D&D (2024) Dear Team WotC: Better Pact Magic Fixes

[Neonchameleon]

Something I just realized. All the pacts effectively get a "free" invocation at level 5.

Like pact of the tome gets agonizing blast for free (actually a slightly better).

So your really up 2 invocations over previous warlock.

And then down four because you used to get levels 6-9 Mystic Arcana for free and now have to pay invocations for them.

 

[VenerableBede]

Warlocks are solid spellcasters who not an exercise in book keeping to track spells. That is the key part of their mechanical identity. No warlock has to track more than a single number that changes over time, and most of them can count their slots left on their thumbs. They only ever have a single list of limited use spells at one time (or two lists, one of which is for one shot spells) rather than either three or five different lists at tenth level, some of which can be flexed between lists and that do different things when used as parts of different lists while tracking multiple numbers of slots.

THIS.
And this is just one big reason why making warlocks like traditional spellcasters is anathema. Keep it simple, keep it fun, keep it different.

Some huge warlock fans see the best way to go about that is tweaking the recharge mechanics, others want to leave spell slots behind and lean hard into invocations (I think, personally, if we ditched Pact Magic we'd need to triple the number of invocations and double the amount granted, more-or-less), but the general agreement is that warlocks should never be Vancian or neo-Vancian.

 

[mellored]

What about...

Patron Spell
You can cast burning hands at-will. You cast it at spell level (scaling).

 

[Mistwell]

You're absolutely right. That isn't the mechanical identity of warlocks, it's just an accident of the mechanics.

Warlocks are solid spellcasters who not an exercise in book keeping to track spells.

I dispute the solid spellcaster part. You think they're solid because you have said in your games you can get a short rest whenever you need to. In many games that doesn't happen. In many games that means their spellcaster is at best a side issue and at worst those two spell slots are held on to and never used. In no way does that make them a solid spellcasting class. They have other cool things they do but a lot of what many Warlock players are forced to do, because of the existing mechanics of the Warlock, is shoot an eldritch blast in combat and then do something with an invocation. Which is not a solid spellcaster.

These changes are attempting to remedy that and make them into a solid spellcaster. But you are against that because in your games you can get lots of spell slots and think anyone who can't isn't playing the game right or has a bad DM or frankly I am at a loss as to why you think your game is the norm and theirs an anomaly despite tons of feedback to WOTC of the opposite.

That is the key part of their mechanical identity. No warlock has to track more than a single number that changes over time, and most of them can count their slots left on their thumbs.

Yes indeed they absolutely can track their slots left on their thumbs, which somehow you described as "solid spellcasting."

They only ever have a single list of limited use spells at one time (or two lists, one of which is for one shot spells) rather than either three or five different lists at tenth level, some of which can be flexed between lists and that do different things when used as parts of different lists while tracking multiple numbers of slots.

They have a bunch of one time per day spells though they need to track as they get to higher levels, right?

What this means in practice is that I can give a fifth level pregenerated warlock to a newbie, spend only a couple of minutes talking through it, and they won't suffer from analysis paralysis over the spells when they would if they were playing even a third level wizard or fifth level ranger.

Wizard yes, but I've never seen decision paralysis over a Ranger at that level

It also means that I can play an eighth level warlock and by the second session literally never have to look at my character sheet for the entire session, keeping the entire thing in my head and not forcing me to take my focus away from the group and the game. These are not hypothetical examples.

Being a generic off-the-shelf half-caster means you are not a solid spellcaster. It also means that you do need an exercise in book keeping to track spells, tracking multiple lists of spells and flexing spells between level. It is the literal opposite of the warlock's mechanical identity. This is why the warlock fans are in general more than fine with suggestions that change the warlock's recovery cycles or that push everything off spell slots into either always on or at will invocations; invocations aren't exercises in book keeping.

And just to simplify further the key mechanical identity part of pact magic that is a positive is that warlocks do not have more than a single pool of resources that all their spells draw on equally. And that their number of spells known is kept deliberately low because that makes it easier to master.

ore later

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Nope. Any “solution” that turns warlocks into any variety of Vancian caster dishonors the class’s unique mechanical identity.

Honor in its verb form, as in to respect or show adherence to. Making warlocks Vancian casters would be disrespecting the class’s mechanical identity.

Respectfully, I disagree. Pact Magic is not elegant, just different for difference's sake, and it has all the flaws that JC and many other people have mentioned. I don't mean this as dishonoring fans of Pact Magic, but Pact Magic itself is not worthy of "honor". The designers gave it a noble try in 2014, but it has proven itself to suck for the pacing and shared narrative of the game, and so it warrants being explored for trying a new tact. I also like the Short Rest as-is. But certain things should not be tied to Short Rests (like the entire functionality of Pact Magic, though recharging a few spell slots are ok, like Arcane Recovery like a Wizard).
.
To me, "Vancian" magic is D&D magic, and it can be played with and tweaked in all kinds of ways. It is not boring for spellcasting classes to share the same universal mechanic. I think it is better for the narrative and health of the game. For instance, I dislike spellpoint/mana systems and I'm glad they are not in the core game. But I am fine with how the Sorcerer utilizes sorcery points to play with the concept, as that doesn't break D&D's "Vancian" magic system, rather gives it a unique tweak for the Sorcerer.
.
All that said, if they can redesign Pact Magic in way that doesn't recharge on a short rest (without changing the 1-hour short rest itself which I like), that also lets Warlocks keep a bit of big bang of higher level spells at proper spell levels, that is worth exploring too. Below is one suggestion I have that lets Warlocks get the same power-level of spells at the appropriate spell levels:

1. Warlocks could choose between Cha, Int, and Wis for their spellcasting ability modifier. That does not define the Pact Boon they choose at 1st level. Want to be an Int-based Pact of the Blade? That's fine. (Is Con-based spellcasting too powerful as a SAD option?)
2. Warlock gets 1 Pact Spell slot for each spell level at the level that a primary spellcaster would get that spell level (A 1st-level slot at 1st level, a 2nd-level slot at 3rd, all the way up to a 9th level slot at 17th). The Warlock chooses the spell they like, and it stays that way, however they can "prepare" different pact spells by communing with their Pact Object (blade, tome, or familiar) at the end of a long rest. Those spell slots recharge on a long rest (there is no short rest mechanic in this system). This means they would get up to 9 "daily" spells from this ability at 17th level (more from Patron spells later). Because of the number of pact spells they will get (even more from Patron Spells), these do not auto-upcast, and can only be upcast if they are prepared into the appropriate spell slot ahead of time (you could prepare multiple fireballs in higher level slots).
3. Due to the change in power level, Mystic Arcanum might no longer grant new spells in this paradigm, as it is effectively rolled into Pact Magic. But if balance determines it can add 1 extra spell slot for 6th through 9th for the cost of a Mystic Arcanum, that could be fine (though I doubt that having access to two 8th and 9th level spell slots per day would fly).
4. At 3rd level, Patron Spells add new Pact Spells, adding 1 more daily spell slot for each spell level (expanding up to 5th level) for specific spells on a list (these Patron Spells can also be used in place of normally prepared Pact Spells of the same level). Maybe as another ability at 3rd level, in addition to the Patron Subclass, they get a lesser "Commune With Patron" ability that allows the Warlock to commune for an "Arcane Recovery-like effect" to get some spent spell levels back, as a nod to the "short rest" functionality. It also reinforces their connection to the Pact holder for acquiring power.

In this rough design, Warlocks don't get as many spells overall compared to a full caster, but they ultimately get 2 spells of each spell level up to 5th (with a few more spell levels from Arcane Recovery), and they still get up to 9th level spells, and they still get their Invocations (which might be abilities, short rest, or long rest spells), and still get their Pact Cantrips. The Warlock's power level access would be on par with full spellcasters at the same levels.

With this design, an 11th level warlock would have 11 daily spells just from Pact Magic (2 spells each for spell levels 1-5, and a 6th level spell). They also get to recharge up to 5 levels of spells on a short rest, once per long rest. They also have 6 Eldritch Invocations to tweak their Warlock's theme.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I dispute the solid spellcaster part. You think they're solid because you have said in your games you can get a short rest whenever you need to.

I have literally never said this because I don't expect it. What I expect is that it will vary between sessions and sometimes the warlock is significantly OP and at other times they aren't. But fundamentally I expect there to be two "natural" breaks in the day for lunch and dinner.

I tend to run into the following:

• Warlocks can cast Hex before breakfast if they take it (I don't) and then have a short rest at breakfast
• Wilderness encounters: these run few and large; after the fight either the bandit camp gets looted or the ranger butchers the meat. This is a case where the warlock always gets their short rests and are a little OP because of it.
• Five room dungeon. These, by the book contain two combat encounters and no time to rest between them. The warlock goes in fully loaded (because they've almost always had a rest before they get there; the wizard might not) but doesn't get a rest in the middle. But rooms 2 and 3 warlock invocations are often very useful and if the warlock's burning a slot it's to carry the party. So it's either one spell in each of the first and the fourth rooms or two in the fourth. And they get a rest at the end.
• Urban exploration: The party probably has a lunch break and a dinner break. Even when the excrement hits the rotary air impeller it's very seldom more than three encounters (e.g. the group trying to kidnap someone or assassinate the PCs, following them back to their lair, and their boss) and then in one of the time blocks of morning, afternoon, evening. And when the excrement isn't hitting it's at most two encounters with there being time.
• Politics and intrigue: As Urban Exploration. With the warlock being a charisma based class and politics taking time ... until it doesn't.
• Megadungeons: These dungeons have safe areas because you're meant to camp there. One break for lunch, one for tea, and camping in them. No spells used to mug sentries (that's what Eldritch Blast is used for) or other low level combat.

So no I don't expect short rests whenever. I do however expect days that aren't five minute adventuring days - and to get one to two short rests in in them. And I expect PCs to eat and that to be a short rest.

In many games that doesn't happen. In many games that means their spellcaster is at best a side issue and at worst those two spell slots are held on to and never used. In no way does that make them a solid spellcasting class.

If they were just using their pact magic as spells this might be a point. But warlocks also have invocations and (non-blade) pact boons. It takes a sixth level specialist illusionist wizard to keep up with a second level warlock for illusions (and they can then beat the warlock to a pulp because they can do more). And wizards don't start getting at will spells until IIRC level 17.

Pact magic is not the whole of the warlock's spellcasting. And if you ignore the rest of course you don't find it solid. An at will spell is often fundamentally conceptually different from something that's limited use and competing for resources.

These changes are attempting to remedy that and make them into a solid spellcaster.

You physically can't be a solid spellcaster without high level magic. The paladin is a solid warrior. The ranger is a solid skill monkey. The artificer is a solid ... disappointment? There are precisely zero solid spellcasters with half-casting.

Or do you genuinely think that the paladin fits what you consider a solid spellcaster to be? Solid class, yes.

Yes indeed they absolutely can track their slots left on their thumbs, which somehow you described as "solid spellcasting."

And they don't have to track their invocations unless they've been silly and picked a trap. This is something wizards can't do until level 17.

Wizard yes, but I've never seen decision paralysis over a Ranger at that level

I have.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Disagree.

Warlocks have to pay for their invocations, and they do so with less spells.

Just like wizards do for being able to literally rewrite spells. Makes sense.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Respectfully, I disagree. Pact Magic is not elegant, just different for difference's sake, and it has all the flaws that JC and many other people have mentioned.

Respectfully, I disagree. Modern pseudo-Vancian magic is not elegant and is laden down with flaws. I consider pact magic to be more elegant than modern pseudo-Vancian magic. This is not a high bar.

Pact magic has a different set of flaws, some of which can be fixed (like the short rest issues). And it scratches a slightly different itch.

To me, "Vancian" magic is D&D magic, and it can be played with and tweaked in all kinds of ways.

To me modern pseudo-Vancian magic is closer to the 3.5 Psionics system than it is to classic Gygaxo-Vancian magic. (Actual Vancian magic as used by Jack Vance is closer to warlock casting with the extremely limited slots but you'd have to prepare one spell into one slot).

It is not boring for spellcasting classes to share the same universal mechanic.

It absolutely is boring for all spellcasting classes to have to share the same universal mechanic, especially when that method is so inelegant as modern pseud-Vancian magic. The point of a class based system is that different people can get different things. That several groups can share it is fine. That all other methods are considered BadWrongFun is a horrible thing for the health of the game.

 

[mellored]

Just like wizards do for being able to literally rewrite spells. Makes sense.

D6 hit points and no armor proficiency.

Though I do agree that warlocks could use a few more things.

 

[Vaalingrade]

D6 hit points and no armor proficiency.

Though I do agree that warlocks could use a few more things.

I feel like that's not really equivalent to 4 spell levels, the best class features in the game.