D&D (2024) Warlock -- initial analyses

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

WotC stance is that new players cannot comprehend anything so we cannot have decent features at levels 1&2.

ALL subclasses should start at 1st level not 3rd, sure, powerful features could be delayed to 3rd level to avoid cheese dips from multiclassing.

From a flavour perspective, I understand thi.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

That's easy. Either you have the pact at level 1 but its full power doesn't come throu until the third or you dabble with dark powers until you decide where you want to fully commit at 3rd Level.

That feels like a hollow justification. It makes sense from a certain perspective, I see what you're saying... but it forces a specific flavouring of the class on a player. To me, yuck.

 

[pukunui]

That feels like a hollow justification. It makes sense from a certain perspective, I see what you're saying... but it forces a specific flavouring of the class on a player. To me, yuck.

It's no different than a paladin who doesn't commit to their oath until 3rd level or a druid who doesn't get fully inducted into their circle until 3rd level or a sorcerer whose unique power doesn't manifest until 3rd level and so on.

I think it works just fine.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

It's no different than a paladin who doesn't commit to their oath until 3rd level or a druid who doesn't get fully inducted into their circle until 3rd level or a sorcerer whose unique power doesn't manifest until 3rd level and so on.

I think it works just fine.

I don't like those situations either, for the reasons I stated earlier. As you say, it works fantastically... if your mind palace aligns with that fit of straitjacket. What's the harm in allowing more interpretations of the flavour of the class? Then everyone is happy instead of only some people being happy.

 

[MarkB]

That feels like a hollow justification. It makes sense from a certain perspective, I see what you're saying... but it forces a specific flavouring of the class on a player. To me, yuck.

What specific flavour? You can play your character as having bonded with a specific patron right from level 1, and you're gaining powers from them right from level 1 - that's where your spells and invocation come from. The only thing that's delayed until level 3 is specialisation.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

WotC stance is that new players cannot comprehend anything so we cannot have decent features at levels 1&2.

Wow. That is your take.

ALL subclasses should start at 1st level not 3rd, sure, powerful features could be delayed to 3rd level to avoid cheese dips from multiclassing.

In my opinion classes got buffed, not nerfed by the subclass change to level 3.
The warlock now gets their pact at level 1 which is more intersting. Clerics get to chose heavy armor or being mire studied whatever subclass they might pick later.

Species class and background are enough to chose from at level 1.
Usually if I play a character from level 1, it usually takes a few sessions to see what subclass works best anyway.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

“more invocations than ever before”: technically true, but given that the pact is rolled into this, for most of an adventurer’s career, it’s fucntionally only one more than before (an extra one at 5). What is present is greater flexibility: you can choose 3 pacts or none.

That said, they also combined several invocations together, meaning those 10 invocations now stretch further than the 8 you originally got.

I agree with most, but not all, of the rest of your analysis. Certainly, the Celestial Warlock suffers from not having good radiant damage spells. Personally, I think it should have had the option to change the damage type of any one chosen Warlock cantrip to radiant (obviously, pick whatever cantrip you used with Agonizing Blast.) As a Warlock that accepts being more support-focused, Celestial really isn't bad at all. I fully agree that it isn't very good for damage, but it's very much the versatility subclass, not the power subclass.

But, then again, I see value in spells like guardian of faith that others seem to ignore or reject. (It actually came in really clutch multiple times in our Phandelver game thus far!)

 

[FrogReaver]

Not needing to choose a patron until level 3 makes absolutely no sense to me.

There’s plenty of ways for it to make sense IMO. The most compelling IMO is that the Patron only later reveals his true identity a bit after the pact.

The whole defining characteristic of being a warlock is that you make a pact with an otherworldly being, or they make an involuntary pact with you. In some way or another, a connection between the PC and the patron needs to happen for the warlock/warlock class to exist. Because the connection is how you get your powers.

Indeed. Not sure why you think that doesn’t happen in 2024.

Without it, you're just a wanna-be spell caster.

Think about it. Under the 2024 rules, all you have to do is say "I wanna be a warlock" and poof the universe grants you the ability to cast eldritch blast.

That’s always been the case and is a criticism applicable to every class.

Maybe it's not the "universe" that grants the PC the ability...but under the 2024 rules, it's certainly not a patron either.... So how do you exactly get it? (From an in-world perspective, not a meta perspective)

Alternatively the patron gives you a taste of his power to later entice you to make a pact with him sounds pretty cool.

I mean, it’s certainly a departure from how 2014 handled the concept, but it’s not devoid of all sense.

 

[NaturalZero]

WotC stance is that new players cannot comprehend anything so we cannot have decent features at levels 1&2.

ALL subclasses should start at 1st level not 3rd, sure, powerful features could be delayed to 3rd level to avoid cheese dips from multiclassing.

After playing Pathfinder 2, I'm reminded how much I hate this about 5e. I've come to accept it over the years, but playing other systems really makes a lot of sore spots stand out.

Having every class get a subclass at level 1 opens all of the design space. Want a Str based monk? Works at level one without nerfing your build. Cha based noble fighter concept? You can dump Str at level 1. Unarmed martial that isn't a monk? Works right out of the gate with a subclass. Too bad they don't trust the player base to be able to make decisions.

Wow. That is your take.

That's the developers' take. They've said they wanted to push back subclasses because they didn't want people to have to make too many decisions at level 1. They literally don't trust us to figure it out.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That's the developers' take. They've said they wanted to push back subclasses because they didn't want people to have to make too many decisions at level 1. They literally don't trust us to figure it out.

That is your thing. It has nothing to do with dumb. It is that at level 1 making the subclass choice is usually uninformed. Often you learn to know your character by playing it a few levels.

Not one designer called you dumb.