D&D 5E Warlock Mechanics - The best representation of modern fantasy archetypes in Dnd

[DND_Reborn]

The Artificer is played by 1% and includes the three most popular subclasses. It's on the bottom of the infographic that Neonchameleon provided.

Thanks! I didn't notice it. My mistake.

 

[Scribe]

Or that other classes have not enough going for them, especially when the warlock isn't mechanically OP

In some cases, certainly, but then you get some of the examples were people still just want a 'basic fighter' and dont care for the customization right?

 

[Aldarc]

Combination of multiple factors, personally I think Warlock has too much going for it.

So does the Wizard, but there would be a mutiny if you messed with the Wizard.

 

[Scribe]

So does the Wizard, but there would be a mutiny if you messed with the Wizard.

I dont disagree, and people would not be happy if Warlock was nerfed at all as well.

 

[Aldarc]

I dont disagree, and people would not be happy if Warlock was nerfed at all as well.

I don't think that the Warlock needs a nerf so much as it does rearranging, such as its low level abilities (and how that interacts with multiclass) and the balancing of some of its pact boons and invocations. I've never seen anyone, for example, say that the single-class Warlock is OP. Usually people are complaining about the low-level dips for invocations or patron abilities like the Hexblade's +Cha to attack. But if you include the latter as part of the Bladelock or even push that to a level 5 feature, then it becomes less attractive for multiclassing. If Eldritch Blast becomes a Warlock feature rather than just a cantrip, then that also takes out some of the desire to dip.

 

[Neonchameleon]

In some cases, certainly, but then you get some of the examples were people still just want a 'basic fighter' and dont care for the customization right?

I've never argued that simple characters shouldn't exist.

The weird thing about the warlock is that in practice they make the best simple casters in 5e.

 

[DND_Reborn]

You are suggesting changes to the game - you want changes that will affect the wider D&D community.

Nope, just my games. Read my posts more carefully in the future please.

In short you literally want to remove them as classes from the game.

No, from (again) from my games.

You want to remove what people like and play from the game and utterly shred the class variety of the most popular spellcasting class because your tiny group differs from the mainstream.

Again, you are making what I said about my own games and experience and claiming (without proof) that I am saying that is how it has to be for everyone.

So thank you for proving my point.

No, I have consistently and constantly a point which is based on your reading meaning into things I never said. If I said them pull a quote.

And maybe you should realise that you shouldn't suggest changes to D&D as a whole based on your atypical group.

Again, I never suggested it for D&D as a whole...

If I were to have my way then I'd demote wizard to a subclass of sorcerer that uses intelligence for spellcasting - the sorcerers that gain their spells from the study of books.

Cool, do that in your games. And I'll do what I want in mine...

It represents a lot more of it than your table.

LOL I never said my table did represent them! Please stop making implications based on things I never actually said or quote where I said it.

No one said it didn't. However it is just a small minority (as seen by the explosive growth of D&D in recent years).

I never said you didn't say that. I was simply pointing out that the "wider D&D community" includes older, more experienced players as well. In fact, the "wider D&D community" includes players who don't even play 5E or use D&D Beyond.

Meanwhile the wizard is a long rest class with arcane spells that it prepares. It is utterly redundant in a game that also has sorcerers, clerics, full caster bards, and warlocks.

Well, we can just disagree on this easily enough. You only need one caster class IMO, the rest can all easily be subclasses of it.

And just so you know, Bards are full casters in my games either! Oh, the HORROR!!!

If we're taking classes out for being meh, take the redundant ones out first. Ditch the wizard. You might not personally like invocations - but people do and no other class has them. You might find the patrons very meh - but no other class has something that comes close. And the wizard subclasses ("I'm a book caster who's slightly better at a few spells") might be better than the pre-4e wizard subclasses (I can cast extra spells but they are exactly the same spells as any other wizard other than the ones I can't cast) but are still all boring.

Or ditch the Sorcerer and Warlock. With Tasha's, metamagic and invocations can be taken as feats, so now you don't even need to dip in to those classes to get those things--which both classes are primarily based on, respectively.

Wizards are the best over all spellcasters hands down. That is there "thing", they don't need anything more like Sorcerers and Warlocks.

FWIW, I like the concept of invocations, just IME some are so good people end up taking the same ones over and over again; and not just in my games, but in other games I've watched people play! The rest are so lackluster people simply don't take them IME. YMMV, of course.

But instead what you want downgraded from the status of a full class is simultaneously:

• The most popular spellcasting class according to the best data we have available (which is incomplete and unreliable so worthless. bad data has no use other than anecdotal at best, which is fine, but let's not pretend it is anything better...)
• The single class with the most interesting levelling experience (LOL, that is your opinion--which I am sure is shared by others, but hardly universal)
• The single class with the most mechanically varied characters (thanks to the Invocations and the Pact Boon) (invocations which anyone can have now and Pact Boons which really aren't anything special IMO)
• The class that works least like the other classes (the only short rest spellcasting class) (so Arcane Recovery and Natural Recovery--both short rest features which allow you to recover spells on a short rest... they are hardly unique, it is their "thing"--which is fine, but not unique really)
• Probably the spellcasting class with the greatest variety in their subclasses (oh, plah-eeze, I can't even dignify that with a response...)

(See bolded comments)

And somehow you want to downgrade this into a subclass.

Not only want to, but HAVE!!! Oh, the HORROR!!!

So, if you want to actually quote me for saying anything that (in context) implied I believed my preferences should be universally applied to the "wider D&D community", please do so. Otherwise, I have nothing further to say to you on the subject. Cheers.

 

[DND_Reborn]

So does the Wizard, but there would be a mutiny if you messed with the Wizard.

Slightly off topic, but I have stated repeatedly on this forum that I think Wizards should be nerfed, but I know I am in a minority on that.

I've never seen anyone, for example, say that the single-class Warlock is OP.

Me, neither. Their power-level is fine, it is their "ho-hum" nature that makes them less appealing to me. Although I will admit I really like the two new subclasses @Undrave has developed and I assisted on. Those have a more "cool factor" for me.

If Eldritch Blast becomes a Warlock feature rather than just a cantrip, then that also takes out some of the desire to dip.

Agreed. I think it should be, in the same way Hunter's Mark should be a Ranger feature, not a spell.

 

[Scribe]

Slightly off topic, but I have stated repeatedly on this forum that I think Wizards should be nerfed, but I know I am in a minority on that.

I dont know that you are in the minority on this, at least on the forum.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I dont know that you are in the minority on this, at least on the forum.

I don't know, people keep claiming nerfing the wizard would be akin to an all out revolt, so I figured I was...