You forgot the text of the sorcerer class feature in question: "Converting a Spell Slot to Sorcery Points. As a bonus action on your turn, you can expend one spell slot and gain a number ofsorcery points equal to the slot's level." Nothing there says you can't use non-sorcerer slots to fuel this feature.
Yes, but by default, 5e is a single-class game.
All of the rules for a class apply to the other rules of the class.
Only the multiclassing rules all you to use spell slots you gain from a sorcerer level on a spell you have from a wizard. And those rules state you can use the shared spell slots on spells from either class. They state that non-warlock spell slot progression is unified, which implies there is no difference between wizard and sorcerer spell slots.
They do not do this for warlock spell slots. Warlock spell slots, in the actual rules as written, are not unified with other spell slots.
I mean, read the warlock class. It states that at level 1, you gain the feature "You regain all expended Spell Slots when you finish a short or Long Rest." It doesn't say "your pact magic slots", because all 5e classes are written as single-classed characters, and multiclassing is an optional extension whose rules are covered elsewhere.
By so RAW, a level 1 warlock/wizard 19 "regain all expended Spell Slots when you finish a short or Long Rest." All spell slots. Warlock and Wizard.
This is as valid as coffeelock. I mean, there might be JC tweets about it, but following those religiously is madness.
Look, you are the DM.
Your job is to interpret the rules, and determine what optional rules you are using.
And the rules do not actually say "you can use spell slots from Warlock pact magic on features of other classes". You can let that happen, but when things go wrong, well, guess you should change that.
No. There are two problems. One, they're obsessed with combat. Two, they're hard-core optimizers. Obsessed with combat I can generally handle. Optimizers who want to break the game, not so much.
If they optimize for combat and you don't have combat, their optimization
doesn't matter.
If they aren't disruptive when they aren't in combat, then 2/3 of the game has fun stuff for most of the players.
You keep on talking about them derailing exploration. Is that not a problem? You just said it was, and now you say it isn't.
And stating "I have done everything, I won't change anything" is one of your problems.
Yes, it is.
And if they weren't obsessed with combat the problem of super-optimized characters would remain.
As stated in the OP, I've run through the possibilities.
Mechanical levers will utterly destroy the non-optimizers in combat. That's bad.
How does giving a non-optimizer a boon that makes them do +20 damage on every hit destroy them in combat?
For Gygax's sake, you are the DM. You are actually permitted to do the above. That is one of your mechanical levers.
You have control over magic items, boons, and monsters, and the
entire world.
One of the DM's job is to notice party balance issues and deal with them if they are a problem.
Modifying the game so the optimizers have fun will directly cause the destruction of the fun of the non-optimizers. Modifying the game so the non-optimizers have fun will directly cause the destruction of the fun of the optimizers. When my goal is for us all to have fun...
If you refuse to change anything, nothing will change.
You refuse to change anything about the game. Between making up stawmen, saying that the players you seem to dislike don't "deserve" to have any changes to make their gameplay better, you basically blanket refuse.
You refuse to talk to the players. "I have said everything and it doesn't matter".
You refuse to change which players you play with.
So you want a solution that doesn't involve anything different by you in the game, doesn't involve talking to the players outside of the game, and doesn't involve any differences at all.
If you actually want things to be different, you actually have to do something.
You left out the real problem that they're optimizers.
I included 4 bullet points describing your problem.
1 out of 4 was optimization.
1 out of 4 was players who are combat obsessed.
1 out of 4 was players who are disruptive when they aren't in the spotlight.
1 out of 4 was you literally refusing any and all changes to your behavior.
So no, I don't leave out that problem.
No, they optimized their PCs to the point where combat trivial.
Combat difficulty is a dial you, as a DM, have total and complete control over.
So this describes the problem wrong. The problem is that they are ridiculously more competent than other PCs are. So any combat that challenges them makes the other PCs instant splatters, and any combat where the other PCs could contribute they make trivial.
As I have said repeatedly, you as the DM have mechanical levers to make the other PCs more competent in combat.
Literally the only thing stopping you from doing so is you refusing to do so.
Which was problem #4.
Right. Which is why I'm here trying to get advice or at least some commiseration.
Can you find me, say, 10 pieces of advice in this thread you have said "this is good advice, I am going to try it"?
Ok ok, 10 is a lot. I'll accept 5. Can you find me 5 distinct pieces of advice in this thread where you have said "this is good advice, I'm going to try it"?
Because there are a lot of people who know a lot about playing D&D in this thread, and if you where honestly looking for advice, the odds that there aren't 5 good pieces of advice in this thread yet is basically zero.
Which means if you don't have 5 pieces of advice you already said where good advice, I you are either lying to yourself or other people with near certainty.
Hell, start with one.
