Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 6875329" data-attributes="member: 6750235">Warlocks were the simple caster.  The spend most of their time with combat cantrips and and the occasional spell cast, and it's not possible for a warlock to blow his daily slots because of the short rest.  There's also no decision point on which level a spell is to be cast -- it's always the highest level of pact magic available.  Arcanum are straight forward and simply another 1/day SLA of which four are acquired.  One of the simple spell caster design concepts seems to have centered around a much lower number of in-combat decision points than other spell casters.I'm not convinced that the late design in the play test had anything to do with it, however.  There was an earlier warlock design in the public play test followed by a later design in the public play test after feedback followed by a non-public play test after feedback to include the fine tuning we saw released.  All the classes released in the PHB had quite a bit of time for testing and feedback to get to where they were released.  The bard, as a counterpoint, did not have as early a public beta test (it was very late) and after the private play test was altered quite a bit from the public play test version.  It was quite clear that WotC developers were using the feedback given by play testers with the bard and that reinforces the fact they were doing the same with other classes, including the warlock.The warlock was also steered more towards the AEU concept.  Short rest abilities are the 5e version of encounter abilities but no longer per encounter given the 5e short rest mechanics.  Warlocks focus on their at will, spend 1 pact magic slot per encounter, and have dailies in the format of arcanum at higher levels.  Adding the short rest into the narrative after about 2 encounters (but continue to mix it up as per earlier discussion) and warlocks are generally at 1-2 encounter abilities per encounter throughout most of their career.The issue people have with the warlock restrictions is that the warlock isn't capable blowing their load on a low number of encounters, generally followed by the unreasonable assumption that everything (good guys, bad guys, general innocent bystanders, the environment, any time sensitive factors, etc) takes the rest of the day off so that everyone can get a good night's sleep for the next day's rinse and repeat.  Some times it's true, but generally it's not; get rid of that 5MWD fallacy and the group has gotten rid the biggest complaint those players have regarding warlocks.  What I also find humorous is that players complain about warlocks because of the 5MWD approach and massive spell dumping ability during encounters, but then complain about healing when that same 5MWD heals everyone up to full per the core rules, destroying the need for healers because the group can just take a long rest.  To me, that seems like people are just selectively rationalizing mechanics to hold on to class biases and so they have something to complain about, tbh.A DM who narrates the story including the, "and you have a break in (x action) allowing a short rest" and "it seems like it's getting late and things are getting quiet for the night" (that one is often the opposite of what happens and also creates issues with simply taking a long rest; night is when the scary monsters come out) instead of players thinking they can break whenever and however they want, and the system works.  This is a role-playing gaming, not gaming our role-play.That probably went beyond the answer to your question.  I did participate in play testing.  Warlocks were the simple spell casters, even if they did end up with a bit of system mastery in the planning process.  The combat play is pretty simple and straight forward as planned.  If a person doesn't want that simple system, it's not a problem with the class.  It's just not the right class for that player.</blockquote>

Verification