D&D (2024) The new warlock (Packet 7)

[Clint_L]

You can sort of already have a Draconic patron via Bahamut (Celestial) or Tiamat (Fiend). It's certainly not a stretch to imagine an ancient dragon turtle being a patron for Fathomless, and the dracolich Dragotha is actually cited as a potential warlock patron for The Undead.

 

[Sir Brennen]

You can sort of already have a Draconic patron via Bahamut (Celestial) or Tiamat (Fiend). It's certainly not a stretch to imagine an ancient dragon turtle being a patron for Fathomless, and the dracolich Dragotha is actually cited as a potential warlock patron for The Undead.

But you won't necessarily have the powers/spells that reflect those draconic patrons the way a Draconic Sorcerer does its lineage (or would, if they gave them some bonus spells known!)

I mean, there's tons you can do narratively for all kinds of class backgrounds/power sources in D&D. But I think folks want the mechanics to back more of those off-core scenarios up.

 

[lall]

The question I'm not sure about is how much actual dipping gets done. (I don't mind "genuine multiclassing"). But there are only a few actually obnoxious single level dips, and most of them are (I hope) now a whole lot more niche.

• Sorcerers and bards dipping 1-2 levels of warlock for Eldritch Blast will with luck be blocked by EB scaling with warlock level (or just being a class feature) in the final version

For my 5.5 bard, it looks like a one-level dip is the way to go. Will likely cast Foresight most days, so the bard capstone is not that great. But I’ll want to raise CHA to 22 at level 19. First level in warlock gives my drow/halfling (with halfling stats) Devil’s Sight, which would otherwise cost a feat through Eldritch Adept. I also exchange DEX for WIS saves. Anything I get spell-wise is a bonus. I lose a 7th level slot, but it’s worth it.

 

[Remathilis]

Feind and Divine Soul, as well. Hell, I think he only real exception is Archfey Patron (and Draconic Origin). There hasn't been an official Fey-themed Origin, yet. I should know, I've wanted one for years. Well, specifically a NATURE-themed Origin, but Fey feels like it would be a decent avenue to take for that.

While Divine Soul can be evil-themed, the fact they end up as "sorcerers with access to healing magic" puts them closer to the "warlocks who have access to healing magic" than the "warlocks who use fire and brimstone" magic in my book.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

For my 5.5 bard, it looks like a one-level dip is the way to go. Will likely cast Foresight most days, so the bard capstone is not that great. But I’ll want to raise CHA to 22 at level 19. First level in warlock gives my drow/halfling (with halfling stats) Devil’s Sight, which would otherwise cost a feat through Eldritch Adept. I also exchange DEX for WIS saves. Anything I get spell-wise is a bonus. I lose a 7th level slot, but it’s worth it.

Always funny how everyone plans for level 20, when nearly noone plays that far.
A 1 level dip for a spell that without agonizing blast is not that great
(You take devil sight instead), leaves you behind one level compared to a full bard.
Not that it is a totally bad choice. But it is not overpowered at all.

 

[Scribe]

Always funny how everyone plans for level 20, when nearly noone plays that far.

Was thinking about this in regards to dips. Considering the capstone sees so little use, it adds weight to just dipping on other classes.

 

[lall]

Always funny how everyone plans for level 20, when nearly noone plays that far.
A 1 level dip for a spell that without agonizing blast is not that great
(You take devil sight instead), leaves you behind one level compared to a full bard.
Not that it is a totally bad choice. But it is not overpowered at all.

Well, that’s good to know. “Overpowered” is not a word anyone uses to describe my bard builds. Nor is “powered”. Usually, the words are “oh yeah, we have a bard”.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Well, that’s good to know. “Overpowered” is not a word anyone uses to describe my bard builds. Nor is “powered”. Usually, the words are “oh yeah, we have a bard”.

Usually it is "Oh no, not a bard again."

 

[OB1]

I think it pretty obviously breaks it because people will have existing characters they were planning on multiclassing or part-way through some MC combo who will get rug-pulled by any change in the MC rules, if their DM enforces them. Add to that people who want to use the old rules and it's kind of an issue.

Forcing people to do three levels in a class before dual-classing again (I don't know why they call it multi-classing lol, it's not) would be highly effective balance-wise and mess with quite a few popular MCs, but I just don't believe WotC would be okay with the pushback they'd get on such an idea - if it was subjected to the 70% threshold test, I very much doubt it - or indeed any more restrictive change to the MC rules - would pass the threshold.

That's really the ultimate thing here - I don't think even very smart changes to the MC'ing rules will hit 70%. It's kind of ironic because I don't think 70% of people like the current MC rules. I but I suspect more than 30% do. Hence with the 70% rule this would forever be in limbo (just another reason why the 70% test isn't great - even if 60% of players don't like something and want it changed, WotC have basically written themselves into a corner).

I don't think it breaks anything any more than changes to classes or spells does so if switching mid-campaign, but I take your point.

I don't think WotC will test the new multi-classing rules. I think they'll just change them as part of the final balancing of classes for multi-classing. Instead of changing all of the classes to fit multi-classing rules, they'll change the multi-classing rules to fit the new classes.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I don't think it breaks anything any more than changes to classes or spells does so if switching mid-campaign, but I take your point.

I don't think WotC will test the new multi-classing rules. I think they'll just change them as part of the final balancing of classes for multi-classing. Instead of changing all of the classes to fit multi-classing rules, they'll change the multi-classing rules to fit the new classes.

I mean I'm basically inclined to agree that it doesn't really break much (I think the Feat-based version would break stuff but not the 3-level version), but honestly I will be surprised if WotC changes the multi-classing rules at all, because of the 70% issue.