Xeviat
Hero
Hi everyone,
I like to mess around with the rules, and the new game I'm DMing has a Warlock character. This has me thinking about a few things.
First of all, for a long time, I've been interested in switching my house games over to spell points. I've also been interested in shifting spellcasting from Long Rest to Short Rest recovery. Having the Warlock in my game would allow me to test both of those.
How much more powerful will spell points make a Warlock? I believe it will make them immensely more flexible. For the bulk of the game, the warlock only has 2 spell slots per short rest. Converted to spell points, a Warlock would be able to spread things around a little more. Mostly, this means they'll have more utility effects. Hex, for instance, doesn't scale until 3rd level, so a Warlock will only cast it for 2 spell points until they have 3rd level spells and they can cast it for 5 spell points for 8 hours. Likely, this isn't going to be a big gain offensively, but it will give them far more options, especially with spells that don't scale well.
Here's what their Spell Points would look like, still refreshed on a short rest:
Second, I'm finding myself disliking some of the Warlock Invocations. In the PHB, the following jump out to me:
Agonizing Blast: This feels like a "requirement".
Lifedrinker and Thirsting Blade: Eldritch Blast scales automatically, and up to 4 attacks, and exceeds all 1 handed weapon damage if you take agonizing blast, so why aren't these just built into the Pact of the Blade?
Repelling Blast and Eldritch Spear: Modifiers to Eldritch Blast are cool. I like these in theory. I'd like EB to be a Warlock class ability rather than a cantrip, too. But, these invocations should really come with a price; choose one, modify EB in some way (lower damage die for Eldritch Spear), maybe killed range for Repelling Blast). With the other "offensive" choices removed, these could exist for people who want to run simple blaster warlocks to give them options with their EB. Sort of like the old 3E Warlock.
Well, I thought there were going to be a few more of them. There definitely are in the UA article.
What do I think Invocations should be for? Utility things and options. The at-will utility spells, the extra skills, the extra (but limited) spells known. These are the things I think invocations should be used for. What do you think?
Third, I (and everyone else really) have my own houserules for the Pact of the Blade. Let me know what you think:
Pact of the Blade
You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. It takes on the form of a one-handed melee weapon that deals 1d10 damage of either bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, your choice based on it's form. You are proficient with it while you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage. You use your Charisma modifier for attack and damage rolls with your Pact Weapon. At 5th level, when you take the attack action and attack with your Pact Weapon, you can attack twice. The number of attacks increases to three when you reach 11th level in this class and to four when you reach 17th level in this class. Your pact weapon counts as an Arcane Focus while you wield it. (The second and third paragraph remain the same).
In effect, the Pact of the Blade gives you a melee Eldritch Blast that doesn't require you to take Agonizing Blast to get your ability modifier added in. I'm still not sure it gives enough benefit over the other pacts: Tome gives you 3 cantrips (2 cantrips is worth half a feat), an Chain gives you a beefy familiar (that doesn't scale, but that's another thread). I'm considering adding "While unarmored and wielding your pact weapon, your AC is 10 plus your Dexterity modifier plus your Charisma modifier". This makes the pact somewhat equivalent to 2ish invocations (agonizing blast and armor of shadows).
I may have overstretched on that first attempt, but what do you think?
I like to mess around with the rules, and the new game I'm DMing has a Warlock character. This has me thinking about a few things.
First of all, for a long time, I've been interested in switching my house games over to spell points. I've also been interested in shifting spellcasting from Long Rest to Short Rest recovery. Having the Warlock in my game would allow me to test both of those.
How much more powerful will spell points make a Warlock? I believe it will make them immensely more flexible. For the bulk of the game, the warlock only has 2 spell slots per short rest. Converted to spell points, a Warlock would be able to spread things around a little more. Mostly, this means they'll have more utility effects. Hex, for instance, doesn't scale until 3rd level, so a Warlock will only cast it for 2 spell points until they have 3rd level spells and they can cast it for 5 spell points for 8 hours. Likely, this isn't going to be a big gain offensively, but it will give them far more options, especially with spells that don't scale well.
Here's what their Spell Points would look like, still refreshed on a short rest:
Level | Spell Points |
1 | 2 |
2 | 4 |
3 | 6 |
4 | 6 |
5 | 10 |
6 | 10 |
7 | 12 |
8 | 12 |
9 | 14 |
10 | 14 |
11 | 21 |
12 | 21 |
13 | 21 |
14 | 21 |
15 | 21 |
16 | 21 |
17 | 28 |
17 | 28 |
17 | 28 |
20 | 28 |
Second, I'm finding myself disliking some of the Warlock Invocations. In the PHB, the following jump out to me:
Agonizing Blast: This feels like a "requirement".
Lifedrinker and Thirsting Blade: Eldritch Blast scales automatically, and up to 4 attacks, and exceeds all 1 handed weapon damage if you take agonizing blast, so why aren't these just built into the Pact of the Blade?
Repelling Blast and Eldritch Spear: Modifiers to Eldritch Blast are cool. I like these in theory. I'd like EB to be a Warlock class ability rather than a cantrip, too. But, these invocations should really come with a price; choose one, modify EB in some way (lower damage die for Eldritch Spear), maybe killed range for Repelling Blast). With the other "offensive" choices removed, these could exist for people who want to run simple blaster warlocks to give them options with their EB. Sort of like the old 3E Warlock.
Well, I thought there were going to be a few more of them. There definitely are in the UA article.
What do I think Invocations should be for? Utility things and options. The at-will utility spells, the extra skills, the extra (but limited) spells known. These are the things I think invocations should be used for. What do you think?
Third, I (and everyone else really) have my own houserules for the Pact of the Blade. Let me know what you think:
Pact of the Blade
You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. It takes on the form of a one-handed melee weapon that deals 1d10 damage of either bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, your choice based on it's form. You are proficient with it while you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage. You use your Charisma modifier for attack and damage rolls with your Pact Weapon. At 5th level, when you take the attack action and attack with your Pact Weapon, you can attack twice. The number of attacks increases to three when you reach 11th level in this class and to four when you reach 17th level in this class. Your pact weapon counts as an Arcane Focus while you wield it. (The second and third paragraph remain the same).
In effect, the Pact of the Blade gives you a melee Eldritch Blast that doesn't require you to take Agonizing Blast to get your ability modifier added in. I'm still not sure it gives enough benefit over the other pacts: Tome gives you 3 cantrips (2 cantrips is worth half a feat), an Chain gives you a beefy familiar (that doesn't scale, but that's another thread). I'm considering adding "While unarmored and wielding your pact weapon, your AC is 10 plus your Dexterity modifier plus your Charisma modifier". This makes the pact somewhat equivalent to 2ish invocations (agonizing blast and armor of shadows).
I may have overstretched on that first attempt, but what do you think?