D&D 5E DM purposely gimping my Warlock

[occam]

IMO:
1. The DM should have made you aware of his house rules prior to play.
2. The DM should not have altered your spell slots.
3. If the DM had a problem with warlocks, he should have told you upfront. Given the nature of Ravenloft, i.e. domains being ruled over by evil lords, warlocks can easily attract their attention and ire. I can understand his concerns but he should have told you up front. I would have banned the class before I nerfed it.

I don't think the OP said the DM was doing anything specifically to warlocks, including altering spell slots. It sounds as if the DM wants to run a grittier, more desperate game, which is appropriate for Ravenloft. That it affects the warlock (and I don't personally think it does to the extent that the OP feels) is incidental.

4. I have played and DM'd in games which started with no gear/starting cash, or lost much of it later (usually to avoid drowning/escaping from prisons). It's challenging, but not something that's really out of line.
5. The short rests being houseruled and limited is fairly common. Particularly at 2-3 per day. Not sure about the eight hour rule between but that's still not something that I'd call out of line. Especially if you're dealing with an older school DM.
6. Regenerating 1 HD per level is a throwback to earlier editions. It's not really out of line.

Agreed with all of these. In playing 5e, I've rarely been able to take more than one short rest in a day anyway, and never more than two.

And the healing/recovery rules in 5e are wide open to change, with variants coming in the DMG to make it both easier and harder (based on what we saw in the playtest and what we've repeatedly heard from the designers). They have to be, if the goal is to encompass play styles from all editions of D&D.

7. I would leave the game. It sounds like you are more a fan of the gamestyle as presented in fourth edition and not earlier ones. In contrast, it sounds like the DM is more a fan of the gamestyle of earlier editions. Given your expressed frustration, it seems unlikely that you will enjoy this style of play.

That's possible, but I would urge the OP to give it a fair shot. It may not be what you're used to, but the DM is clearly going for a certain feel in this campaign to heighten the Ravenloft mood. You may enjoy it.

 

[daddystabz]

Not sure how much enjoyment I am going to get from casting the same cantrip every time it is my turn in combat.

 

[occam]

I can't disagree with this more. Wanting a certain flavor in your game and not catering to players doesn't make you a bad DM, and certainly doesn't make you an ignorant one. I do agree that any houserule should be communicated before play starts, but what the OP describes is actually pretty close to how I DM. Limited short rests (not that give a hard cap, but I run the world as a living world and monsters and NPCs dont' just stop whenever the PCs want to rest), and I've houseruled the healing rate down myself.

Also, it sounds like the OP wants to cast a lot of spells, so I'd suggest playing a different class as well. One of the things to keep warlocks from becoming OP is their limited spell slots. If you give them short rests all the time (essentially negating this balancing mechanic), they will far outshine all other classes.

This. Warlocks are balanced with few slots to use for spells, given all the other tools in their toolbox: cantrips, invocations, blade or familiar, etc. Playing 4e-style, with essentially free short rests, would significantly increase the warlock's capability. Spells are meant to provide a dash of magical flavor, an occasional burst of damage or versatility, not be a warlock's bread and butter.

 

[WuM1nG]

From your comments, it sounds like you would rather play a wizard, who is a more versatile with a wider ranger of spells available and spell slots, than a warlock. Perhaps a change of class would be sufficient?

Not sure how much enjoyment I am going to get from casting the same cantrip every time it is my turn in combat.

 

[SoulsFury]

Not sure how much enjoyment I am going to get from casting the same cantrip every time it is my turn in combat.

D&D is not always based on combat.

 

[daddystabz]

D&D is not always based on combat.

I get that but let's not kid ourselves and pretend that it isn't a HUGE part of it? If I wanted to do nothing but tell stories I would read a book.

 

[SoulsFury]

I get that but let's not kid ourselves and pretend that it isn't a HUGE part of it? If I wanted to do nothing but tell stories I would read a book.

Playing characters that are statistically nerfed for combat can be quite rewarding to play. I just think you should give it a shot instead of worrying about power output.

 

[NaturalZero]

Playing characters that are statistically nerfed for combat can be quite rewarding to play. I just think you should give it a shot instead of worrying about power output.

The problem is that with short rests being capped at 2 per day, the warlock's out-of-combat utility is also nerfed as much as combat. That one slot he has starting out has to be all of the combat AND non-combat magic he gets outside of cantrips.

 

[Paraxis]

Playing characters that are statistically nerfed for combat can be quite rewarding to play. I just think you should give it a shot instead of worrying about power output.

Not for the people you are playing with, characters that can't hold their own in combat are not asked to go save the world and if they are the first time they fail to contribute in protecting their allies, those said allies should leave them behind.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Not for the people you are playing with, characters that can't hold their own in combat are not asked to go save the world and if they are the first time they fail to contribute in protecting their allies, those said allies should leave them behind.

I hate how much metagaming it gets sometimes... well we would never adventure with someon so weak...but he is a PC...

I agree you need to carry your weight