D&D (2024) Survey Launch | Player's Handbook Playtest 5 | Unearthed Arcana | D&D

[Parmandur]

I doubt cutting pact magic or invocations is even on the table. From watching the video, they consider those more important than the question of how warlock Spellcasting works.

My prediction is we will see 1-5 spell levels on a schedule similar to full casters, with mystic arcanum for 6-9 level spells, and the rest of the class pretty much as presented in the recent UA.

I’d prefer long rest pact magic with max level slots and max -1 and max -2 slots, with at least 1/day easy recharge, but I doubt they will happen to see the idea, see it’s potential, and try it out, all from my survey feedback!

Pact magic as in the 2014 short recharge mechanic. Writing is pretty firmly on the wall for that. What Crawford said in this video is that they wrote up a full caster version...but to get there Invocafuons would basically be gone, which they felt was boring amd indistinct from Wizard and Sorcerer.

I think you are right that if the half-caster doesn't test well they will try thwt new progression he teases(I know I will be giving this version high marks, and I am not sure that is a minority response, but we ahall see). I am intrigued by the suggestion he makes of a "moving window" of Spell Levels, thst sounds like it still adds up to the Spell poikt equivalent of a half-caster, but switches out the Levels of the Slots over time.

 

[Incenjucar]

As I already said, resolving an AoE spell takes less time that resolving multiple attacks. The spells that actually take more time than an attack action are few, and spread out over many levels. And limited in use.

Acting like there is no downside to adding complexity to the attack action because “casters are also complex” is not even an argument, much less a compelling one. It’s just angry flailing.

Okay? That quote doesn’t even come close to saying the nonsense you tried to claim I had said.

I can't seem to find where you explain that; link?

In any case, if that's true, just let fighters combine attacks into a big whammy or an AOE.

Also maybe consider toning down the aggro, eh?

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

Pact magic as in the 2014 short recharge mechanic. Writing is pretty firmly on the wall for that. What Crawford said in this video is that they wrote up a full caster version...but to get there Invocafuons would basically be gone, which they felt was boring amd indistinct from Wizard and Sorcerer.

I think you are right that if the half-caster doesn't test well they will try thwt new progression he teases(I know I will be giving this version high marks, and I am not sure that is a minority response, but we ahall see). I am intrigued by the suggestion he makes of a "moving window" of Spell Levels, thst sounds like it still adds up to the Spell poikt equivalent of a half-caster, but switches out the Levels of the Slots over time.

Haven't had a chance to try it out in person, but Pathfinder 2E has a couple of specialized caster classes (the Summoner and the Magus) that unlock new spell levels at the same time as other casters, but only have four total spell slots to work with (not counting cantrips): two slots at their max spell level, and two slots at max spell level - 1.

The "moving window" idea sounds like something similar.

 

[Parmandur]

Doing some quick napkin math, a Level 20 Warlock with 3 Level 5 Slots and 1 Slot each of Level 6-9 would work out to the same Spell point value of a Level 20 Paladin/Ranger/Artificer.

 

[Charlaquin]

I doubt cutting pact magic or invocations is even on the table. From watching the video, they consider those more important than the question of how warlock Spellcasting works.

Oh, the impression I got was that their highest priority is fixing the problem with people feeling like warlocks don’t have enough spell slots, and that they would prefer to maintain other defining class elements like invocations if they can, but that they’re willing to change those things if that’s what needs to happen to solve the spell slot problem.

My prediction is we will see 1-5 spell levels on a schedule similar to full casters, with mystic arcanum for 6-9 level spells, and the rest of the class pretty much as presented in the recent UA.

That’s probably what they’ll try next, which would still be extremely dissatisfying to me.

 

[Charlaquin]

Doing some quick napkin math, a Level 20 Warlock with 3 Level 5 Slots and 1 Slot each of Level 6-9 would work out to the same Spell point value of a Level 20 Paladin/Ranger/Artificer.

How many times are you assuming the warlock regains those level 5 slots in a day to arrive at that conclusion? Cause that does not agree with the math I’ve done.

 

[Parmandur]

How many times are you assuming the warlock regains those level 5 slots in a day to arrive at that conclusion? Cause that does not agree with the math I’ve done.

None at all. That's 64 Spell points, same as the standard half caster progression (though it maybe ought to be 4 Level 5 Slots).

 

[Incenjucar]

I wonder if they've considered giving warlocks per-encounter limits on USAGE so that they can still pump them full of slots without them being able to do a wizard-scale nova.

 

[Charlaquin]

None at all. That's 64 Spell points, same as the standard half caster progression (though it maybe ought to be 4 Level 5 Slots).

Yeah, that’s the problem. Warlocks should recover their spell slots twice a day, which would be nine fifth level spell slots per day instead of three.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Pact magic as in the 2014 short recharge mechanic. Writing is pretty firmly on the wall for that. What Crawford said in this video is that they wrote up a full caster version...but to get there Invocafuons would basically be gone, which they felt was boring amd indistinct from Wizard and Sorcerer.

Right, which is a fairly clear indicator that they view invocations as too important to mess with too much.

I think you are right that if the half-caster doesn't test well they will try thwt new progression he teases(I know I will be giving this version high marks, and I am not sure that is a minority response, but we ahall see). I am intrigued by the suggestion he makes of a "moving window" of Spell Levels, thst sounds like it still adds up to the Spell poikt equivalent of a half-caster, but switches out the Levels of the Slots over time.

I literally haven’t been able to figure out what anyone could possibly like about the current UA model.

The floating window could look what I’ve been advocating, where at level 5 you have 2 Third level slots, 2 Second level slots, and 1 First level slot. Soemthing like that. Daily pact magic, basically.

Also maybe consider toning down the aggro, eh?

I struggle to find words for the incredible “irony” of you telling me that.

Oh, the impression I got was that their highest priority is fixing the problem with people feeling like warlocks don’t have enough spell slots, and that they would prefer to maintain other defining class elements like invocations if they can, but that they’re willing to change those things if that’s what needs to happen to solve the spell slot problem.

I don’t think that fits what they said, but we will see.

That’s probably what they’ll try next, which would still be extremely dissatisfying to me.

I can see where you’re coming from, but I do think it’s fair to want the basics of Spellcasting to mostly work the same across the board.