D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook reveal: "New Warlock"

"The character builder's paradise".

​

We last saw the Warlock in Playtest 7, with a lot of features from 2014 restored from the previous version. Still, a lot of questions (for me) remain: here's my list from before the video ran:

Spoiler

• Will the three pacts still be invocations, and will it be possible to get all of them by level 2? (I hope not). Yes.
• If they are invocations, will people still believe they are getting more invocations than thry had in 2014? Yes.
• What will the Pact of the Chain special creature options be? (We've seen the Sphinx of Wonder previewed already.) Is there still going to be a (M-sized) skeleton option? YES!
• Will Pact of the Tome still have the lame rewritten Ritual Caster rules, of only two 1st level rituals, and never any more? (I hope not). No answer, but I doubt it's been changed.
• Is it conceivable that anyone would not take Pact of the Blade as one of their Invocations? (Doubt it.) No answer. They did not talk about whether later invocations will give Extra attack, or other concerns here.
• Will anyone be able to take Eldritch Blast? "Warlock Specific"

(Happily, many of these questions were indeed answered in the video!).
I think warlock really benefits from having the subclasses come at level 3: you can "dabble" in the occult without selling your soul until level 3 (though admittedly, the wording of the fluff text does not require you to sell your soul).

OVERVIEW

• Invocations at 1, Magical Cunning at 2 (as in PT7)
• Crawford claims we will get more eldritch invocations. Assuming the table's as in PT7, this is a bit of a fudge: there's one for a pact at level 5 (no gain) and one extra, at level 5, and for most it will go, I feel, to another pact). Yes there's more flexibility.
• Main choices are Pact Boons. "This is a big deal" -- "it is a juicy choice" they say, and Crawford makes it clear you can get them all "over time". "Over time", though, is by level 2. To me this is too much too early.
• NEW: all pact boons at level 1 now.
• NEW: "More Spooky critter options" for Pact of the Chain, speaking to Patron types. Complete list: Slaad tadpole. Skeleton, Imp, Pseudodragon, Quasit, Sprite (Fey), Sphinx of Wonder (Celestial), Venomous Snake. All will be in the PHB.
• Spellcasting has been enhanced: more invocations work with warlock spells. Now they don't just affect Eldritch Blast (which is warlock-specific -- not clear how that's mechanized, though). You can have Ray of Frost with Repelling Blast.
• NEW: Lessons of the First Ones only lets you take an Origin Feat.
• Contact Patron at 9, Mystic Arcanum at 11+, expanded spell list (though not as big as sorcerer).
• All subclasses get an expanded spell list.

SUBCLASSES

ARCHFEY - "a teleportation fantasia"

• Gameplay was not living up to the flavour. Going "all-in" on Teleportation.
• Additional effects occur whenever you cast the spell, not just the free casting from Steps of the Fey. (Refreshing step and Taunting Step confirmed, as in PT7 apparently).
• Beguiling Defenses, causing psychic damage
• Bewitching magic at 14 as in PT7 -- "ridiculous in all the best ways".

CELESTIAL

• NEW: from expanded class spell list. Summon Celestial on spell list.
• NEW: Guiding Bolt, Cure wounds and Aid (Aid was not on PT7 list) on subclass list
• You can be "a hired hitman from the gods"
• NEW: Searing Radiance at 14 now can apply to an ally.

FIEND

• Magical weapons no longer pass your damage resitance (in reference to Fiendish Resilience at 10?)
• "tankiness" seen in BG3 is also here: Dark One's Blessing seems completely rewritten, as it was described in the Design Note of the PT7.

GREAT OLD ONE

• NEW: Summon Aberration might be a version of the Mind Flayer (an option in the Summon Abberation spell)
• when you do damage, you can do psychic.
• Psychic Spells for enchantment/illusion without Verbal/Somatic (but you still need Material); damage may be Psychic. Clairvoyant Combatant can be a battle of wills (focusing damage to one target -- a nod to AD&D psionic battles). Eldritch Hex also as in PT7.

 

[tglassy]

In theory, three attacks is fine. In the playtest, they did far too much damage. I know people always harped on the Spirit Shroud, but when I was doing my calculations I consistently avoided adding Spirit Shroud, and the Playtest Bladelock was still better than a fighter who had taken multiple feats to improve their damage, without the need for a single feat. Many of which they could also qualify and get to further increase their damage.

It was absolutely overtuned.

One way of reigning it in was to take away the 3rd attack. That left their damage high, but reasonable, and still made them as much of a warrior as the Barbarian, Ranger or Paladin.

There are other ways to reign in their damage, reducing some of the invocations and making them deal less damage on a hit could also do it.

I don't particularly care whether or not they get a 3rd attack, I am much more concerned with them not absolutely shattering every other damage focused build in the game.

Could you explain for me how they get so much damage compared to other martials?

 

[Kurotowa]

Would it be a sensible compromise to only give the warlock the third attack akin to the War Priest so that it requires a bonus action?

Not really, that just creates a choice conflict without meaningfully addressing the balance problem.

Look, the real problem is that when you combined UA Warlocks with 2014 material, there were too many powerful spell and invocation based per-hit damage bonuses. That's why a third attack scaled outrageously in power. So rather than focusing on the third attack, the better solution is probably to revise those 2014 spells or the Warlock spell list so they can't stack so many per-hit bonuses. And from the hints Treantmonk was dropping, that seems likely to have happened. That or they took the simple stupid route and removed the third attack, but that's only balanced if the Warlock stacks all those buffing spells.

 

[Kinematics]

Could you explain for me how they get so much damage compared to other martials?

From my own spreadsheets, it was the combo of Thirsting Blade + Lifedrinker + Spirit Shroud, which improved by about 33% over TB+LD+Hex, and where TB+LD+Hex was almost at the level of a standard fighter build.

So where the Hex (rapier) build was around 45 DPR in the teen levels, and the fighter was at 50-55 DPR (the high end being a PAM/GWM/Charge glaive build), swapping in Shroud brought the Warlock up to 60 DPR without any feats.

This is a bit vague due to there being a ton of options being compared, so that's just what I had set up when I went to look at it.

 

[Distracted DM]

It has to do with player focus nowadays I believe. What is more important to players. And I suspect the tension and fear of your character dying has become much less of a motivator for play than all kinds of other things. Creating an interesting character with a history and desires and seeing them progress and advance throughout a story has become more important. Working with other players in harmony to solve interesting problems has become more important. Playing the tactical board game and figuring out how to win has become more important.

But "keep your character from dying" just isn't as much of a concern or an interesting thing to experience for a lot of players anymore. So the need for more deadly monsters to up your chances of seeing your PC killed is not actually necessary for a large swathe of the population I don't think. Sure, players want antagonists that they can go up against to create interesting fights and stuff, but the expectation and fun is in the tactics and progress of the fight you will eventually end up completing (to then move on to the next challenge in the game), and not the chance of being removed from it.

In many ways these later editions of D&D combat are merely mirroring the trends in modern board gaming. Board gaming in the 1900s was oftentimes about eliminating your opponents from the game, like for instance Monopoly, or Diplomacy. Once you lost, you got up from the table and walked away, leaving the remaining players to continue playing and having fun, while you sat in the corner depressed and waiting around for the game to hopefully end. Whereas in modern board gaming, the trend is to keep everyone involved in the game through to the end, with everyone being allowed to keep building scores until some end point the game chooses to stop, at which point scores are compared. This method keeps players more invested in what is happening the entire time, keep giving them a chance to come from behind, and doesn't force anyone to go off and sit on their hands doing absolutely nothing and not having fun.

Which is exactly what we see in modern RPGs. Eliminating characters from the game is no longer the point in playing for a lot of people, because it just means the player has to sit on their hands and do nothing until the next chance to make a new character and get re-introduced. It's boring, it's sad, and it isn't actually necessary towards making an enjoyable game.

Well said. And yet we have conditions that make the player sit out of the game- if a character dies, they can make a new one. That takes longer in some systems than others, 5e characters can take a while to make especially if they're leveled.
But STUNNED ... ugh. I hate that one in particular, so (after almost a decade) I house-ruled it.

 

[Remathilis]

So we never got the warlock article?

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

So we never got the warlock article?

Supposedly should be coming out later this week - WotC's community manager said as much over on Reddit, I believe.

 

[Kurotowa]

From my own spreadsheets, it was the combo of Thirsting Blade + Lifedrinker + Spirit Shroud, which improved by about 33% over TB+LD+Hex, and where TB+LD+Hex was almost at the level of a standard fighter build.

That's been my understanding since the furious discussions around UA7's release. It's all about the difference between 1d6 per hit from Hex and 2d8 per hit from Spirit Shroud. The former is balanced and the latter is not. If SS didn't upscale with a 5th level spell slot, there wouldn't be a problem.

Changing SS or removing it from the Warlock spell list seems the best solution to me, because I really don't want SS's damage to be a mandatory expectation for every Bladelock character. But we'll see what solution the devs decided on.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Could you explain for me how they get so much damage compared to other martials?

I don't have the original discussion, you'd have to go digging into it from playtest 7. I do still have the playtest 7 packet though, so I'll run a fresh set of numbers.

Pact of the Blade allowed you to summon any melee weapon, gain proficieny in it, and use the mastery property. Let us go with a Greatsword for 2d6+cha mod damage, and the graze property. They could also cause the weapon to deal necrotic, radiant or psychic damage, bypassing resistance.

Thirsting Blade allowed for two, then three attacks at levels 5 and 11 respectively.

Lifedrinker added +1d6 per hit, and allowed you to roll HD whenever you hit.

Hex allowed for +1d6 damage per hit.

At this point, the Warlock at level 11 is swinging for 4d6+4d6+4d6+15 or an average of 57 damage per round, with hex lasting 8 hours or more.

The Fighter with PAM is going to deal 1d10+1d10+1d10+1d4+20 or 39, add in the charger feat for another 4.5 and GWM for an additional +4 and you can get to 47.5 damage on average, with three feats. And even if you took out the Hex spell from the Warlock, they are only dropping down to 46.5. And they can also take GWM, Charger and other damage boosting feats. Also, the fighter is potentially not ignoring or bypassing damage resistance, like the warlock is.

A fighter might eke out ahead if you count various subclass abilities, but that could potentially bring in subclass abilities in from the warlock, who could regain the lead.

Edit: fixing fighter damage a third time. sigh. I need to stop rushing.

 

[Gladius Legis]

I don't have the original discussion, you'd have to go digging into it from playtest 7. I do still have the playtest 7 packet though, so I'll run a fresh set of numbers.

Pact of the Blade allowed you to summon any melee weapon, gain proficieny in it, and use the mastery property. Let us go with a Greatsword for 2d6+cha mod damage, and the graze property. They could also cause the weapon to deal necrotic, radiant or psychic damage, bypassing resistance.

Thirsting Blade allowed for two, then three attacks at levels 5 and 11 respectively.

Lifedrinker added +1d6 per hit, and allowed you to roll HD whenever you hit.

Hex allowed for +1d6 damage per hit.

At this point, the Warlock at level 11 is swinging for 4d6+4d6+4d6+15 or an average of 57 damage per round, with hex lasting 8 hours or more.

The Fighter with PAM is going to deal 1d10+1d10+1d10+1d4+20 or 39, add in the charger feat for another 4.5 and GWM for an additional +4 and you can get to 47.5 damage on average, with three feats. And even if you took out the Hex spell from the Warlock, they are only dropping down to 46.5. And they can also take GWM, Charger and other damage boosting feats. Also, the fighter is potentially not ignoring or bypassing damage resistance, like the warlock is.

A fighter might eke out ahead if you count various subclass abilities, but that could potentially bring in subclass abilities in from the warlock, who could regain the lead.

Edit: fixing fighter damage a third time. sigh. I need to stop rushing.

And then on top of all that, the playtest Warlock had a better smite than the Paladin.

(They'd better have turned Eldritch Smite into a bonus-action spell for the final version.)

 

[Kurotowa]

At this point, the Warlock at level 11 is swinging for 4d6+4d6+4d6+15 or an average of 57 damage per round, with hex lasting 8 hours or more.

The Fighter with PAM is going to deal 1d10+1d10+1d10+1d4+20 or 39, add in the charger feat for another 4.5 and GWM for an additional +4 and you can get to 47.5 damage on average, with three feats.

I don't think that's an apples to apples comparison. You're counting invocations, but you're not counting all the class features a Fighter is going to have. Where's the Fighting Style benefit? Where's the subclass features calculation? Warlock subclass features tend to be defensive, while Fighters have more offensive ones included, so you can't ignore those.

I'm not the best at these sort of calculations, but I'm relying on people I'm confident are pretty good. Including Treantmonk, even if I think people treat his ideas as gospel a little too much.