D&D (2024) I like the new Warlock

[Charlaquin]

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.

Would doing what make them OP?

 

[Charlaquin]

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.

Oh, see I don’t think using the rules to try to make the game “tableproof” is a good thing. In fact, this is another one of those things that 4e got roundly criticized for. Moving away from trying to use the rules to make play consistent across tables and towards embracing an attitude of using rulings to tailor the game to your own table’s preferences was one of 5e’s major selling points.

Sorry if this is getting off-topic, it’s just always frustrating to see 5e praised for doing the exact things that the edition was created as a means of “correcting” when 4e did them.

 

[Remathilis]

I am a warlock fan and have played this class many times, and have always felt Pact Magic was weak and frustrating. It’s too restrictive and discourages me from casting 1st level or higher spells, especially since warlock has a limited spell list and if you cast a spell that is ineffective (save or suck, lose concentration, ect.) then you have effectively wasted your spells. I always have to take feats that add spells just to feel somewhat useful. Most of the time I only use cantrips or play Bladelock so I don’t feel useless. Which sucks because the subclass features are really flavorful and fun to use.

So please, don’t just assume that because I like a lot of the proposed changes that I’m suddenly not a warlock fan.

This matches my experience 100%. Most of the time I felt like I didn't have spells; just little booms, 1-2 BIG BOOMS, and some utility effects. And I loved the spooky flavor of warlocks, so it was a real let down that I had all sorts of spooky magic and was too afraid to cast it because I always felt I needed to save my slots for my most powerful nova attacks for bosses.

 

[Yaarel]

The short-rest spell point system is simple.

A full caster gets a number of spell points equal to level + 1. So a level 10 caster has 11 points. A spell costs the same amount of points as its slot value, so a slot 3 Fireball costs 3 points to cast. So a level 10 caster can cast Fireball three times, plus a couple of minor spells, before needing to refresh during a Short Rest. At level 10, the caster can cast 5-point spells but not yet 6-point spells. So alternatively choose to cast two 5-point spells like Telekinesis plus one minor spell, before needing to rest.

Very simple, user-friendly, narratively intuitive, and surprisingly balanced mechanically.



The amount of spell points, level + 1, derives from the value of the Warlock spell slots that no longer exist in the Play Test. But the flexibility of converting these slots into points is valuable. Probably, this same value should work for all full casters, including Wizard, Druid, etcetera. Now that the playtest Warlock is being reunderstood as a partcaster-plus-Invocations, it might need to have a two-thirds spell point pool, such as a Paladin would use.



Anyway, whatever the exact numbers that work best, a short-rest spell point system is great to have in the DMs Guide available for every caster.

 

[Charlaquin]

This matches my experience 100%. Most of the time I felt like I didn't have spells; just little booms, 1-2 BIG BOOMS, and some utility effects.

That is how they work, yes.

And I loved the spooky flavor of warlocks, so it was a real let down that I had all sorts of spooky magic and was too afraid to cast it because I always felt I needed to save my slots for my most powerful nova attacks for bosses.

Honestly, the cantrips are good enough to get you through a boss fight. Taking spooky spells (and using them) is perfectly viable.

 

[Mistwell]

I’m saying a desire for caster supremacy was the real reason for the complaints about homogeneity in 4e,

Well that's plain false. I loved 4e but the issues with homogeneity had nothing to do with wanting spellcasters to be supreme. It had everything to do with the powers all feeling the same with slightly different descriptions. It felt like all the powers, regardless of class, broke down into a dozen set things they could do, and then were re-flavored for that class. And yes, I found this bothersome, despite like 4e quite a lot.

 

[cbwjm]

I like that they are considering getting rid of pact magic, I was never a fan of that part of the warlock and as a half caster it will play far nicer with the multiclass rules. I'm not as keen on eldritch blast and hex being automatic spells, and I'd rather EB act like a force version of fire bolt and all the invocations that affect EB instead affect all of the warlock's cantrips. EB and hex limit warlock concepts, IMO.

 

[Vael]

I remain firmly straddling the fence. I'm no fan of Pact Magic, all its flaws have been seen at my tables. But I am not convinced that this is the way forward for the Warlock.

 

[Remathilis]

That is how they work, yes.

Honestly, the cantrips are good enough to get you through a boss fight. Taking spooky spells (and using them) is perfectly viable.

My biggest complaint (besides how badly it doesn't work with multi-classing) is that it is wildly ineffective to cast anything but your best spell. Casting anything that doesn't scale or scale poorly is a waste. Upcasting when it's not needed is a waste. There is no point to most of the warlock spell list. You don't know enough spells to take them and you don't have enough guaranteed spell slots to ever use them. Even paladins and rangers get more mileage out of their spell casting for everything but the boom.

I dunno. Maybe if there was a full progression spooky mage that could emulate witches, arcanists and cultists using full spellcasting, I would be happy. But we have the warlock and he does not work for anything but a sniper with occasional grenades.

 

[Charlaquin]

My biggest complaint (besides how badly it doesn't work with multi-classing) is that it is wildly ineffective to cast anything but your best spell. Casting anything that doesn't scale or scale poorly is a waste. Upcasting when it's not needed is a waste. There is no point to most of the warlock spell list. You don't know enough spells to take them and you don't have enough guaranteed spell slots to ever use them. Even paladins and rangers get more mileage out of their spell casting for everything but the boom.

This, in my experience, is an “on paper” concern. Yeah, technically casting spells that aren’t max level and don’t scale well with upcasting is inefficient. But in actual practice, that doesn’t tend to matter. Casting the spell that’s useful now is generally better than holding on to your spell slot in the hopes that a spell that scales better with level will be useful later. Especially since you can get your spell slots back so easily as a Warlock.

I dunno. Maybe if there was a full progression spooky mage that could emulate witches, arcanists and cultists using full spellcasting, I would be happy. But we have the warlock and he does not work for anything but a sniper with occasional grenades.

What’s stopping you from doing that with a wizard or sorcerer? Especially now that the arcane spells are going to be shared across all the mage classes. Picking spooky spells for your wizard shouldn’t be difficult.

Edit to add: And besides, "a sniper with occasional grenades" is a good thing to give people the option to play. This is why people keep saying this warlock looks like it was designed for people who don't like warlocks. If you want to play a mage that isn't "a sniper with occasional grenades," you have at least five and arguably seven other classes that can do that. Eight if you also count the Artificer. Ten if you count the 1/3 casting fighter and rogue subclasses. Surely, one of those can satisfy your desire for a spooky Vancian caster, and let us "sniper with occasional grenades" lovers enjoy our one non-Vancian mage.