D&D 5E Hex Shenanigans

[Fanaelialae]

Aside from aid and mage armor not being on the warlock spell list, I think they are interesting examples. If you dislike the chicken tactic, would you also be annoyed if the warlock cast those spells in the morning and then took a short rest to get back the slots? If so then it seems your issue is with the short rest mechanic, not the chicken. If not then I suspect it's a question of whether a chicken is a valid target. If the warlock snuck off before breakfast and killed a bear, would you have the same objection? Or maybe its this particular combination of gaming the targeting rules and the rest mechanic together?

My only objection is the gaming of the mechanics.

I believe a warlock can use their slots to cast spells from other classes if they gain them via multi classing, so that is how they could cast mage armor or aid.

I've got no issues with pre casting hex (as I've stated before I'd allow it to be cast without a target). I've got no issues with a warlock short resting to regain spells. But the hex chicken is just someone trying to game the system, and that is terrible for immersion.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Interesting. The Warlock class is one of my favorite mechanical things about 5E.

I mean, it's a fun idea, it's just you get basically everything you need at like 4th or so level.

Which, again, makes sense, because the Warlock is the person who bargained for power so getting a good boost early on makes sense. It's just a bad idea for 5e.

 

[Arial Black]

Aside from aid and mage armor not being on the warlock spell list, I think they are interesting examples. If you dislike the chicken tactic, would you also be annoyed if the warlock cast those spells in the morning and then took a short rest to get back the slots? If so then it seems your issue is with the short rest mechanic, not the chicken. If not then I suspect it's a question of whether a chicken is a valid target. If the warlock snuck off before breakfast and killed a bear, would you have the same objection? Or maybe its this particular combination of gaming the targeting rules and the rest mechanic together?

As you can see from my list, I like playing multi-class warlocks. So I've played some that could cast aid/mage armour with their Pact Magic slots.

Why would they cast those spells with slots they regain after an hour? If you have to ask, you're not paying attention. : )

 

[Arial Black]

Ugh...my apologies. Too much multitasking and I completely, totally misread @Arial Black post on his PCs

In my games it's always been a couple of levels and then on to the real class. When it happens every time (roughly 20 players in different groups, 5 multi-class warlocks) it becomes a pattern.

Again ... oops.

That's very much appreciated. Thank you.

 

[Oofta]

I can totally see why the out-of-combat Hex followed by a short rest can be seen as an exploit/gaming the system. I personally think it's fine (and, as my previous anecdote illustrated, was a positive contribution to the one game I've seen in it used in) but I can see both sides.

I don't see, however, how class selection can be seen as an exploit/gaming the system. Could you please clarify what you mean by this? Different campaigns have different styles, and I can totally see how someone making a character in an incompatible style (e.g. treating class descriptions as suggested fluff in a game where they are mandatory) is problematic. But how does making an incompatible style of character qualify as an exploit/gaming the system?

As I explained in the other post, I've played with/DMed home games with a few different groups now (roughly 20 people). In that group we've had 5 people who did a couple level dip of warlock to get eldritch blast and more spells. In fact, it's about the only multi-classing I've seen.

It just feels like something that people are doing solely because they read it as a power boost. I also view paladins, clerics and warlocks as slightly different from other classes. From an RP/background story they are beholden to some external power or vow and I think it should make a difference.

My experience is, of course, not universal and I have yet to implement a rule limiting multi-classing.

 

[Fenris-77]

I mean, it's a fun idea, it's just you get basically everything you need at like 4th or so level.

Which, again, makes sense, because the Warlock is the person who bargained for power so getting a good boost early on makes sense. It's just a bad idea for 5e.

I don't think that's universally true for Warlock builds. I would agree that there's a little too much for MC dips though. I was talking more about the overall design of the class, with the SR high-slot spells paired with invocations. It's a cool mechanic that doesn't feel like just another full caster, which is a good thing. Dealing with mutli-classing shenanigans is a table by table thing and isn't just limited to Warlock levels.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I agree with all that. It may be to no avail. It may be that you use both your slots and then get attacked before you can rest (hopefully not by a [collective noun] of grudge tarrasques!). That's the rational risk/reward you're calculating.

It's up to the player, not the DM, how the PC casts their spells.

If the player wants to take the trouble to haul around a cage full of chickens, just be realistic about the consequences, not arbitrary, not with the universe suspending its own laws just to vex me. I'll be realistic about choosing whether or not to haul around a cage of chickens.

So far, I never have. None of my PCs has ever carried around a 'bag of rats' either literally or figuratively. I can envision a larger caravan carrying such things for food, and if they did then I'd be around just before they killed one to hex it if I didn't expect action in the next hour, because that makes sense! I'm taking advantage of the laws of the universe for my own advantage, just like every living creature in the universe!



What do you think is poorly designed? The spell? How Pact Magic works? I really don't see a problem here.

Like I said to you earlier in the thread, I wouldn't forbid it in universe. I would request that you (the player) don't do it. I'd even let you pre cast hex without a target, so that you don't have to.

Why? Because gaming the system like that will ruin my (and my players') immersion. You're treating the game like a system to be hacked, rather than a living setting.

You justify it by saying things like the rules of the game are the physics of the setting, but as far as I am concerned that isn't true.

There's nothing in the rules about breaking bones from falling. But when my buddy's character literally fell down a mountain the DM had him make a saving throw and when he failed he shattered his leg. We were cool with it because it made sense.

The players I've known who try to game the system were the first to decry DMs for doing things like that, accusing them of cheating (not unlike what you did earlier in this thread).

Plenty of things aren't covered by the rules. The DM creating a realistic setting without being shackled to the letter of the rules is the DM doing their job.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

My experience is, of course, not universal and I have yet to implement a rule limiting multi-classing.

If you do the way I would do it is just use the Adventure League's downtime leveling thing.

 

[Fenris-77]

I feel like I'm in the minority here, I love me some Warlock, but the bag of hex chickens thing really rubs my rhubarb the wrong way.

 

[jaelis]

My only objection is the gaming of the mechanics.

Well the question is what makes this, for you, gaming the mechanics? I mean say the player just asked if he could precast hex, and you said yes, and then the player said cool, for RP reasons I will cast it on a chicken and sacrifice it. Surely you would not object? But you would object if the player just asked if he could hex the chicken directly?

Or is it that you are looking ahead to a scenario where the player argues that you must allow him to cast hex on the chicken, and that's what you object to?