Vestige Companion has this sentence: "It uses the Vestige Companion stat block and is a Celestial, Fiend, or Undead (choose when you gain this feature)." Too me this implies that your choice is permanent... similar to when you choose from which spell list you are working when you choose the Magic Initiate Feat.
However, later, after the Disappearance of the Vestige, these sentences are written: "Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can summon the vestige in a new form, which appears in an unoccupied space within 5 feet of you. You choose its appearance and whether it is a Celestial, Fiend, or Undead." This is clearly stating the original choice is not permanent.
I feel the text of one of these paragraphs needs to be altered to reflect what is intended.
The choice is permanent until another feature allows you to make a change to the form, which Disappearance of the Vestige does. It looks intentional to me.
It feels like something that should be permanent. Your vestige is the last remnant of a dying god, and that god presumably had an alignment/identity of some kind. Now you're telling me it can switch between being a fiend and a celestial? The lore is conflicting with the gameplay.
It feels like something that should be permanent. Your vestige is the last remnant of a dying god, and that god presumably had an alignment/identity of some kind. Now you're telling me it can switch between being a fiend and a celestial? The lore is conflicting with the gameplay.
You are, of course, free to make the same choice each time, meaning it would effectively be permanent. Others may wish to make a different choice. Options are good.
It feels like something that should be permanent. Your vestige is the last remnant of a dying god, and that god presumably had an alignment/identity of some kind. Now you're telling me it can switch between being a fiend and a celestial? The lore is conflicting with the gameplay.
I'm ok with how this is written. You are choosing the form the vestige (i.e. a trace of the god, substantially reduced in power compared to the god itself) of the god takes, not the god itself. That is to say that this is only a portion of the god's remaining power, so it makes sense to me that it is mutable and can change to suit your needs, as the dying god is getting as much out of this pact as the warlock is.
It feels like something that should be permanent. Your vestige is the last remnant of a dying god, and that god presumably had an alignment/identity of some kind. Now you're telling me it can switch between being a fiend and a celestial? The lore is conflicting with the gameplay.
This feels like an attempt to bring the Binder from 3.5 into 5e. The Binder could form Pacts with multiple Vestiges. Additionally, many gods have multiple facets. As SpinzFire says, the fragment of the god or power you are connecting to might not be consistent. I think most likely the appropriate interpretation is that you essentially have 3 Pacts and can switch between them like a Beastmaster Ranger switches their Primal Companion.
The Binder’s shtick was that you were able to bind different and multiple vestiges to gain different powers. And while I do like warlock having a pet class option, it feels off. Back in 4.0 VLocks operated by swapping vestiges with their daily spells, and this would adjust certain class features. The simplified format was still useful.
This? It feels like an upgraded chainlock combined with the Summoner of Pathfinder. Do I think a summoner style warlock would be good? Heckin ya. But trying to cram the Vestiges into it? It’s a bit of a no for me dawg. The Binder is the occultist that warlocks COULD be. Ancient knowledge, cobbled together simple pacts and invocations, but it doesn’t feel like a pet class. If anything IMHO that concept would fit better as Tomelock thematics. This is giving “we wanted to try again on the warlock UA everyone hated” (side note I did not hate it). If ya wanna make the Binder a pet class, then the whole theme needs to be supported. Specific vestiges to bind, abilities granted based on which. Support for multiple bindings. Specific pets based on your primary bindings. It’s a whole mess.
That being said? I like the subclass, but I don’t really enjoy the flavor on it.
It feels like something that should be permanent. Your vestige is the last remnant of a dying god, and that god presumably had an alignment/identity of some kind. Now you're telling me it can switch between being a fiend and a celestial? The lore is conflicting with the gameplay.
I mean so do most of the retraining rules. You were a Wizard Initiate and learned a bunch of magic but then suddenly you weren't and forgot it all?
The conflict between deep roleplay and accessible gaming is a real one. I tend to pose this question when this conflict comes up - will it prevent you from playing the way you want to? A roleplayer can simply choose to never change it. So presenting it as an option allows for all types to play.
I will also say that a vestige that cycles between two or more of these forms could actually be really fertile ground for roleplay. Maybe its a manifestation of the god's mood, or maybe you have multiples fighting over you, or maybe you have a plausible campaign-specific reason why the vestige is chaotic or changeable.
It feels like something that should be permanent. Your vestige is the last remnant of a dying god, and that god presumably had an alignment/identity of some kind. Now you're telling me it can switch between being a fiend and a celestial? The lore is conflicting with the gameplay.
The conflict between deep roleplay and accessible gaming is a real one. I tend to pose this question when this conflict comes up - will it prevent you from playing the way you want to? A roleplayer can simply choose to never change it. So presenting it as an option allows for all types to play.
Spot on! This is a core concept, embodied by so many players in so many different ways. For example, the DM in one of my regular games has a core philosophy: Story trumps rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Vestige Companion has this sentence: "It uses the Vestige Companion stat block and is a Celestial, Fiend, or Undead (choose when you gain this feature)." Too me this implies that your choice is permanent... similar to when you choose from which spell list you are working when you choose the Magic Initiate Feat.
However, later, after the Disappearance of the Vestige, these sentences are written: "Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can summon the vestige in a new form, which appears in an unoccupied space within 5 feet of you. You choose its appearance and whether it is a Celestial, Fiend, or Undead." This is clearly stating the original choice is not permanent.
I feel the text of one of these paragraphs needs to be altered to reflect what is intended.
Rules never imply anything. They only do what they say. It does not say the choice is permanent, so it is not.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
It feels like something that should be permanent. Your vestige is the last remnant of a dying god, and that god presumably had an alignment/identity of some kind. Now you're telling me it can switch between being a fiend and a celestial? The lore is conflicting with the gameplay.
You are, of course, free to make the same choice each time, meaning it would effectively be permanent. Others may wish to make a different choice. Options are good.
I'm ok with how this is written. You are choosing the form the vestige (i.e. a trace of the god, substantially reduced in power compared to the god itself) of the god takes, not the god itself. That is to say that this is only a portion of the god's remaining power, so it makes sense to me that it is mutable and can change to suit your needs, as the dying god is getting as much out of this pact as the warlock is.
This feels like an attempt to bring the Binder from 3.5 into 5e. The Binder could form Pacts with multiple Vestiges. Additionally, many gods have multiple facets. As SpinzFire says, the fragment of the god or power you are connecting to might not be consistent. I think most likely the appropriate interpretation is that you essentially have 3 Pacts and can switch between them like a Beastmaster Ranger switches their Primal Companion.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
The Binder’s shtick was that you were able to bind different and multiple vestiges to gain different powers. And while I do like warlock having a pet class option, it feels off. Back in 4.0 VLocks operated by swapping vestiges with their daily spells, and this would adjust certain class features. The simplified format was still useful.
This? It feels like an upgraded chainlock combined with the Summoner of Pathfinder. Do I think a summoner style warlock would be good? Heckin ya. But trying to cram the Vestiges into it? It’s a bit of a no for me dawg. The Binder is the occultist that warlocks COULD be. Ancient knowledge, cobbled together simple pacts and invocations, but it doesn’t feel like a pet class. If anything IMHO that concept would fit better as Tomelock thematics. This is giving “we wanted to try again on the warlock UA everyone hated” (side note I did not hate it). If ya wanna make the Binder a pet class, then the whole theme needs to be supported. Specific vestiges to bind, abilities granted based on which. Support for multiple bindings. Specific pets based on your primary bindings. It’s a whole mess.
That being said? I like the subclass, but I don’t really enjoy the flavor on it.
I mean so do most of the retraining rules. You were a Wizard Initiate and learned a bunch of magic but then suddenly you weren't and forgot it all?
The conflict between deep roleplay and accessible gaming is a real one. I tend to pose this question when this conflict comes up - will it prevent you from playing the way you want to? A roleplayer can simply choose to never change it. So presenting it as an option allows for all types to play.
I will also say that a vestige that cycles between two or more of these forms could actually be really fertile ground for roleplay. Maybe its a manifestation of the god's mood, or maybe you have multiples fighting over you, or maybe you have a plausible campaign-specific reason why the vestige is chaotic or changeable.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Spot on! This is a core concept, embodied by so many players in so many different ways. For example, the DM in one of my regular games has a core philosophy: Story trumps rules.