Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 9341608" data-attributes="member: 20564">I think the Warlock is a decent chassis.  I think the Warlock broken up for parts is an excellent foundation.In the recent "what do you wish the 2024 update was" thread, I mentions that I'd love to rip spells out of ranger, install the invocation system.  And a bunch of invocations would be at-will and completely based on "I am the master of this", and some would have varied usage (per long rest, per short rest, etc.) and be more "nature magic".  Such that from the same class, before even hitting subclasses, you can make a magical or non-magical ranger just fine.And the ability to do that, without also requiring spellcaster, especially spellcasting that advances at a rate similar to full casters during most commonly played levels (1-11) by WotC survey so there is design space to be good at other things, like the ranger is known for, would be great.But hanging full caster equivalent on every class, which as an opportunity cost doesn't leave design space for the other classes to have their specialties, misses much of what is good.The warlock's casting, adjusted to half or third caster, might be a better fit for the Eldritch Knight subclass, to align with the short-rest-recharge of other parts of the fighter class.The invocation system would fit Monk subclasses like Way of the Four Elements.I guess what I'm getting at is that there are excellent bones in the Warlock chassis, but to mix-n-match as opposed to always use in the same configuration as the Warlock.</blockquote>

Verification