Warlocks are the Only casters without the justification for their casting stat in their spellcasting description
CHA is a very usefull stat for Warlocks since they have to hide their "Carreer" options to others, cause usually people don't like Warlocks that much or doesn't trust them, or even in some places outright discrimate them.
You need to be able to lie through your teeths as a Warlock, even to your own Party.
One of my Party never exactly knew what my character was, he convinced them that he was an Eldrithc Knight (he was an Hexblade), when they met an actual Eldritch Knight, the party then where curious cause there was some obvious differences, i managed to convince them that it was just a "regional" difference or "Difference in learning experiences and applications, but its identical", that +8 in Deception and Persuasion was handy.
Honestly leave the CHA Lock the heck alone, its good how it is now, there's bigger issues with the class than it using CHA over INT.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Normality is but an Illusion, Whats normal to the Spider, is only madness for the Fly"
Warlocks are the Only casters without the justification for their casting stat in their spellcasting description
CHA is a very usefull stat for Warlocks since they have to hide their "Carreer" options to others, cause usually people don't like Warlocks that much or doesn't trust them, or even in some places outright discrimate them.
You need to be able to lie through your teeths as a Warlock, even to your own Party.
One of my Party never exactly knew what my character was, he convinced them that he was an Eldrithc Knight (he was an Hexblade), when they met an actual Eldritch Knight, the party then where curious cause there was some obvious differences, i managed to convince them that it was just a "regional" difference or "Difference in learning experiences and applications, but its identical", that +8 in Deception and Persuasion was handy.
Honestly leave the CHA Lock the heck alone, its good how it is now, there's bigger issues with the class than it using CHA over INT.
yes but it would defenetly be an perfect addition for an class feature variants option, letting warlocks use int instead of charisma would please a lot of players and would thus satisfy fixing an so called "pain point" of the class, and the flavour of the class seems to necessitate as much of an intelligent approach to their spells and carreer as an wizard would need. At least having the option to use int should be there, if not the default assumption of the class
also just because an stat is useful to an class does not mean that it should be the stat they use it to cast their spells, strength is one of the most important stats for a wizard, but that does not mean eldritch knights should use strength to cast their spells, same with arcane tricksters and dexterity, you can have an character put points into charisma even if they are primarily an intelligence or wisdom caster, heck you could even make it your highest stat if you want, it makes no sense for warlocks to have charisma be the stat they use.
to quote each of the spell casting features for each class
sorcerer: "Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your sorcerer spells, since the power of your magic relies on your ability to project your will into the world."
bard: "Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your bard spells. Your magic comes from the heart and soul you pour into the performance of your music or oration"
paladin "Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your paladin spells, since their power derives from the strength of your convictions"
wizard: "Intelligence is your spellcasting ability for your wizard spells, since you learn your spells through dedicated study and memorization"
warlock: "Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your warlock spells, so you use your Charisma whenever a spell refers to your spellcasting ability"
it seems a bit out of place you know? again the flavour text from xanatar's guide to everything tells about how warlocks are dark scholars, how they are the finders and keepers of secrets, how they delve into forbidden knowledge, and the players handbook also makes it clear that they draw on ancient knowledge to use their abillities, and yet for people who want to play their warlock in the most effective manner they will dump their int and so must play their warlock as an fool, an complete idiot, a charming dunce who got their magic from their magic sugar daddies, an himbo if i understand internet lingo correctly, it does not fit the class, it is out of place, it is wrong
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Warlocks were originally slated to get INT for their spellcasting stat. However, the surveys taken during the playtest showed an overwhelming number of people wanted CHA for the spellcasting stat.
The arguments I heard is that people didn't want an occult investigator for a warlock. They wanted a charismatic deal maker. The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic.
I guess the writers didn't really like the arguments, and just put down Charisma for popular demand, and secretly kept thinking of it as an occult investigator instead of pact maker.
Warlocks were originally slated to get INT for their spellcasting stat. However, the surveys taken during the playtest showed an overwhelming number of people wanted CHA for the spellcasting stat.
The arguments I heard is that people didn't want an occult investigator for a warlock. They wanted a charismatic deal maker. The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic.
I guess the writers didn't really like the arguments, and just put down Charisma for popular demand, and secretly kept thinking of it as an occult investigator instead of pact maker.
Jokes on them. Turns out that all Warlocks bargain and haggle equally well regardless of their Cha. After all, they all have access to the exact same abilities choices that all other Warlocks have.
Warlocks were originally slated to get INT for their spellcasting stat. However, the surveys taken during the playtest showed an overwhelming number of people wanted CHA for the spellcasting stat.
The arguments I heard is that people didn't want an occult investigator for a warlock. They wanted a charismatic deal maker. The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic.
I guess the writers didn't really like the arguments, and just put down Charisma for popular demand, and secretly kept thinking of it as an occult investigator instead of pact maker.
Jokes on them. Turns out that all Warlocks bargain and haggle equally well regardless of their Cha. After all, they all have access to the exact same abilities choices that all other Warlocks have.
That's kind of a silly point to make. That's like saying that the joke's on the wizards who get high INT, because they have access to the same abilities that someone with a low INT has. Fighters with low DEX and STR get the same exact abilities as someone with a high STR or DEX.
I get it, you want an INT warlock. But going by early surveys, it appears that such a stance is in the minority, and I doubt people have changed their mind much.
Warlocks were originally slated to get INT for their spellcasting stat. However, the surveys taken during the playtest showed an overwhelming number of people wanted CHA for the spellcasting stat.
The arguments I heard is that people didn't want an occult investigator for a warlock. They wanted a charismatic deal maker. The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic.
I guess the writers didn't really like the arguments, and just put down Charisma for popular demand, and secretly kept thinking of it as an occult investigator instead of pact maker.
Jokes on them. Turns out that all Warlocks bargain and haggle equally well regardless of their Cha. After all, they all have access to the exact same abilities choices that all other Warlocks have.
That's kind of a silly point to make. That's like saying that the joke's on the wizards who get high INT, because they have access to the same abilities that someone with a low INT has. Fighters with low DEX and STR get the same exact abilities as someone with a high STR or DEX.
I get it, you want an INT warlock. But going by early surveys, it appears that such a stance is in the minority, and I doubt people have changed their mind much.
That was not my point at all, I just found the idea that Warlocks are "Charismatic Deal Makers" and "The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic." to be a little funny.
Warlocks were originally slated to get INT for their spellcasting stat. However, the surveys taken during the playtest showed an overwhelming number of people wanted CHA for the spellcasting stat.
The arguments I heard is that people didn't want an occult investigator for a warlock. They wanted a charismatic deal maker. The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic.
I guess the writers didn't really like the arguments, and just put down Charisma for popular demand, and secretly kept thinking of it as an occult investigator instead of pact maker.
Jokes on them. Turns out that all Warlocks bargain and haggle equally well regardless of their Cha. After all, they all have access to the exact same abilities choices that all other Warlocks have.
That's kind of a silly point to make. That's like saying that the joke's on the wizards who get high INT, because they have access to the same abilities that someone with a low INT has. Fighters with low DEX and STR get the same exact abilities as someone with a high STR or DEX.
I get it, you want an INT warlock. But going by early surveys, it appears that such a stance is in the minority, and I doubt people have changed their mind much.
If the warlock is supposed to be the charismatic deal maker, then the lore should reflect that, dont just say one thing with every bit of lore, concept and flavour, Only to do the exact opposite of that thing. If the designers made the wizard cast with charisma becuase that is the kind of wizard People prefer, they would need to subtly Change and alter the flavour of the class to fit this shift in mechanics to them casting their spells with force of personality, no source in 5e make any reference to the warlock as this charismatic deal maker, one who haggles for every last bit of their soul, one adept at tricking elder entities to give them power in exchange for minimal service, that is simply not how the warlock is described. They are described as those not content with the secrets and power the wizards would give them, not content with the "normal" and "sane" research methods and looked for deeper truths about the universe, an warlock can have a patron and pact forced onto them without their consent, an warlock can draw power from an patron without their knowledge, if they really are charisma casting used car salesmen, then they better ******* act like ones instead of being just int casters in denial. I Think that Most People would at the very least apreciate the option to use intelegence instead of charisma, just as many as would apreciate any of the other class feature variants options available in that one UA
It is what it is. People during the test phase wanted a CHA warlock. The writers changed it from INT to CHA without changing the flavor text. I doubt there's going to be any changes, because as far as WotC knows, this is what the majority of players want.
Of course, the writers also thought that being able to cast Slow and Bane more than once a day as a warlock would be overpowered, and were surprised when feedback said that, no, it wasn't and putting those spells in invocations was dumb.
Warlocks are the Only casters without the justification for their casting stat in their spellcasting description
CHA is a very usefull stat for Warlocks since they have to hide their "Carreer" options to others, cause usually people don't like Warlocks that much or doesn't trust them, or even in some places outright discrimate them.
You need to be able to lie through your teeths as a Warlock, even to your own Party.
One of my Party never exactly knew what my character was, he convinced them that he was an Eldrithc Knight (he was an Hexblade), when they met an actual Eldritch Knight, the party then where curious cause there was some obvious differences, i managed to convince them that it was just a "regional" difference or "Difference in learning experiences and applications, but its identical", that +8 in Deception and Persuasion was handy.
Honestly leave the CHA Lock the heck alone, its good how it is now, there's bigger issues with the class than it using CHA over INT.
yes but it would defenetly be an perfect addition for an class feature variants option, letting warlocks use int instead of charisma would please a lot of players
I wouldn't be against an Option that at lvl 1 lets you choose between Either CHA or INT as a spellcasting ability, just like martial classes can use either DEX or STR for their Hit rolls and Damage rolls.
What i'm against is the switch to INT cause some people think its how it should be, i like my CHA Lock, and would like it to stay that way, but if there's a variant rule for it leaving the choice, thats the better.
I've allready said that the Class Features Variants they have introduced should be the future of the game, cause it offers more without taking anything out, and that they should focus/expand on this as a Core mechanic for the game.
When the Warlock was first introduced in 3e it was an Int caster. I’m against the fact that it was switched to Cha because “some people think it’s how it should be.”
If anything, the Bard fits the whole "I persuade an eldritch entity for ultimate power" thing better than the Warlock (which explicitly calls out as Eldritch Invocations as things you have to actively research, suggesting an INT-based archetype), especially because of Magical Secrets.
If anything, the Bard fits the whole "I persuade an eldritch entity for ultimate power" thing better than the Warlock (which explicitly calls out as Eldritch Invocations as things you have to actively research, suggesting an INT-based archetype), especially because of Magical Secrets.
Bards don’t need to “persuade an eldritch entity,” they just persuade the universe with their bardsong directly.
I personally don't care which ability score Warlocks use. I currently am playing a hexblade warlock, and the Charisma benefit very much helps with roleplaying.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
When the Warlock was first introduced in 3e it was an Int caster. I’m against the fact that it was switched to Cha because “some people think it’s how it should be.”
The 3.5 warlock was always CHA. 4e warlock was CHA + INT or CON + INT.
I personally don't care which ability score Warlocks use. I currently am playing a hexblade warlock, and the Charisma benefit very much helps with roleplaying.
I personally do, especially since I tend towards Warlocks that are competent at Arcana, Religion, and/or INT saves (for contact other plane), and aren't necessarily socialites.
If anything, the Bard fits the whole "I persuade an eldritch entity for ultimate power" thing better than the Warlock (which explicitly calls out as Eldritch Invocations as things you have to actively research, suggesting an INT-based archetype), especially because of Magical Secrets.
Bards don’t need to “persuade an eldritch entity,” they just persuade the universe with their bardsong directly.
I know they don't need to, but they can be played as such. And there are ways of getting boons from extraplanar entities besides being a Warlock.
If anything, the Bard fits the whole "I persuade an eldritch entity for ultimate power" thing better than the Warlock (which explicitly calls out as Eldritch Invocations as things you have to actively research, suggesting an INT-based archetype), especially because of Magical Secrets.
That has always allowed me to enjoy multiclassing Bards with Warlocks more so than any other class combination...Bards have the most capability to get in trouble (alongside Rogues), so magical deals with extra-planar entities always seemed like something they'd bumble or finesse themselves into.
A Warlock certainly fits the class backstory, either as a victim or ambitious power-seeker...but a Bard provides an amusing roleplaying angle.
And yes, the "Magical Secrets" are a great foil for late-game as an explanation to where you get your "warlock-y" abilities.
If anything, the Bard fits the whole "I persuade an eldritch entity for ultimate power" thing better than the Warlock (which explicitly calls out as Eldritch Invocations as things you have to actively research, suggesting an INT-based archetype), especially because of Magical Secrets.
That has always allowed me to enjoy multiclassing Bards with Warlocks more so than any other class combination...Bards have the most capability to get in trouble (alongside Rogues), so magical deals with extra-planar entities always seemed like something they'd bumble or finesse themselves into.
A Warlock certainly fits the class backstory, either as a victim or ambitious power-seeker...but a Bard provides an amusing roleplaying angle.
And yes, the "Magical Secrets" are a great foil for late-game as an explanation to where you get your "warlock-y" abilities.
The players handbook suggest the possibillity of an bard gaining their powers from a deal with a hag, and many People at his time belived Robert Johnson made a deal with the devil to attain his music / was birthed from hell itself becuase he played so damm well, your warlock patron and patron might well be the source of your bardic knack, not the other way arround
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
so anyways, if or when we see an new itteration for the artificer, does anybody have any ideas for what they will do with the artificer? will they just leave it at giving them cantrip versatility and some extra spells like the wizard? might they perhaps make the spell storing item feature a bit more versatile, make it work on any old item of a certain size or lower, perhaps make it work on any magic item regardless of type? Might we perhaps have the possibillity of adding infusions your infusions to common magic items, letting you go around with an +1 arm blade or an +1 moon blade or an arm blade that is an moon blade or resistant cast-of armor?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
I don't think they're going to change the Artificer, like at all. Probably add some infusions, new subclasses, and I hope a class feature variants, but I don't think they're going to make any significant changes for them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
CHA is a very usefull stat for Warlocks since they have to hide their "Carreer" options to others, cause usually people don't like Warlocks that much or doesn't trust them, or even in some places outright discrimate them.
You need to be able to lie through your teeths as a Warlock, even to your own Party.
One of my Party never exactly knew what my character was, he convinced them that he was an Eldrithc Knight (he was an Hexblade), when they met an actual Eldritch Knight, the party then where curious cause there was some obvious differences, i managed to convince them that it was just a "regional" difference or "Difference in learning experiences and applications, but its identical", that +8 in Deception and Persuasion was handy.
Honestly leave the CHA Lock the heck alone, its good how it is now, there's bigger issues with the class than it using CHA over INT.
"Normality is but an Illusion, Whats normal to the Spider, is only madness for the Fly"
Kain de Frostberg- Dark Knight - (Vengeance Pal3/ Hexblade 9), Port Mourn
Kain de Draakberg-Dark Knight lvl8-Avergreen(DitA)
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Warlocks were originally slated to get INT for their spellcasting stat. However, the surveys taken during the playtest showed an overwhelming number of people wanted CHA for the spellcasting stat.
The arguments I heard is that people didn't want an occult investigator for a warlock. They wanted a charismatic deal maker. The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic.
I guess the writers didn't really like the arguments, and just put down Charisma for popular demand, and secretly kept thinking of it as an occult investigator instead of pact maker.
Jokes on them. Turns out that all Warlocks bargain and haggle equally well regardless of their Cha. After all, they all have access to the exact same abilities choices that all other Warlocks have.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
That's kind of a silly point to make. That's like saying that the joke's on the wizards who get high INT, because they have access to the same abilities that someone with a low INT has. Fighters with low DEX and STR get the same exact abilities as someone with a high STR or DEX.
I get it, you want an INT warlock. But going by early surveys, it appears that such a stance is in the minority, and I doubt people have changed their mind much.
That was not my point at all, I just found the idea that Warlocks are "Charismatic Deal Makers" and "The strength of your pact magic is based on how well you can argue for the magic." to be a little funny.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
If the warlock is supposed to be the charismatic deal maker, then the lore should reflect that, dont just say one thing with every bit of lore, concept and flavour, Only to do the exact opposite of that thing. If the designers made the wizard cast with charisma becuase that is the kind of wizard People prefer, they would need to subtly Change and alter the flavour of the class to fit this shift in mechanics to them casting their spells with force of personality, no source in 5e make any reference to the warlock as this charismatic deal maker, one who haggles for every last bit of their soul, one adept at tricking elder entities to give them power in exchange for minimal service, that is simply not how the warlock is described. They are described as those not content with the secrets and power the wizards would give them, not content with the "normal" and "sane" research methods and looked for deeper truths about the universe, an warlock can have a patron and pact forced onto them without their consent, an warlock can draw power from an patron without their knowledge, if they really are charisma casting used car salesmen, then they better ******* act like ones instead of being just int casters in denial. I Think that Most People would at the very least apreciate the option to use intelegence instead of charisma, just as many as would apreciate any of the other class feature variants options available in that one UA
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Of course, the writers also thought that being able to cast Slow and Bane more than once a day as a warlock would be overpowered, and were surprised when feedback said that, no, it wasn't and putting those spells in invocations was dumb.
I wouldn't be against an Option that at lvl 1 lets you choose between Either CHA or INT as a spellcasting ability, just like martial classes can use either DEX or STR for their Hit rolls and Damage rolls.
What i'm against is the switch to INT cause some people think its how it should be, i like my CHA Lock, and would like it to stay that way, but if there's a variant rule for it leaving the choice, thats the better.
I've allready said that the Class Features Variants they have introduced should be the future of the game, cause it offers more without taking anything out, and that they should focus/expand on this as a Core mechanic for the game.
"Normality is but an Illusion, Whats normal to the Spider, is only madness for the Fly"
Kain de Frostberg- Dark Knight - (Vengeance Pal3/ Hexblade 9), Port Mourn
Kain de Draakberg-Dark Knight lvl8-Avergreen(DitA)
When the Warlock was first introduced in 3e it was an Int caster. I’m against the fact that it was switched to Cha because “some people think it’s how it should be.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If anything, the Bard fits the whole "I persuade an eldritch entity for ultimate power" thing better than the Warlock (which explicitly calls out as Eldritch Invocations as things you have to actively research, suggesting an INT-based archetype), especially because of Magical Secrets.
Bards don’t need to “persuade an eldritch entity,” they just persuade the universe with their bardsong directly.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I personally don't care which ability score Warlocks use. I currently am playing a hexblade warlock, and the Charisma benefit very much helps with roleplaying.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
The 3.5 warlock was always CHA. 4e warlock was CHA + INT or CON + INT.
I personally do, especially since I tend towards Warlocks that are competent at Arcana, Religion, and/or INT saves (for contact other plane), and aren't necessarily socialites.
I know they don't need to, but they can be played as such. And there are ways of getting boons from extraplanar entities besides being a Warlock.
That has always allowed me to enjoy multiclassing Bards with Warlocks more so than any other class combination...Bards have the most capability to get in trouble (alongside Rogues), so magical deals with extra-planar entities always seemed like something they'd bumble or finesse themselves into.
A Warlock certainly fits the class backstory, either as a victim or ambitious power-seeker...but a Bard provides an amusing roleplaying angle.
And yes, the "Magical Secrets" are a great foil for late-game as an explanation to where you get your "warlock-y" abilities.
The players handbook suggest the possibillity of an bard gaining their powers from a deal with a hag, and many People at his time belived Robert Johnson made a deal with the devil to attain his music / was birthed from hell itself becuase he played so damm well, your warlock patron and patron might well be the source of your bardic knack, not the other way arround
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
so anyways, if or when we see an new itteration for the artificer, does anybody have any ideas for what they will do with the artificer? will they just leave it at giving them cantrip versatility and some extra spells like the wizard? might they perhaps make the spell storing item feature a bit more versatile, make it work on any old item of a certain size or lower, perhaps make it work on any magic item regardless of type? Might we perhaps have the possibillity of adding infusions your infusions to common magic items, letting you go around with an +1 arm blade or an +1 moon blade or an arm blade that is an moon blade or resistant cast-of armor?
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
I don't think they're going to change the Artificer, like at all. Probably add some infusions, new subclasses, and I hope a class feature variants, but I don't think they're going to make any significant changes for them.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms