthulu cultist", or "tricked out of something precious by faeries" the other three have.
i've done what i could to set the field but still you come at this with "no reason they can't do the same, but" and "lacks this and that." you're right, of course: celestial isn't there to add nuance. it's there because some people, when confronted with flavors and toppings and cones still ask for vanilla plain in a cup.
That’s an incredibly reductive take on the issue; it would be more accurate to say it’s there so people have the choice of vanilla alongside chocolate and strawberry. “Toppings” in any sense that’s particularly applicable to Warlock are neither inclusive nor exclusive to any of the options.
And its not about banning it or not but what would be best for the limited 4 slots. And one of the 4 should not go to a sub class almost no one takes.
Even if I somehow agreed with you that "most played" is the best or only possible attribute to consider for core inclusion - what data are you basing the bold on? What makes you think WotC selected a subclass that is so wildly unpopular for their PHB?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm fine with all that stuff, but abstracting them into being contents of {insert tool kit} seems to me to be the way to go. I certainly have no desire to track individual sticks of chalk etc.
<----Clamoring to play Celestial Warlock
I for one love every single non-cleric "healer" option, because there's still a lot of tables that come to D&D from other RPGs with the "we need a healer" mindset (we all know that isn't true in D&D, but it's still pervasive from other games) and having options for those new players to choose from so they don't feel locked into a single class are good. And even for experienced players, having those options is fun. I love that Stars Druid and Celestial Warlock made it into core, I only wish Divine Soul Sorcerer had made it alongside them, but that's going to be a big draw for their next subclass book.
Do you not realize how badly outnumbered the Good Guys are? The Abyss is literally infinite, and the one thing the folks down there can agree on is destroying everyone and everything else. That's the whole reason everybody signed onto the Pact Primeval in the first place; even with Baator helping due to the Blood War, the Great Wheel is barely holding on. If the Upper planes were winning, they wouldn't need heroes like us all the time.
No. Ban evil paladins at your table if your imagination is incapable of stretching that far, but don't touch my books.
I was being a bit facetious with that line, but if your imagination is incapable of understanding sarcasm, well, I can't help you.
Except most non-deity celestials are significantly less powerful than a level 20 Celestial Warlock would be which doesn't make a lot of sense. Fey-locks don't get their power from a random Eladrin or Satyr, they get it from an ArchFey. GOOlocks don't get their power from a Cloaker or Illithid, or Aboleth, they get is from Elder Beings in the far realms the size of planets or stars. Fiendlocks don't get their power from a Cambion or Chain Devil but from a ArchDevil or ArchDemon.
...now i want to hear a story about a warlock growing powerful, sneakily becoming equal, and eventually draining their CR<20 patron-turned-spellfocus to a husk.
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!
In point of fact, example patrons for subclasses like Fiend include sub-20 CR creatures like Ultroloths and Pit Fiends, Genies of all flavors are naturally cited for their specific subclass while being low teens CR, and Sea Hag covens are cited for Fathomless despite having a collective CR of 12. Not every patron is a god-tier unstatted entity.
There are already so many non-cleric "healer" options though : Ranger, Paladin, Bard, Druid, even Alchemist Artificer or in a pinch Thief Rogue can act as the party healer. And that's in the context of a system where a healer isn't even necessary. The Dungeon Dudes ran a full campaign with 3 characters and 0 healing spells just fine.
I don't care that it's not "necessary," it's fun. You are free to ban Celestial Warlock at your table if you don't like it existing.
Archfey patrons can be Hags as well, and IIRC we don't have any of them above 10.
There is a common concept that often gets lost with patrons/Devine/nature "power sources" for adventurers. The lost concept is multiple sources. Either by moving up the chain as the adventurer becomes more powerful or the adventurer becomes the focus for adding the magics together.
Druid groves come as the closest example to multiple natural sources adding to a great whole but realistically why not the same with fiends, Djinn, celestials etc.
But we have gotten kinda close to derailing the thread. So I'll stear back.....
As long as there's an interesting story that can be told it has a Game space and I really thing a decent breadth of options is more important than popularity with the final decision on subclasses that make the cut.
Plus if someone hasn’t mentioned it yet, having a strongly Good oriented option for the class helps highlight that it’s not all Faustian and provides a good vehicle for someone who likes the core features but doesn’t want to risk the hang-ups classically associated with the other three character-wise.
fiend remains the main bargain subclass. fey is mostly (but not exclusively) for the tricked or saved from peril, while goo is the industrial accident (whether caused or caught up in). i don't think they're adding celestial to provide alignment symmetry (kinda judgy vs all the non-evil players) so much as planar symmetry: lower planes, fey realms, far realms, and now upper realms.
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!
Mmm, I think you’re underestimating how Faustian the other options are in a lot of contemporary pop fiction.
Not really, it lists specific demons that are above CR 20 and says pit fiends that are especially mighty and the basic pit fiend is CR 20. The closest example might be the genie as the only princes stated out are CR 18-20. But its for an adventure and I don't think you are fighting there true form anymore than you fight whatever gods true form in icewind dale. That being said I'd assume the same here, its not a random unicorn but some embodiment of unicorns that is making the pact.
Its not fun. And its not about banning it or not but what would be best for the limited 4 slots. And one of the 4 should not go to a sub class almost no one takes.
Presumably a warlock patron gets something of value out of the pact. Increased power is certainly a possibility; just because your genie patron was CR 11 when you were level 1 doesn't mean it's still CR 11 when you're level 20.
i accept that fey don't shy away from a bargain. however, since you've invoked faust twice, i don't know how readily fey lords would accept to playing the part of servant (without a terrible twist). great old one (or their cult?) being a servant seems off as well. but if faustian bargains are good for the goose, then so too with the gander: bring on the celestials chaining themselves to service a capricious mortal's thirst for power... and then calling it in later for duties more harsh than the bargainer bargained for. although, i feel like that indentured service model fits genies better.
...unless you meant faustian bargains as simply power from distasteful origins. in which case, extra great: let's have some unkind celestial stories! bring on the sacrifice and toil that the faithful contribute gladly, but now neatly packaged for faithless warlocks who thought a handshake agreement wouldn't come to this. subvert those expectations!
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!
"Almost no one takes" would require a hig burden of proof from my perspective.
However fiend, old one and even fey in some settings have dark undertones. Where is the playspace for someone who wants a wholesome warlock? Djinn I suppose but I've seen that one actively banned because it's mechanics can interfere with certain stories/tables. Now that's just my perspective from dm complaints I've seen and genie might be a better choice but I'd say both are fair contenders.
I do like healer/support options for every class from a playstyle balance perspective rather than a narrative balance perspective.
I was using "Faustian Bargain" in the broad sense of "pact for power that ultimately costs the mortal a great deal"; and of course there's no hard reason a Celestial can't do the same thing, but it lacks the innate connotation of "literal deal with a devil", "Cthulu cultist", or "tricked out of something precious by faeries" the other three have.
i've done what i could to set the field but still you come at this with "no reason they can't do the same, but" and "lacks this and that." you're right, of course: celestial isn't there to add nuance. it's there because some people, when confronted with flavors and toppings and cones still ask for vanilla plain in a cup.
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!
That’s an incredibly reductive take on the issue; it would be more accurate to say it’s there so people have the choice of vanilla alongside chocolate and strawberry. “Toppings” in any sense that’s particularly applicable to Warlock are neither inclusive nor exclusive to any of the options.
"I, Mydudeicus, don't personally don't find it fun." Fixed that for you.
Even if I somehow agreed with you that "most played" is the best or only possible attribute to consider for core inclusion - what data are you basing the bold on? What makes you think WotC selected a subclass that is so wildly unpopular for their PHB?