D&D 5E 5e PHB Warlock Advancement Table Spells max 5th Level but Spell list max 9th Level

[Fire Brand]

This is interesting. The Warlock spell list go up to 9th level on 5e PHB pg 210 but the Warlock spell slot level only goes up to 5th on the Warlock class advancement table pg 106.

And fwiw...

Spell Slots (pg.107)
The Warlock table shows how many spell slots you have.
The table also shows what the level of those slots is; all
of your spell slots are the same level. To cast one of your
warlock spells of 1st level or higher, you must expend a
spell slot. You regain all expended spell slots when you
finish a short or long rest.
For example, when you are 5th level, you have
two 3rd-level spell slots. To cast the 1st-level spell
thunderwave, you must spend one of those slots, and
you cast it as a 3rd-level spell.

Spells Known of 1st Level and Higher
At 1st level, you know two 1st-level spells of your choice
from the warlock spell list.
The Spells Known column of the Warlock table shows
when you learn more warlock spells of your choice of 1st
level and higher. A spell you choose must be of a level
no higher than what’s shown in the table’s Slot Level
column for your level. When you reach 6th level, for
example, you learn a new warlock spell, which can be
1st, 2nd, or 3rd level.
Additionally, when you gain a level in this class,
you can choose one of the warlock spells you know
and replace it with another spell from the warlock
spell list, which also must be of a level for which you
have spell slots.
(which is cool because WotC varified: “Warlock spells can be replaced with an spell of the Slot level or lower. At level 10 you have 2 spell slots that can have spells 5th level or lower.” ie, go ahead and replace a lower level spell with a 5th to have 2 5th unless for a character background role playing the lower level spell at the 5th slot level damage/effect works for you)

I’m thinking perhaps this is for future rare magic implements with charges(?)

I asked WotC as part of a different Q. Their answer was ‘it’ll be passed to the proper team.’ ie. No explanation right now (as far as I could tell what they meant)

Compared to their respective tables : Bard 9th, Cleric 9th, Druid 9th, Paladin 5th, Rangers do stop at spell Lvl 5, Sorcerer’s 9th, Wizard of course 9th.

I know 5e warlocks are a unique spell casting class compared to the others but I don’t think I’m missing anything. Or am I?

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Yes, you are. Mystic Incarnum, level 11.

Why is there a new thread like twice a day by someone who apparently reads rules pretty carefully and STILL misses this? Is it worded particularly poorly?

 

[Fire Brand]

Yes, you are. Mystic Incarnum, level 11.

Why is there a new thread like twice a day by someone who apparently reads rules pretty carefully and STILL misses this? Is it worded particularly poorly?

Thanks for the kind response. I did find the rule right after I posted. Yes I did miss this particular one. I couldn't delete this thread. I've asked Morrus to do it.

I'm embarrassed I completely missed that. I was looking at building a low level Warlock so was looking under the Spells section of the class and the general advancement table. I skipped right over the high level Mystic Arcanum and Eldritch Master. Clear as day now. I should have known it had something to do with the uniqueness of the class.

You're incorrect about "a new thread like twice a day...and STILL misses this". The pact blade rule posted a couple days ago is what you're thinking of. And no it wasn't completely clear in one phrase. There were people who gave some creative examples of what WotC really meant. That was the only thread a couple people were upset about. Otherwise if you look closely, my threads (including the pact blade) have gotten some interesting responses, including from the people who were stunned I couldn't figure it out. I could have approached posting that pact blade one differently. But there were still good ideas out of it.

Thanks.

 

[Essenti]

You're incorrect about "a new thread like twice a day...and STILL misses this". The pact blade rule posted a couple days ago is what you're thinking of. And no it wasn't completely clear in one phrase. There were people who gave some creative examples of what WotC really meant. That was the only thread a couple people were upset about. Otherwise if you look closely, my threads (including the pact blade) have gotten some interesting responses, including from the people who were stunned I couldn't figure it out. I could have approached posting that pact blade one differently. But there were still good ideas out of it.

Thanks.

I think ZombieRoboNinja meant this thread: A-tad-confused-about-Warlock-magic which was originally posted yesteraday, and last post was earlier today.

I do believe I have seen at least one more thread on this. The real issue is that the Warlock magic is apparently just confusing enough that even careful people overlook those class features often enough to be noted in these 5e threads.

 

[Fire Brand]

I think ZombieRoboNinja meant this thread: A-tad-confused-about-Warlock-magic which was originally posted yesteraday, and last post was earlier today.

I do believe I have seen at least one more thread on this. The real issue is that the Warlock magic is apparently just confusing enough that even careful people overlook those class features often enough to be noted in these 5e threads.

Thank you for understanding. Yes if that thread is the reference I see. Would have been nice to have linked to. I never played a spell caster prior to 4e. And even then it was a Warlock based on the power system. I always played the hack-n-slash characters. Not the glass cannons ; But Warlocks are more aggressive so are interesting. Anyway. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Sorry for being curt, I was typing on my phone. I certainly don't blame you either, since it seems to be a very common error even among people who are clearly pretty experienced and tuned in to 5e.

 

[Fire Brand]

Sorry for being curt, I was typing on my phone. I certainly don't blame you either, since it seems to be a very common error even among people who are clearly pretty experienced and tuned in to 5e.

Thank you, sir. This thread still may be deleted because I wasn't aware of the other one.

I haven't been using the search function because not everyone had access to the PHB yet. And yes unfortunately I was speed reading it and more worried about typing and spell check than reading all the way thru the chapter. That was my fault.


Fwiw I do find it helpful when older thread links to similar topics or maybe literally the same one show up below when the thread starts.

I'll add one more thought I said in Monster Knowledge check thread (some excellent feedback there even though there are older threads)

The ‘old school’ gamers should have little problems with 5e. I do think some wording will cause the traditional D&D problems. Not as bad as rules lawyering. And besides enworld.org, WotC is very good answering Q's to you even if it takes a few days. And hey get this even they’ve gotten some rulings incorrect or had to look it up! When everyone gets the PHB it’ll be easier to help one another.

5e right now is like driving somebody else’s car. I have to get used to it. That’ll be be my signature : Right now it’s literally rental car. I borrowed a PHB from someone and scanned a couple pages to copy & paste. That’s why I’ve missed some info. “At 11th level you get” yeah whatever. I’m not there yet :

 

[Juriel]

This keeps coming up, because a class having 3 different methods for gaining their spells is just as confusing as it sounds.

 

[Evenglare]

This may not be the right place for it, but I'm wondering if you can pump up a regular spell to the 6th-9th levels instead of using the spell you picked. Specially thinking about Armor of Agyths and how sweet it would be to gain 45 temp HP and deal 45 pts of cold damage when hit.

 

[Fire Brand]

This keeps coming up, because a class having 3 different methods for gaining their spells is just as confusing as it sounds.

(Perhaps this thread doesn’t have to be deleted afterall.)

It’s bringing up some valid points. that people who aren’t new to D&D nor dummies : ) like me have to wrap their head around the 5e mash-up that the new version is imho kind of like a “greatest previous edition hits with new songs and remixes on it” (hey my new tag line). Ultimately it is in a good way – and it feels more ‘old school’ than 4e for sure.

The Warlock picks up some of the flavor in 4e power spell names and pact blade if nothing else – and fro all I know they come from 2-3.5e which I skipped playing – (which is why the name ‘pact blade’ which is more accurately a ‘pact weapon’ – even WotC support was calling it that – threw me for a loop in my first Warlock thread). And support even had to correct themselves on another warlock spell ruling for me! I caught errata in 5e Warlock quick build took from the alpha draft they didn’t update when they updated the spell list. So even WotC is learning their new system

But if you’re used to playing a previous edition(s) a lot, and not all of them, or some of them in the distant past, which 5e draws from, it can be confusing when you expect one thing and get another.

Once more people get the PHB and can sit down with it we can help each other make sense of it.

Personally I had a borrowed book I had to get back. You know like when you have to return a library book the next day so you speed read what you think are the important parts. It doesn’t make complete sense. so you ask a Q. Then right after you do you that you realize that a higher level feature actually is tied to what you were looking for. even though you’re looking at making a low level PC let a lot perhaps a multi-class for more defense up front. Exactly what happened.

Thanks for the responses. I think were doing OK.

I'm excited about 5e.