D&D 5E A Warlock Without Spells?

[ezo]

Simple question for an idea a player had...

Could more Eldritch Invocations replace having spells? Beginning at 1st level you gain know a number of Eldritch Invocations equal to your level. For multiclassing, we don't do level-dips, so don't worry about that aspect. MC characters have to keep their levels within 1 level for each class.

The idea is some invocations could be taken more than once, and others would have to be re-written to accomodate the idea of course since spell slots wouldn't be part of the class.

Would this be an overall power bump or not? I don't use warlocks often so would like other peoples' input. Thanks.

 

[TwoSix]

Would the invocations that allow you to use a warlock spell slot to cast a spell once per long rest still be usable?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I think “warlock without spells” would be a new base class, not a warlock. The Illrigger goes there for a start. From a mechanical perspective, invocations are "choose a power from a menu".

The thing about spell slots as a shared system it interacts with other game elements, opening up more build options: multiclassing, feats, species; if a supplement adds new spells to the game you benefit, etc.

What exactly would you hope to achieve by removing slots?

 

[niklinna]

Try it, and see how it works.

 

[MarkB]

This was essentially how the original 3.5e Warlock worked. They knew a very limited number of spells granted by their invocations, and none of the spells used slots - typically they were either at-will, continuous-effect or once-per-day depending upon type and power level.

I only played a warlock once in 3.5e, around the mid to high single-digit levels, but it was a lot of fun - as I recall, I had constant-effect spider climb and at-will dimension door in addition to eldritch blast.

 

[ezo]

Would the invocations that allow you to use a warlock spell slot to cast a spell once per long rest still be usable?

Yes.

As would the one where you could cast them at will.

This was essentially how the original 3.5e Warlock worked. They knew a very limited number of spells granted by their invocations, and none of the spells used slots - typically they were either at-will, continuous-effect or once-per-day depending upon type and power level.

I only played a warlock once in 3.5e, around the mid to high single-digit levels, but it was a lot of fun - as I recall, I had constant-effect spider climb and at-will dimension door in addition to eldritch blast.

Oh, good to know! I'll dig out my 3.5 PHB and check it out (if it was in there).

What exactly would you hope to achieve by removing slots?

The player really likes the invocations, both for theme but also for simplicity over having known spells for warlock. He finds the two slots per short rest limiting and artificial with "maximum power but minimum use". Also, he finds in practice his two spell slots are always "hex and something else".

The goal would be to create a "magic-using" but simpler class.

 

[MarkB]

Oh, good to know! I'll dig out my 3.5 PHB and check it out (if it was in there).

It was in a later supplement, Complete Arcane.

 

[ezo]

The only downside is I think certain invocations would become even more standard than they already are, like agonizing blast and devil's sight.

But, I suppose the same is already true for spell selection, with hex and hellish rebuke.

I am also worried one per level might be too much, but considering it is replace pact magic completely maybe not?

It was in a later supplement, Complete Arcane.

I'll see if I can find a write-up online then. Thanks!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The player really likes the invocations, both for theme but also for simplicity over having known spells for warlock. He finds the two slots per short rest limiting and artificial with "maximum power but minimum use". Also, he finds in practice his two spell slots are always "hex and something else".

The goal would be to create a "magic-using" but simpler class.

The warlock in my current game doesn't have hex. It isn't really needed if you aren't a dps optimiser.

There are a couple of invocations that let you use spell slots to do things other than cast spells, and other invocations that use slots, so removing slots would also limit invocation options.

From 11th level, the warlock starts getting spells from Mystic Arcanum, so you eventually end up with a bunch of spells anyway.

You could keep the spell slots, but set Prepared Spells to zero. replacing it with the equivalent of ranger favoured foe from Tasha's. That should be neither overpowered nor sucky.

It might be worth looking at the Illrigger if a new character is to be started. The Blood Hunter also has some warlockish options without being a full caster.

 

[ezo]

There are a couple of invocations that let you use spell slots to do things other than cast spells, and other invocations that use slots, so removing slots would also limit invocation options.

No, the initial plan (anyway) is that taken the invocation allows you one use (at the same "maximum spell level") and additional uses if you take it more than once (a maximum of 4 times for any such invocation).

For example, eldritch smite which uses a spell slot could be used once. If you select it again you can use it twice, etc. Whether those would come back on a short or long rest requires more discussion.

From 11th level, the warlock starts getting spells from Mystic Arcanum, so you eventually end up with a bunch of spells anyway.

You wouldn't get them. We don't use them already (Warlocks are more half-casters in our houserules). Having up to 20 EIs makes up for that IMO--and we don't usually play into tiers 3 and 4. Not sure how much of an issue it would be.

You could keep the spell slots, but set Prepared Spells to zero. replacing it with the equivalent of ranger favoured foe from Tasha's. That should be neither overpowered nor sucky.

That's a good option, but with the limitation on spell slots being a concern I don't know how well it would work out.