Hot take, but IDK why but I was thinking about the way magic classes are built and have their own ability scores and ways they access spells (prepared or learned). Along the way, I came across the warlock and the idea that they gain occult knowledge as they progress (as stated in the PHB) but... they're prepared charisma casters, not knowledge or learned casters. They don't learn anything (and they should imo).
While I don't ever think the ability scores for any class would change (even if there was a new edition) and I do understand the barter aspect, but warlocks don't always know they've entered into a pact so using that as a basis for the ability score I think is a bit short sighted. Why would they not be wisdom casters as similarly to clerics their powers come from another being? Hell, between all the full caster classes why is there only 1 knowledge caster, 2 wisdom casters (though I also don't see or understand why druids would be wisdom casters either), and 3 charisma casters? It could all be even and it's not like it would alter the balance of the game. So what if I said Warlocks should be learned wisdom or knowledge casters?
Warlock "Flexcasting" or Picking your casting stat at creation was floated but shot down becuase i think people were worried that multiclassing would get out of hand.
I do like the idea that different entities would value different attributes, like an ancient entity of arcane knowledge would value int in a servant, while a fickle fae would love a charismatic person that entertains them and would understand the whimsical magical secrets that a more disciplined mind would scoff at. My table is playing with it on a case by case situation and only does it for story reasons not " i want to make this horrid build, pact please."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
they're prepared charisma casters, not knowledge or learned casters. They don't learn anything (and they should imo).
Warlocks aren't "prepared" casters except insofar as all classes use that term in the 2024 rules. They learn spells semi-permanently the same way that Bards and Sorcerers do.
It had been brought up multiple times before that charisma isn't a great fit for them. Most of the fluff when you read their class description leans far more towards intelligence than any other stat. They were initially designed and written as a intelligence class so that fits. They ended up as charisma casters during the original 2014 playtest. I suspect the main driver of that change was not what made sense, but charisma is flat out a far far better stat. Wisdom is a great stat, its a good save and has perception. Charisma covers an entire section of play, it is the social sphere of the game.
Int, it does very little. It is stuck in that weird spot where you roll for knowledge, but for story purposes people want the players to know things so the roll is almost performative. And other aspects are kind of silly you are fighting a fire elemental, use a turn to roll arcana. Oh geez guys I think its immune to fire. The vast majority of monsters you don't even have to metagame to guess their weakness and strengths. They are the books that you can judge by the cover.
End result, during a playtest not enough people wanted it to be int. I'd prefer it, but so be it. I am not going to argue it in this thread as I said its been brought up before and I have no desire to go in circles again with the people who think it should be charisma. I don't expect any changes in this edition. But like how a supplement expanded class spell lists in the 2014 version, a supplement could come out that could add the option. Depending on how well 2024 D&D is doing will determine how fast a 6e will come out. Whenever it does hopefully if the game looks anything like 5e there will be a int warlock option.
The "fluff" you're citing also greatly emphasizes that they gain their powers from developing some form of relationship with a being or beings. Which happens to be CHA's bag. And being handed pieces of knowledge or reading "Magic for Dummies: Learn to Cast a Fireball Following these Five Easy Steps" is a far cry from the kind of intelligence involved in being able to continuously develop and adapt your own spells.
Also, the fundamental point is that they not Wizards or Clerics, and therefore their powers have a different foundation.
It had been brought up multiple times before that charisma isn't a great fit for them.
A warlock's whole shtick is trying to bend eldritch forces to their will. CHA's the only stat that does make sense
The "well, they read a lot of old books just like wizards, so they should use INT" assumes that INT would actually help them. The OG trope is that, generally speaking, those tomes are the ravings of lunatics and/or have a tendency to drive mortals mad, not how-to textbooks. You don't study them, you have to endure them
Sure, there are plenty of ways to flavor a warlock that aren't straight outta Dunwich, but a pact isn't intended to be something that simple and purely transactional. It's not "read a tome, contact an entity, gain a power, repeat". It's about how well you make out in those contract negotiations that matters in the end, and last time I checked, Persuasion and Deception were CHA skills
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
To me a warlock is both ambitious and lazy. Too lazy to do the rigorous study a wizard will. Ambitious enough to make a pact with a higher being, and thinking of the potential power.
If a warlock was intelligent, he would be a wizard, if he was high on wisdom, he would not take an easy way and make a pact with a monster.
I can’t think of a stat less appropriate for a Warlock than Intelligence except Wisdom. You have to be both stupid and foolish to be making pacts with devils and archfey and thinking you’ll come out ahead
I can’t think of a stat less appropriate for a Warlock than Intelligence except Wisdom. You have to be both stupid and foolish to be making pacts with devils and archfey and thinking you’ll come out ahead
Let's see, there is "cleverly wording your interactions so a being like a Fey or Djinn owes you" INT then there is "being wise and empathetic enough to aid a being with problems very unlike yours" WIS, then there is "Doing enough research that you find an entity's true name and compel it into service" INT, and "Being empathetic enough to the suffering of others but not having a religious education so a Celestial decides to give you a little power to make the world better."
There are so many other ways to form pacts than "give devil soul." Even within D&D cannon there have been examples like Raistlin accepting a deal from an entity during his test, because he was DESPERATE not stupid. If he failed his tower test, he would have just died. Opening up Stats for pacts no only gives diversity, but it also opens up entities to be more insidious with how they appeal to people.
The real problem is that it would mean warlock breaks CHR caster containment and it has a history of being the most dipped class for broken builds. That is the best argument against it i have seen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
I can’t think of a stat less appropriate for a Warlock than Intelligence except Wisdom. You have to be both stupid and foolish to be making pacts with devils and archfey and thinking you’ll come out ahead
This is an extremely narrow view of warlocks and their pacts. The proverbial "deal with the devil" is not the only way they get there. The warlock in the game I'm running now made a deal with an archfey because it was the only way out of a bad situation. The warlock I played in a prior game learned arcane wisdom from studying the stars, and wanted to share it with the world. (Great old one) The nature and scope of the pact is quite malleable, and the circumstances can easily be such that it was a reasonable decision at the time.
(It's also a problem with the nature of the mental stats, which have always been awkward and overlapping and ill-defined. There really is no good stat to encapsulate what a warlock does, and the tacked-on "force of personality" of Charisma is perhaps the best of a bad lot.)
As a DM, I'd certainly be open to arguments of using different mental stats for a warlock, depending on backstory... with the caveat that it wasn't done as some sort of power build dipping. Though I do wonder, because I've seen it argued that some of the most powerful warlock dips are already CHA-based.
I think part of the Charisma based is the fact they made a deal with an all powerful being well beyond their mortal comprehension and it said yes. So its very much like a paladin's zeal or a sorcerer's force of personality
Most Casters have to work for it (even sorcerers need to find creative ways to use their magic via metamagic) but Warlocks cheat, and I love them for it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hot take, but IDK why but I was thinking about the way magic classes are built and have their own ability scores and ways they access spells (prepared or learned). Along the way, I came across the warlock and the idea that they gain occult knowledge as they progress (as stated in the PHB) but... they're prepared charisma casters, not knowledge or learned casters. They don't learn anything (and they should imo).
While I don't ever think the ability scores for any class would change (even if there was a new edition) and I do understand the barter aspect, but warlocks don't always know they've entered into a pact so using that as a basis for the ability score I think is a bit short sighted. Why would they not be wisdom casters as similarly to clerics their powers come from another being? Hell, between all the full caster classes why is there only 1 knowledge caster, 2 wisdom casters (though I also don't see or understand why druids would be wisdom casters either), and 3 charisma casters? It could all be even and it's not like it would alter the balance of the game. So what if I said Warlocks should be learned wisdom or knowledge casters?
Wisdom is about the exact opposite of how warlocks cast spells. In fact, having a high wisdom should prevent someone from becoming a warlock.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Warlock "Flexcasting" or Picking your casting stat at creation was floated but shot down becuase i think people were worried that multiclassing would get out of hand.
I do like the idea that different entities would value different attributes, like an ancient entity of arcane knowledge would value int in a servant, while a fickle fae would love a charismatic person that entertains them and would understand the whimsical magical secrets that a more disciplined mind would scoff at.
My table is playing with it on a case by case situation and only does it for story reasons not " i want to make this horrid build, pact please."
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
Warlocks aren't "prepared" casters except insofar as all classes use that term in the 2024 rules. They learn spells semi-permanently the same way that Bards and Sorcerers do.
pronouns: he/she/they
It had been brought up multiple times before that charisma isn't a great fit for them. Most of the fluff when you read their class description leans far more towards intelligence than any other stat. They were initially designed and written as a intelligence class so that fits. They ended up as charisma casters during the original 2014 playtest. I suspect the main driver of that change was not what made sense, but charisma is flat out a far far better stat. Wisdom is a great stat, its a good save and has perception. Charisma covers an entire section of play, it is the social sphere of the game.
Int, it does very little. It is stuck in that weird spot where you roll for knowledge, but for story purposes people want the players to know things so the roll is almost performative. And other aspects are kind of silly you are fighting a fire elemental, use a turn to roll arcana. Oh geez guys I think its immune to fire. The vast majority of monsters you don't even have to metagame to guess their weakness and strengths. They are the books that you can judge by the cover.
End result, during a playtest not enough people wanted it to be int. I'd prefer it, but so be it. I am not going to argue it in this thread as I said its been brought up before and I have no desire to go in circles again with the people who think it should be charisma. I don't expect any changes in this edition. But like how a supplement expanded class spell lists in the 2014 version, a supplement could come out that could add the option. Depending on how well 2024 D&D is doing will determine how fast a 6e will come out. Whenever it does hopefully if the game looks anything like 5e there will be a int warlock option.
The "fluff" you're citing also greatly emphasizes that they gain their powers from developing some form of relationship with a being or beings. Which happens to be CHA's bag. And being handed pieces of knowledge or reading "Magic for Dummies: Learn to Cast a Fireball Following these Five Easy Steps" is a far cry from the kind of intelligence involved in being able to continuously develop and adapt your own spells.
Also, the fundamental point is that they not Wizards or Clerics, and therefore their powers have a different foundation.
A warlock's whole shtick is trying to bend eldritch forces to their will. CHA's the only stat that does make sense
The "well, they read a lot of old books just like wizards, so they should use INT" assumes that INT would actually help them. The OG trope is that, generally speaking, those tomes are the ravings of lunatics and/or have a tendency to drive mortals mad, not how-to textbooks. You don't study them, you have to endure them
Sure, there are plenty of ways to flavor a warlock that aren't straight outta Dunwich, but a pact isn't intended to be something that simple and purely transactional. It's not "read a tome, contact an entity, gain a power, repeat". It's about how well you make out in those contract negotiations that matters in the end, and last time I checked, Persuasion and Deception were CHA skills
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
PIPA - Planar Interception/Protection Aeormaton, warforged bodyguard and ex-wizard hunter (Warrior of the Elements monk/Cartographer artificer)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
To me a warlock is both ambitious and lazy. Too lazy to do the rigorous study a wizard will. Ambitious enough to make a pact with a higher being, and thinking of the potential power.
If a warlock was intelligent, he would be a wizard, if he was high on wisdom, he would not take an easy way and make a pact with a monster.
By elimination CHA would be the ability.
I can’t think of a stat less appropriate for a Warlock than Intelligence except Wisdom. You have to be both stupid and foolish to be making pacts with devils and archfey and thinking you’ll come out ahead
Let's see, there is "cleverly wording your interactions so a being like a Fey or Djinn owes you" INT then there is "being wise and empathetic enough to aid a being with problems very unlike yours" WIS, then there is "Doing enough research that you find an entity's true name and compel it into service" INT, and "Being empathetic enough to the suffering of others but not having a religious education so a Celestial decides to give you a little power to make the world better."
There are so many other ways to form pacts than "give devil soul." Even within D&D cannon there have been examples like Raistlin accepting a deal from an entity during his test, because he was DESPERATE not stupid. If he failed his tower test, he would have just died.
Opening up Stats for pacts no only gives diversity, but it also opens up entities to be more insidious with how they appeal to people.
The real problem is that it would mean warlock breaks CHR caster containment and it has a history of being the most dipped class for broken builds. That is the best argument against it i have seen.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
This is an extremely narrow view of warlocks and their pacts. The proverbial "deal with the devil" is not the only way they get there. The warlock in the game I'm running now made a deal with an archfey because it was the only way out of a bad situation. The warlock I played in a prior game learned arcane wisdom from studying the stars, and wanted to share it with the world. (Great old one) The nature and scope of the pact is quite malleable, and the circumstances can easily be such that it was a reasonable decision at the time.
(It's also a problem with the nature of the mental stats, which have always been awkward and overlapping and ill-defined. There really is no good stat to encapsulate what a warlock does, and the tacked-on "force of personality" of Charisma is perhaps the best of a bad lot.)
As a DM, I'd certainly be open to arguments of using different mental stats for a warlock, depending on backstory... with the caveat that it wasn't done as some sort of power build dipping. Though I do wonder, because I've seen it argued that some of the most powerful warlock dips are already CHA-based.
I think part of the Charisma based is the fact they made a deal with an all powerful being well beyond their mortal comprehension and it said yes. So its very much like a paladin's zeal or a sorcerer's force of personality
Most Casters have to work for it (even sorcerers need to find creative ways to use their magic via metamagic) but Warlocks cheat, and I love them for it.