D&D (2024) I like the new Warlock

[TwoSix]

My apologies, @TwoSix, for the edit, but I feel like you need the video version.

For the record, you're also definitely one of the posters where I feel we're pretty simpatico on our design preferences.

 

[Parmandur]

I don’t understand. You’re saying you like how the warlock plays, but describing the way it plays in purely negative terms. It sounds to me like you really don’t like the way the warlock plays, and you want the warlock to play in a different way that you would like more.

I didn't have any problem with the Warlock until I read the UA yesterday. I have no issues in play with the 2014 Warlock over the past ten years, but the new proposal...excites me?

 

[Neonchameleon]

I like the move away from Pact Casting. I do not think I am convinced by the half caster idea as it stands, though. I will have to test it, but if this is the way then I would like them to consider adding almost the opposite of Mystic Arcana - over a certain level, let me cast specific low level spells at will, with no cost. Give me a bastardised version of the Wizard's signature spell - let me cast not just Silent Image at will (a contender for my favourite invocation) but an improved choice of low level spells, increasing as I go up in level. Give me at will Detect Thoughts or Command!

Let my warlock be a perpetual engine of hedge magic.

Now this I could get behind. I'd need to see the implementation - but that's a matter of quibbling over the details. I might think that that didn't quite scratch the same itch as the warlock because I like the high level slots as well. But it would definitely play into the warlock's uniqueness.

I think the warlock should work exactly as a bard, just to spite snarf!

As a serious thing I could easily get behind breaking the warlock and the bard away from other arcane casters and moving them into their own liminal group. Both are mostly arcane but don't (or at least shouldn't) stay in the arcane lane.

 

[CleverNickName]

It's not "the new Warlock," it's untested playtest material like all other Unearthed Arcana from 2015 to present.

That said: it's a mixed bag for me, but I like it fine enough. Mostly I'm glad to see they are moving away from short rest dependencies.

 

[Parmandur]

It's not "the new Warlock," it's untested playtest material like all other Unearthed Arcana from 2015 to present.

That said: it's a mixed bag for me, but I like it fine enough. Mostly I'm glad to see they are moving away from short rest dependencies.

With all the Classes in this UA series, they have been leading with their most radical proposal (which isn't all that crazy for popular Classes like Rogue and Fighter), with the stated goal of seeing if reactions to common complaints work for people. The final version will no doubt change a bit...but my gut says this Warlock proposal will test well.

 

[MarkB]

I wouldn't mind some tweaks to Pact Magic to make it easier to work with other party members, but I like the unique feel of it.

I like the Genie warlock's ability to let themselves and a few allies take a short rest in ten minutes once per day, and wish it didn't take them until 10th level to unlock it. Something like that would be a better approach than the half-caster change.

 

[Charlaquin]

Looking at the Druid/Paladin packet, I could definitely see the Channel Nature/Divinity recharge working as a way of allowing those frustrated with the short rest dependency like myself to have more control over spell slot recovery while keeping Pact Magic as a short rest mechanic.

I could see it either being a recharge a number of times equal to spell casting modifier with the current number of spell slots (1 to start, 2 at 2nd lvl, 3 at 11th, and 4 at 17th) or maybe just recharging twice per long rest but possibly bump the spell slots number a bit earlier (2 at start. 3 at 5th level, 4 at 11th level)?

Though now I'm wondering it we could actually make a Channel feature for warlocks. Call it "Channel Patron" and give us some generic options and patron specific options to use, and maybe even some bonus invocations to opt into.

Yeah, I would absolutely be up for the idea of “Channel Patron” with creating a spell slot being just one of the options!

 

[Charlaquin]

I didn't have any problem with the Warlock until I read the UA yesterday. I have no issues in play with the 2014 Warlock over the past ten years, but the new proposal...excites me?

Sorry if even more homogeneity in class resource structures does the opposite of excite me. After how brutally 4e got grilled for having homogeneous resource structures, I’d expect more people to be sympathetic to that, but apparently every class using the same structure is ok, as long as that structure is the one the Wizard uses.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Sorry if even more homogeneity in class resource structures does the opposite of excite me. After how brutally 4e got grilled for having homogeneous resource structures, I’d expect more people to be sympathetic to that, but apparently every class using the same structure is ok, as long as that structure is the one the Wizard uses.

Every spellcasting class. Because spells are spells.

Were they to put martial characters' abilities into the the same daily spell slot chart... we'd hear a lot more complaints. And that was the big issue with 4E... martials and casters had the same progression despite being two different things-- weapons and spells.

 

[Charlaquin]

Every spellcasting class. Because spells are spells.

Were they to put martial characters' abilities into the the same daily spell slot chart... we'd hear a lot more complaints. And that was the big issue with 4E... martials and casters had the same progression despite being two different things-- weapons and spells.

Right, so the problem was never really the homogeneity. It was just naked caster supremacy.