D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

[Tony Vargas]

Invocations and Pact Magic vs full casting. You might as well ask why melee cleric and paladin have spent so much time together (and remember that pre-4e all clerics were weapon users).

OKfine, Warlock can be Mr Short Rest spells and Wizard Mr Long Rest spells.... unless they make the Warlock LR 1/2caster, then

 

[Tony Vargas]

It probably doesn't help that it took almost a decade before wotc stopped talking about the theme and feel of those other classes long enough to express that they consider the wizard's to be their spell list either. I imagine that we would have had quite a few more discussions about the glaringly few spell list the class exclusive spells long ago had that been put out sooner

the Wizard had 33 unique spells in the PH... almost double the Cleric's, 17, after that it was single digits down to the Sorcerer at 0 ...IIRC, it's been a while, and I may not have checked half-casters.... I think EK & AT are also 0 for instance...

 

[Minigiant]

Then why aren't they clerics?

Divine power creep.

Gods are stronger than Patrons in D&D.
Patrons used to be able to create clerics but by 3e, gods became so overpowered compared to patrons... patrons lost their ability to create priest.
3e invented the reject hax strat that patrons used to make a fake priest out of magic school dropouts: warlock.
4e made it strictly an arcane ritual how a patron made a warlock.

The Warlock is staright up like when the major villians in comics hand super suits and laser rifles to criminals. The patron is litterally handing out lazer guns.

 

[Neonchameleon]

So your interpretation that patron funnels magic to the warlock, instead of just gifting them with the innate power source? Because fluff doesn't make it clear. In any case, this would make them clerics. What in your opinion is the metaphysical difference between a cleric of Cthulhu and a warlock of Cthulhu?

A cleric of Cthulhu would need to be part of an organised religion - and clerics are to do with churches - especially when the god doesn't speak directly.

Yes, but why?

Because. Seriously this is like asking why a fish isn't a horse. For that matter it's like asking what a fish is genetically. An oak and a redwood may look alike but oaks have more in common genetically with dandelions.

Why would any of this make any metaphysical difference?

Because the gifts for a warlock are personalised while the cleric's are standard packages given to the rest of the class as well. And the cleric has gentler, healier magic rather than rips open rifts to cause Hunger of Hadar

Then why do all these different methods that are similar to those of other classes produce mechanics that are most divergent from them all?

Because not everything is similar.

I don't. I just want to have coherent fluff attached to them that explains what they metaphysically are. And if that is same or very similar than some other class', then they should be merged, as there is no justification for the difference.

Buh-bye wizard. There's nothing special about getting your power from books and learning that isn't 100% covered by the possibilities in sorcerer. But it is not the job of D&D to answer all possible metaphysical questions. Answering enough practical ones is hard enough.

No, they explicitly learn their magic.

So do sorcerers and warlocks. Which is why they level up. This doesn't make wizards special. (And I've no problem flexing casting stats).

 

[Neonchameleon]

I disagree. It just matters which sort of mechanics best reflect the concept, and warlock mechanics better reflect the fluff of the sorcerer than the actual sorcerer mechanics do.

No they don't - but sorcerer mechanics with a decent subclass (plus metamagic) better reflects the fluff of the wizard better than the actual wizard mechanics you can't put in a subclass do.

The sorcerer has a much broader base of exploration; the warlock is either more of a monomaniac or more power levelled.

 

[Scribe]

Thing is, at introduction, the Sorcerer and Warlock were dramatically differentiated by their respecitive magic systems. Sorcerers were spontaneous, Warlocks were at-will. Both huge things in a game that had been using "but only 1 time a day" as a fig-leaf to cover how crazy spells were, it's whole existence.

So, 4e gave everyone at wills, and 5e kept them for full casters, and 5e also made all full casters cast spontaneously. So, Sorcerer, Warlock, why are you here again? For that matter, no-longer-Vancian wizard....

I'm trying to turn over a new leaf in my anti-5e position.

You are not helping.

 

[Raiztt]

No they don't - but sorcerer mechanics with a decent subclass (plus metamagic) better reflects the fluff of the wizard better than the actual wizard mechanics you can't put in a subclass do.

The sorcerer has a much broader base of exploration; the warlock is either more of a monomaniac or more power levelled.

True - give wizard the sorcerer metamagic feature and spell points.

 

[Neonchameleon]

True - give wizard the sorcerer metamagic feature and spell points.

As a subclass of sorcerer. Take away the tedious "you get this random thing like dice manipulation tricks" subclasses.

 

[Minigiant]

A cleric of Cthulhu would need to be part of an organised religion - and clerics are to do with churches - especially when the god doesn't speak directly.

Technically you can't be a cleric of Cthulhu or any GOO in D&D.

GOOs are aberrant to the normal dimensions and thus cannot exist in it long enough to gain divine ranks to grant divine spells.

Basically if someone is a cleric of Cthulhu that means Cthulhu is on a plane directly connected to the Material plane meaning Oh No Bad Times.

Warlock is the strongest connection one can have with a Far Realm being of true power.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

A cleric of Cthulhu would need to be part of an organised religion - and clerics are to do with churches - especially when the god doesn't speak directly.

So a hermit priest of Pelor is a warlock, not a cleric? Why does what sort of organisation you belong affect the metaphysics of your magic?

Because.

That's not good enough for me, that's the issue.

Because the gifts for a warlock are personalised while the cleric's are standard packages given to the rest of the class as well.

Then why their magic works completely differntly then? At most I'd imagine this resulting warlock hawing slightly more personalised spelllist compared to the cleric.

And the cleric has gentler, healier magic rather than rips open rifts to cause Hunger of Hadar

Why?

Because not everything is similar.

But those methods are similar to the other classes.

Buh-bye wizard. There's nothing special about getting your power from books and learning that isn't 100% covered by the possibilities in sorcerer.

Sure, if you interpret sorcerer broadly enough, i.e. "has magic somehow." But that's really not what sorcerers are about, they're about intuitive innate magic that is part of their being.

But it is not the job of D&D to answer all possible metaphysical questions. Answering enough practical ones is hard enough.

Practical questions should be informed by the underlying concepts that the mechnics are attempting to represent. If you don't know what you're even trying to represent the end result will be incoherent.

So do sorcerers and warlocks. Which is why they level up. This doesn't make wizards special. (And I've no problem flexing casting stats).

They learn it from books, they learn magical formulas. That's why they are dependent on their spellbook and can learn magic from scrolls. This is quite different from the sorcerer, whose magic is innate.

No they don't

Yes they do. Rapidly recharging magic and always-on magical powers both represent an innately magical being better than the little unique mechanics that the sorcerers have.

- but sorcerer mechanics with a decent subclass (plus metamagic) better reflects the fluff of the wizard better than the actual wizard mechanics you can't put in a subclass do.

You could do that. But you'd need to add the spellbook and scroll learning.