They could make another variant class features for capstone abilities as many are rather lackluster and taking one level dips is a improvement over them. But I doubt there would be any changes to the artificer save adding infusions and well, spells.
Spells is also rather probable for a book to come in the style of a xanathar. So far we have psionic and summoning spells. Xanathar had a bit of elemental spells and a mix and blend of other styles of spells so we might get a mix and blend combined with summons and psionic, thus some artificer spells could be added. A few races is also possible, like the thri-kreen if there to be a psionic book or variant race features. Though races are more common for monster books or setting books.
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.
Idk if this has been brought up before, but i would really like some options for Paladins, Clerics and Warlocks who break their respective agreements. Not as like, a way to punish players but mostly as a player option, cause sometimes players develope in a way where breaking it makes more sense (and otherbreaker is an option i more often than not see players want to start out with)
I really can’t get this idea out of my head now that you put it there. 😜 So what exactly did you have in mind?
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 stand corrected.
Well yes but at the same time there was an wizard kit called the witch in 2e, where male members pr that kit were called warlocks, and just like the other editions they were spellcasters who made an pact with an supernatural (often evil) entity for your Magic , and 3.5e warlocks were Only cha based becuase charisma was the Only stat that could be used for spell like and supernatural abillities, the mechanics the warlock was based on, same reason that mind flayers had cha as their highest stat, they did shape the lore arround them as cha users tho
Idk if this has been brought up before, but i would really like some options for Paladins, Clerics and Warlocks who break their respective agreements. Not as like, a way to punish players but mostly as a player option, cause sometimes players develope in a way where breaking it makes more sense (and otherbreaker is an option i more often than not see players want to start out with)
I really can’t get this idea out of my head now that you put it there. 😜 So what exactly did you have in mind?
Well we already got palladin covered with oathbreaker (an similar Good version of oathbreaker for previously evil paladins could be cool), but mechanics for entering a New pact with a different god or patron or oath, or rules for loosing your connection to your god or patron would be cool
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 stand corrected.
Well yes but at the same time there was an wizard kit called the witch in 2e, where male members pr that kit were called warlocks, and just like the other editions they were spellcasters who made an pact with an supernatural (often evil) entity for your Magic , and 3.5e warlocks were Only cha based becuase charisma was the Only stat that could be used for spell like and supernatural abillities, the mechanics the warlock was based on, same reason that mind flayers had cha as their highest stat, they did shape the lore arround them as cha users tho
Maybe that was what got me confused. With all of these various editions all rolling around in my grapefruit, I find I keep getting more of the old stuff confuzzled.
I don't think it's that weird that Warlock uses charisma for its stat. After all, their magic is derived from a social interaction.. But I also kind of view charisma as not only its literal meaning, but also a sort of "Force of will" stat, which, in my mind, is why its used as a casting stat for Sorcerers and Paladins as well; Simply put, its not only a stat for making people believe you, but also a gauge of your own self-awareness, confidence and willpower. In this way, it makes sense for Sorcerers and Paladins as well as more a more literally charismatic class like Bard. That being said, I also can't help but think that Both Warlock and Sorcerer should maybe be able to choose between Int or Cha, or maybe just be split down the middle. like Yea, you draw the power from a pact/your own inner capabilities, but in my mind, Warlocks are always at least somewhat hungry for knowledge, and Sorcerers at the very least want enough knowledge to control their arcane talents, so pure charisma from a roleplaying perspective doesn't seem right. Did I just come full circle on my own post? Hm.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
I don't think it's that weird that Warlock uses charisma for its stat. After all, their magic is derived from a social interaction.. But I also kind of view charisma as not only its literal meaning, but also a sort of "Force of will" stat, which, in my mind, is why its used as a casting stat for Sorcerers and Paladins as well; Simply put, its not only a stat for making people believe you, but also a gauge of your own self-awareness, confidence and willpower. In this way, it makes sense for Sorcerers and Paladins as well as more a more literally charismatic class like Bard. That being said, I also can't help but think that Both Warlock and Sorcerer should maybe be able to choose between Int or Cha, or maybe just be split down the middle. like Yea, you draw the power from a pact/your own inner capabilities, but in my mind, Warlocks are always at least somewhat hungry for knowledge, and Sorcerers at the very least want enough knowledge to control their arcane talents, so pure charisma from a roleplaying perspective doesn't seem right. Did I just come full circle on my own post? Hm.
the thing is nothing in the lore or descriptions say anything about warlocks deriving their magic from force of will alone like the other spell casting classes do, shure they were described as such in 3.5e, but no current material would ever suggest that is how they cast their magic. Also like being good looking, likable, well mannered and persuasive will not help nearly as much when dealing with an eldrich abombination beyond time or with an asexual sterile demon only concerned with the blood war and it defenetly does not help when you are making a pact with the plane of positive energy or with an solar who can see past all your lies, and many a warlock is spawned with no formal interaction with their patron at all, particularly old one warlocks where their patrons might not be aware of them in the slightest or archfey warlocks where they patrons might have tricked them into making a pact. Contrast the description of the sorcerer's spellcasting feature with the same feature from the warlock, "an event in your past, or in the life of an parent or ancestor, left an indelible mark on you, infusing you with arcane magic" vs "Your arcane research and the magic bestowed on you by your patron have given you facility with spells.", look at the description for eldrich invocations "In your study of occult lore, you have unearthed eldritch invocations, fragments of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability."
it is so much more focused on eldrich research than it is for them to be just humble con-artists with magical sugar daddies, sorry if i am being unnecessarily confrontational (especially since i kinda do fully agree that they should be able to choose between charisma and intelligence) (also sorry if this ends up just completely unreadable) i just think it is absurd that the warlock fluff is all over their lust for knowledge and how people still think that that is not what they are, intelegence should have been the assumption from the start. Shure for a few warlock patrons charisma and force of will are more important (particularly an hexblade that fully disregards the schollarly vibes they were going for), and for blasting your foe with an elrich blast that is more charisma-y than int, and shure charisma is often a more fun stat to have, but still smarts is what they are first and formost, they are meant to be big brain bois who do their damm homework
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"
warlock: "Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your warlock spells"
also making sorcerers int would kinda slightly go against the lore, in the sense that the gift of sorcerery is often too unpredictable to be tackled with any logical framework, there is not really much one sorcerer can teach another other than general advice, i donno it might work out just fine and both additions would at least partially resolve the drought of int casters
also while we are speaking of alternative choices for casting stats and stuff, the blood hunter should be able to choose ether wis or int as their primary stat becuase while it makes sense for tieflings to be good at blood hunting, i feel like it also makes sense for firbolgs and lizardfolk to make good blood hunters (and for orcs to be not as terrible at it), and for the art of hemocraft to not be as "forgotten" in those more "barbaric" communities as it is for the civilized world. I feel like wis just makes for more fun, down to earth wholesome blood hunters (especially mark of healing profane halfling) that i personally perfer over the edgier int focused blood mage. Again as of right now the blood hunter is no more officially part of the game than any other piece of homebrew, just a thought,
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 always found it strange that Sorcs where Charisma based, if ever there was a class that would have been more logical to have Con as a casting stat it would have been sorcs. But I presume that was a balancing decision once.
I have always viewed Wisdom as the willpower stat. In 3.5 the Wisdom save was actually called a Will Save. Wisdom is most used for saving throws against spells and effects that control the mind as well. Charisma is just your force of personality.
This is all just my thoughts and opinions on the matter of course.
Yea, fair enough, I can totally see wisdom playing a similar role, but I see the wisdom saves as more of "I'm perceptive enough to see through this spell" rather than "I just fight it off with determination." It's hard to put into words, but I guess its a certain... sense of self? that makes me more inclined towards charisma for that. That being said, if they ever added "willpower" proficiency I have no doubt it would probably be wisdom.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
I believe the real reason we see so many Charisma based characters is WotC over correcting for decades of Charisma being the universal dump stat. Until 3.5, Charisma really had no purpose in the game mechanically speaking beyond being a random requirement for Paladins and when dealing with followers. Bards were a terrible class until 5e so were rarely played as far as I can remember.
Now there are multiple classes that make use of it AND there are spells that use it as a saving throw. Now Charisma is almost as potent of a stat as Dexterity and Int is all but useless. My, how the times have changed.
I believe the real reason we see so many Charisma based characters is WotC over correcting for decades of Charisma being the universal dump stat. Until 3.5, Charisma really had no purpose in the game mechanically speaking beyond being a random requirement for Paladins and when dealing with followers. Bards were a terrible class until 5e so were rarely played as far as I can remember.
Now there are multiple classes that make use of it AND there are spells that use it as a saving throw. Now Charisma is almost as potent of a stat as Dexterity and Int is all but useless. My, how the times have changed.
Well yeah bards used to suck a bit but there were many ways in wich Classes that did not cast spells with charisma or at all were forced or encuraged to invest in charisma, turn undead, Wild empathy, lay on hands, divine grace were all features relying on charisma, plus the leadership feat if it was allowed, and there were rules for intimidating and feinting in combat, so those skills were also more useful for an martial character. It was also used for the use Magic device skill, and was for that reason important for artificers and rouges.
(I have not played any 3.5e at all, just been a DM for a expedition to Castle ravenloft campaign that never went anywhere, i just really like reading the splatbooks and building perfectly balanced characters with like +20 to intimidation or something stupid like that, so i am probably missing some crucial detail )
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
Like I said, it was not until 3rd edition and beyond, that Charisma was a useful stat. Even in 3.5 Charisma was more often a dump stat before any other. Higher Int meant more skills, Wis was an important save (Cha wasn't a save at all), Dex has been an important stat for a long time same with Con. Strength was even more important than Cha for most characters. Unless Cha was your prime stat, it wasn't that useful over all.
Skills wise it had it's moments, but 3.5 was all about optimization so social abilities took a back seat a lot of the time.
Yeah. It sucks that those didn't get improved from the UA to the final form, IMHO.
Xanathar's 2.0 could have them, just to fill pages if it needs more. If it is Planescape, I kind of doubt that it would have sidekick rules in it, but anything's possible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Side Kick Rules would be great really. Maybe do something like the old school followers rules as well to help expand on higher level play and down time.
Yeah. It sucks that those didn't get improved from the UA to the final form, IMHO.
Xanathar's 2.0 could have them, just to fill pages if it needs more. If it is Planescape, I kind of doubt that it would have sidekick rules in it, but anything's possible.
Even if it a Planescape type book it could have sidekicks for the run of the mill campaigns on Eberron, Forgotten Realms or even Wildmount sidekicks are great if you dont have a full group and need extra hands so to speak. Like back in 1st edition with Henchpersons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
They could make another variant class features for capstone abilities as many are rather lackluster and taking one level dips is a improvement over them. But I doubt there would be any changes to the artificer save adding infusions and well, spells.
Spells is also rather probable for a book to come in the style of a xanathar. So far we have psionic and summoning spells. Xanathar had a bit of elemental spells and a mix and blend of other styles of spells so we might get a mix and blend combined with summons and psionic, thus some artificer spells could be added.
A few races is also possible, like the thri-kreen if there to be a psionic book or variant race features. Though races are more common for monster books or setting books.
I stand corrected.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I really can’t get this idea out of my head now that you put it there. 😜 So what exactly did you have in mind?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Well yes but at the same time there was an wizard kit called the witch in 2e, where male members pr that kit were called warlocks, and just like the other editions they were spellcasters who made an pact with an supernatural (often evil) entity for your Magic , and 3.5e warlocks were Only cha based becuase charisma was the Only stat that could be used for spell like and supernatural abillities, the mechanics the warlock was based on, same reason that mind flayers had cha as their highest stat, they did shape the lore arround them as cha users tho
Well we already got palladin covered with oathbreaker (an similar Good version of oathbreaker for previously evil paladins could be cool), but mechanics for entering a New pact with a different god or patron or oath, or rules for loosing your connection to your god or patron would be cool
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
Maybe that was what got me confused. With all of these various editions all rolling around in my grapefruit, I find I keep getting more of the old stuff confuzzled.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I don't think it's that weird that Warlock uses charisma for its stat. After all, their magic is derived from a social interaction.. But I also kind of view charisma as not only its literal meaning, but also a sort of "Force of will" stat, which, in my mind, is why its used as a casting stat for Sorcerers and Paladins as well; Simply put, its not only a stat for making people believe you, but also a gauge of your own self-awareness, confidence and willpower. In this way, it makes sense for Sorcerers and Paladins as well as more a more literally charismatic class like Bard.
That being said, I also can't help but think that Both Warlock and Sorcerer should maybe be able to choose between Int or Cha, or maybe just be split down the middle. like Yea, you draw the power from a pact/your own inner capabilities, but in my mind, Warlocks are always at least somewhat hungry for knowledge, and Sorcerers at the very least want enough knowledge to control their arcane talents, so pure charisma from a roleplaying perspective doesn't seem right. Did I just come full circle on my own post? Hm.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
the thing is nothing in the lore or descriptions say anything about warlocks deriving their magic from force of will alone like the other spell casting classes do, shure they were described as such in 3.5e, but no current material would ever suggest that is how they cast their magic. Also like being good looking, likable, well mannered and persuasive will not help nearly as much when dealing with an eldrich abombination beyond time or with an asexual sterile demon only concerned with the blood war and it defenetly does not help when you are making a pact with the plane of positive energy or with an solar who can see past all your lies, and many a warlock is spawned with no formal interaction with their patron at all, particularly old one warlocks where their patrons might not be aware of them in the slightest or archfey warlocks where they patrons might have tricked them into making a pact. Contrast the description of the sorcerer's spellcasting feature with the same feature from the warlock, "an event in your past, or in the life of an parent or ancestor, left an indelible mark on you, infusing you with arcane magic" vs "Your arcane research and the magic bestowed on you by your patron have given you facility with spells.", look at the description for eldrich invocations "In your study of occult lore, you have unearthed eldritch invocations, fragments of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability."
it is so much more focused on eldrich research than it is for them to be just humble con-artists with magical sugar daddies, sorry if i am being unnecessarily confrontational (especially since i kinda do fully agree that they should be able to choose between charisma and intelligence) (also sorry if this ends up just completely unreadable) i just think it is absurd that the warlock fluff is all over their lust for knowledge and how people still think that that is not what they are, intelegence should have been the assumption from the start. Shure for a few warlock patrons charisma and force of will are more important (particularly an hexblade that fully disregards the schollarly vibes they were going for), and for blasting your foe with an elrich blast that is more charisma-y than int, and shure charisma is often a more fun stat to have, but still smarts is what they are first and formost, they are meant to be big brain bois who do their damm homework
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 always found it strange that Sorcs where Charisma based, if ever there was a class that would have been more logical to have Con as a casting stat it would have been sorcs. But I presume that was a balancing decision once.
Dumb joke incoming, maybe their primary is Charisma because its the save stat for planar spells.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
I have always viewed Wisdom as the willpower stat. In 3.5 the Wisdom save was actually called a Will Save. Wisdom is most used for saving throws against spells and effects that control the mind as well. Charisma is just your force of personality.
This is all just my thoughts and opinions on the matter of course.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Yea, fair enough, I can totally see wisdom playing a similar role, but I see the wisdom saves as more of "I'm perceptive enough to see through this spell" rather than "I just fight it off with determination." It's hard to put into words, but I guess its a certain... sense of self? that makes me more inclined towards charisma for that. That being said, if they ever added "willpower" proficiency I have no doubt it would probably be wisdom.
It's ok Ranger, you'll always be cool to me.. Unless druid gets another use for its wild shape charges.
I believe the real reason we see so many Charisma based characters is WotC over correcting for decades of Charisma being the universal dump stat. Until 3.5, Charisma really had no purpose in the game mechanically speaking beyond being a random requirement for Paladins and when dealing with followers. Bards were a terrible class until 5e so were rarely played as far as I can remember.
Now there are multiple classes that make use of it AND there are spells that use it as a saving throw. Now Charisma is almost as potent of a stat as Dexterity and Int is all but useless. My, how the times have changed.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Well yeah bards used to suck a bit but there were many ways in wich Classes that did not cast spells with charisma or at all were forced or encuraged to invest in charisma, turn undead, Wild empathy, lay on hands, divine grace were all features relying on charisma, plus the leadership feat if it was allowed, and there were rules for intimidating and feinting in combat, so those skills were also more useful for an martial character. It was also used for the use Magic device skill, and was for that reason important for artificers and rouges.
(I have not played any 3.5e at all, just been a DM for a expedition to Castle ravenloft campaign that never went anywhere, i just really like reading the splatbooks and building perfectly balanced characters with like +20 to intimidation or something stupid like that, so i am probably missing some crucial detail )
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
Like I said, it was not until 3rd edition and beyond, that Charisma was a useful stat. Even in 3.5 Charisma was more often a dump stat before any other. Higher Int meant more skills, Wis was an important save (Cha wasn't a save at all), Dex has been an important stat for a long time same with Con. Strength was even more important than Cha for most characters. Unless Cha was your prime stat, it wasn't that useful over all.
Skills wise it had it's moments, but 3.5 was all about optimization so social abilities took a back seat a lot of the time.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I wish the sidekick rules were more officially revisited after Essentials kit released, such an cool idea of turning monsters to helpers
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
Yeah. It sucks that those didn't get improved from the UA to the final form, IMHO.
Xanathar's 2.0 could have them, just to fill pages if it needs more. If it is Planescape, I kind of doubt that it would have sidekick rules in it, but anything's possible.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Side Kick Rules would be great really. Maybe do something like the old school followers rules as well to help expand on higher level play and down time.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
More crafting rules. More strongholds. More armies. Auction Houses. Social interaction rules in greater depth.
Even if it a Planescape type book it could have sidekicks for the run of the mill campaigns on Eberron, Forgotten Realms or even Wildmount sidekicks are great if you dont have a full group and need extra hands so to speak. Like back in 1st edition with Henchpersons.