D&D (2024) I like the new Warlock

[DEFCON 1]

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

Are you talking about 4E homogeneity or 5E homogeneity? Because I would disagree strongly that there was any caster supremacy in 4E. All the classes were the same, both in structure and in power.

 

[TwoSix]

Every spellcasting class. Because spells are spells.

Just moving away from the weapon topic, I think there can be a lot of disagreement as to exactly what role "spells" play in the fiction, and how similar their fictional role is when they are when used by different classes.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

A lot of people like the idea of the warlock, but don’t like the way the class actually plays. I feel similarly about rangers (in 5e D&D), and about Artificers as well. This is the unfortunate reality of a system where a class is both a narrative archetype and a set of play mechanics. Sometimes you like a class’s narrative identity but don’t like its gameplay function. But I think it’s valuable to have a variety of classes that play in different ways. Why can’t we let the people who like how the warlock plays have their fun?

Would doing this make them "OP"? I'm honestly asking, because what you suggest here was the first thing that I thought of, but rejected because I thought it might be too good. Haven't seen it in action, obviously, so I just don't know. I'm not good at imagining how things might go without playing it.

 

[WanderingMystic]

So thematically the Warlock has always been my favorite 5e class and I have played it many times in many different ways.

Pacts: this is an amazing boost and really makes me feel like your choice of a pact makes a difference in your play style. Also finally I don't feel like I have to use eldritch blast while it is powerful it is boring and I love the flavor of several other cantrips more.

Invocations: The part of a warlock I love the best from the 2014 version although pacts might take that spot now. This is what really sets you apart form every other spell caster.

Patreon: I don't mind this moving to level 3, I have never like the idea of you knowing exactly where your powers come from at level 1 and I have always felt like the pact would be what first drew a character into he class in the first place.

Armor; Honestly unless I am playing a pact of the blade I don't want medium armor give me the choice of medium armor or Armor of Shadows and I would be very happy. Hell add it to your new pact where the time gets armor of shadows, the blade gets medium armor and the chain gets either their choice or something else and I would be very happy

Pact magic and spell casting: So honestly I am torn, first I would never use more than one spell during a combat maybe two at high levels since I knew that I don't think in any game we have played in we have gotten more than 1 short rest, I know there have to been an occasional 2 rest gaming session but they were few and far between however we did always get at least 1.
Second there were numerous spells that were of a lower level that would have cast if I had more spell slots but felt like they would have been a waste on such a precious resource.
Not getting a second level spell until level 5 and needing to use an invocation to pick up a 3rd level spell and then a 4th level spell is to harsh without granting us more invocations available at an earlier level. If pact magic dies I will learn to cope, it was an interesting mechanic that had several downsides, since I am now playing an artificer I am learning how to cope with being a half caster who should feel like a primary caster but to be honest it needs a little something to ease the transition.

 

[WanderingMystic]

Patron's Spell: You may cast a total of spell levels worth of spells equal to your proficiency bonus per day from your patrons spell list without using a spell slot, even spells of a level higher than you can usual cast.

Something like this would fix my issues with the current ua warlock

 

[DEFCON 1]

Just moving away from the weapon topic, I think there can be a lot of disagreement as to exactly what role "spells" play in the fiction, and how similar their fictional role is when they are when used by different classes.

True enough. I'm sure each person would have their own opinion on that. My opinion is pretty straightforward, in that it doesn't matter if you call them Spells, Prayers, Invocations, or whatever name you give them depending on the power source they are supposed to be for... they all are played exactly the same-- roll a spell attack or have a saving throw made, or else some non-combat ability occurs, and in al cases you tick off the box spell slot box you have for the level you cast.

And because D&D combat is its own mini-game within the D&D game sphere and most "fluff" has to be layered and described by the player on top of the mini-game mechanics (or more often than not isn't)... there's no differentiation between spells, prayers, invocations or whatnot. Unless the player works really hard to try and describe what happens as being something different depending on the power source. But because the mini-game doesn't require it, it doesn't oftentimes happen (just like "describing attacks" can get easily pushed by the wayside too, since the mini-game doesn't need those descriptions to function and instead they just slow the mini-game down.)

 

[Parmandur]

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.

Fair enough, but personally overall I prefer what they laid down this week, and it is more tableproof: while I also haven't seen too many issues with rest balance, so many complaints about the rules from the past decade boil down to table issues with either not allowing rests or giving out long rests like candy. Making the game more consistent is a positive outcome, so my feedback on this will be positive.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

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

95% of my life is devoted to spiting Snarf.
-Snarf’s cat

 

[Yaarel]

For me the solution is:

• The disconnect between long-rest and short-rest schedule is a pain for the DM, so making all casters use long-rest is reasonable.

• Put a Spell Points variant in the DMs Guide, that every caster class can opt in for, and all Spell Points use short-rest (more balanced).

 

[Charlaquin]

Are you talking about 4E homogeneity or 5E homogeneity? Because I would disagree strongly that there was any caster supremacy in 4E. All the classes were the same, both in structure and in power.

I’m saying a desire for caster supremacy was the real reason for the complaints about homogeneity in 4e, as revealed by the fact that people are fine with homogeneity in 5e, as long as martial characters don’t get to take part in the fun. But this is not a productive digression.