D&D (2024) Will Pact Magic survive?

[Frozen_Heart]

I can see it already. To balance warlock for DnDone they:

• Replace pact magic with normal casting.
• Make the pact boons as minor as holy orders in effect.
• Remove invocations.

 

[Remathilis]

No, the Occam's Razor solution is to scrap the entire class. Scrap all caster classes except one, call it the magic-user, and make it serve all concepts equally. Pick your casting stat, pick your spell list, and you're good to go.

And I mean that in all seriousness. There is a very substantial cost to having so many classes -- both in needless complexity, and in concepts that can't be built. Why do we need a Wild Shape feature when we have alter self and polymorph? Why shouldn't Turn Undead and Bardic Inspiration be spells too? Why should the scholar-spellcaster be forbidden access to healing magic? Sweep away the cruft and focus all the designers' efforts on making one polished, balanced, versatile caster class that can be whatever you want it to be.

If 1D&D is indeed moving to prepared spells for everyone (gutting the sorcerer's raison d'etre, which was already on life support), the warlock is the only caster class left whose mechanics are distinct enough to justify standing on its own. Maybe that's not a good enough reason to keep it; but in that case, let's not waste designer time or page count on yet another 9-level caster with a coat of black paint.

Well just going classless with a point-buy system would be the ultimate Occam's Razor, but let's not throw the baby out completely. Warlocks still have invocations which are a helluva lot more interesting than spell points on a sorcerer. The theme of a warlock is likewise on point. And I'm not one who thinks a class must justify its existence by reinventing the wheel. (If so, D&D would be only two classes or the above mentioned classless).

 

[Remathilis]

You mean the BORING solution. (Also: Screw level-based multiclassing.)

In a choice between pact magic and multi-classing, I'll keep multi-classing. 99% of all mc combos are fine. The only broken parts are 1.) Going into a 1 level cleric for full weapon/armor proficiencies or 2.) Using pact magic as free paladin smites or free sorcery points per short rest. The first is being fixed by holy orders and domain coming later, now it's time to fix the second.

I can see it already. To balance warlock for DnDone they:

• Replace pact magic with normal casting.
• Make the pact boons as minor as holy orders in effect.
• Remove invocations.

I don't think you need to remove invocations. They are on power with the Channel powers of a priest. Pact boon is already minor (free weapon, free cantrips, or free familiar). If it is too much, you can limit warlocks by making them half-casters OR limiting school usable (say, to conjuration, necromancy, divination and enchantment) plus EB and bonus spells from their patron.

 

[Pauln6]

1. The class is really popular as it is.
2. It is easily modified by new invocations.
3. The most commonly mentioned issues with multiclassing seem to revolve around using warlock spell slots for other class features like smites and spell points, which are easily resolved by adjustments to the multiclass wording.
4. They seem to be moving in the direction of letting all classes know more spells, which will cover off that issue.

I'm not seeing any strong arguments for abolishing pact magic. Quite the opposite.

Sure, I would rather get a third slot sooner and having a choice of two spells for Mystic Arcana but it ain't broke.

 

[Remathilis]

1. The class is really popular as it is.
2. It is easily modified by new invocations.
3. The most commonly mentioned issues with multiclassing seem to revolve around using warlock spell slots for other class features like smites and spell points, which are easily resolved by adjustments to the multiclass wording.
4. They seem to be moving in the direction of letting all classes know more spells, which will cover off that issue.

I'm not seeing any strong arguments for abolishing pact magic. Quite the opposite.

Sure, I would rather get a third slot sooner and having a choice of two spells for Mystic Arcana but it ain't broke.

The two biggest issues you didn't address is the fact they require mandatory short rests to be effective and spell prep is based on spell slots, not a "spells known" number. The system as is conflicts with 1D&D's design ethos. To remove short rest recharge, you're going to have to double or triple the spell slots for a per day, which would also fix spells prepped I guess. But at that point all your doing is keeping the "auto upcasting" mechanic.

Honestly, I'm surprised that people are so happy with pact magic. Those short rests must be plentiful in your games.

 

[Dausuul]

The two biggest issues you didn't address is the fact they require mandatory short rests to be effective and spell prep is based on spell slots, not a "spells known" number. The system as is conflicts with 1D&D's design ethos. To remove short rest recharge, you're going to have to double or triple the spell slots for a per day, which would also fix spells prepped I guess. But at that point all your doing is keeping the "auto upcasting" mechanic.

The obvious solution is to give warlocks a recharge mechanic, usable (proficiency bonus) times per day, which takes one minute. This would be consistent with the general thrust of 1D&D in moving short-rest mechanics to prof/day, and it solves the whole problem very neatly and cleanly.

That's not theorycrafting, by the way. My table has been using a house rule along those lines for years (a short rest is 5 minutes, capped at 2 per day per character) and it works great. Others on ENWorld have done the same.

As far as spell prep being based on spell slots... well, yeah, that's not going to work with pact magic. But that's only a problem if 1D&D insists on trying to modify pact magic to be more like other kinds of spellcasting, which is exactly what I'm arguing against.

 

[Aldarc]

How does one balance around 5 minute short rests? Presumably that just makes those abilities useable once per fight or at-will out of combat?

The way we do it in my game is that short rests can be taken twice, but then you need a long rest to recharge them. They're also a character specific resource, one character can take a short rest without everyone else taking one.

One way WotC could handle Rest is like the Cypher System's Recovery System. The first Recovery/Rest is short, and then it gets progressively longer - i.e., 1 Action, 10 Minutes, 1 Hour - until a Long Rest is required.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Warlocks are easy to play, but they are highly complicated to build.

not really. you pick a patron (from 3-8 choices based on number of books you want to use/your dm uses) then 2 cantrips and 2 1st level spells... no other class has 5 or less AND cast spells, it is the simplist of the caster

A warlock's play style is defined by their pact, their patron, their invocations and their spell selection. In theory, that should make them versatile, but in reality, there are really only two builds: eldritch blaster or hexblade.

funny I have seen about a dozen diffrent builds

You don't have enough spells (or reliable access to them) to really do anything else. Which is why in my experience, hexblades tend to slide into paladin while blasters eventually opt for levels in sorcerer.

bard paliy and sorcerer are all great synergies, but I don't see a reason to multi into eitther

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Because of almost all the classes, it's the one where you have to plan your character out ahead of time. You have to build into the blaster or the hexblade with the right patrons, pacts, invocations and spells.

this seems like something a power gamer would do... but they do for any class... I can't imagine a druid player not planing out subclass... a bladesinger vs an invocer vrs a warmage even

For example, if you plan to play a melee warlock, you must pick hexblade, blade pact, thirsting blade, etc or you will suck at it (and I don't mean not optimal, I mean fail at your role).

nope... my tome lock fey pact warlock picked up 1 feat and was an awesome melee combatant. I started with sheil... the druid hit with stick cantrip, but traded it out for primal savagry that I fluffed into iron teeth bite cause she was a warlock of Baba Yaga... she also made a deal with an Imp in game and cast find familiar on them... as a ritual then had the best of hexblade fey tome and chain all in one

A player who doesn't plan ahead can easily fall into trap options or miss key components.

nope... sorry but even an unoptimized warlock has more options then the most optimized fighter and can come close to damage with 1 cantrip and invocation choice...

Like druid, it expects a certain amount of homework to play effectively, only in this case it's figuring out synergies between the major systems a warlock uses.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

When you're making any of those classes, you make a small handful of choices compared to a warlock.

I had to go back and look it up... you pick 2 cantrips and 2 1st level spells and your patron... that's it... wizard has to choose more 1st level spells then you do total options.

edit: at 2nd level you have 2 cantrips 3 1st level spells and 2 invocatons... at 1st level the wizard has to pick 6 first level spells and 3 cantrips... so if we count subclass/patron for warlock that is at level 2 8 choices, for wizard at level 1 it's 9 choices all from longer lists with more varried effects... and as you add more books to give the warlock more choices the wizard gains more still... and when the wizard goes up to level 2 it has to pick a subclass and 2 more 1st level spells to know....

edit 2 I forgot wizards prep so the wizard not only has 6 first lvel and 3 cantrips known but then preps int mosd (lets say 3) plus level spells... so at level 1 that is 4 more choices, some to be made daily, and at level 2 you get another prep spell... oh and wizards and clerics can ritual cast out the gate

In play, a warlock is less complicated ("I cast Eldritch Blast"), but when you're first making the character, especially as a newbie (see my original post)? There's a ton more choices for warlocks.

at stores and cons I often run first time players... I see more warlocks and bards then fighters

That's what I was specifically addressing.

yeah but I still disagree. most newbies playing for 1st-5th level enjoy the heck out of warlock.

in fact I think it is the BEST class to intro a newbie into D&D 5e