D&D (2024) Its Ironic That Fire Goliaths Make Better Celestial Warlocks Then Aasimar Do

[Remathilis]

I'm with @Mistwell on this one.

If you are a player so hung up on mechanics that you are genuinely upset you don't get a second cantrip (of all things) because your combo gives you the same one twice... then why do you care about the narrative combination between your species and class?

Would it be cool if there was an "official rule" to let you have both? Sure. But if you truly want to roleplay the narrative of an Aasimar Celestial Warlock... you should want to do that regardless of how many game mechanics you get given.

Play the story cause you find it cool... not because of the mechanical bells and whistles you can wring out of it.

Because it's dumb that you gain more for being a tiefling celestial warlock than an aasimar one!

Also, is the skill/tool proficiency redundancy rule still in the PHB? The one that says if you get a proficiency from a different source later (such as class and background) you can swap it for a different proficiency of the same type? Aka "It's not dumb to take the criminal background as a rogue and end up with proficiency in thieves tools twice" rule?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm with @Mistwell on this one.

If you are a player so hung up on mechanics that you are genuinely upset you don't get a second cantrip (of all things) because your combo gives you the same one twice... then why do you care about the narrative combination between your species and class?

Would it be cool if there was an "official rule" to let you have both? Sure. But if you truly want to roleplay the narrative of an Aasimar Celestial Warlock... you should want to do that regardless of how many game mechanics you get given.

Play the story cause you find it cool... not because of the mechanical bells and whistles you can wring out of it.

So you're saying...accept that your thematically designed PC is going to be less powerful than it would otherwise be (because less versatile & fewer abilities), despite using the same resources as everyone else, and if that's a problem for you you're a munchkin? Don't see how that suggestion is going to go over well.

 

[Corinnguard]

Also, is the skill/tool proficiency redundancy rule still in the PHB? The one that says if you get a proficiency from a different source later (such as class and background) you can swap it for a different proficiency of the same type? Aka "It's not dumb to take the criminal background as a rogue and end up with proficiency in thieves tools twice" rule?

I am going to borrow something from Level Up here. If both the Aasimar and the Celestial Warlock grant resistance to radiant damage, then why not grant an Aasimar Celestial Warlock an Expertise die (+1d4) to make a save vs. radiant damage? So, if they were attacked by something that does radiant damage, they would get to roll a 1d4 and add to their saving throw. Whether they succeed at their save or not, their radiant resistance kicks in to reduce the damage down to 1/2 (if their saving throw fails but they still resist it) to 1/4 (if their saving throw succeeds and they apply their resistance).

As for proficiency in Thieves Tools, how does it work toward helping a rogue pick a lock, again? However, it does it, I could see another Expertise dice at play that would help improve the rogue's chances to pick that lock.

 

[ECMO3]

Because it's dumb that you gain more for being a tiefling celestial warlock than an aasimar one!

Also, is the skill/tool proficiency redundancy rule still in the PHB? The one that says if you get a proficiency from a different source later (such as class and background) you can swap it for a different proficiency of the same type? Aka "It's not dumb to take the criminal background as a rogue and end up with proficiency in thieves tools twice" rule?

Under the new rules Rogues should always be Entertainers, Wizards should always be criminals and Clerics should always be Farmers.


They are penalized mechanically if they take the stereotypical iconic Criminal, Sage and Accolyte respectively.

I lilke most of the changes in 2024, but the background system is one thing I strongly do not like.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I am writing up a Zariel Celestial warlock. Nice synergy with the bonus to fire and radiant damage.

Not for one second do I lament this…nor the armor prof for my mountain dwarf blade boon warlock. I mean tiefling should always be better warlocks too I suppose.

I don’t know what 2024 will bring…have not read the book yet…but I do lament that folks lose out on weird and different for want of compensation for any little redundant bonus.

Not harshing anyone’s vibe at all, just too bad sometimes that this gets in the way of weird new and still survivable fun.

I like bonuses and advantages too! But I don’t let a little trade off haunt me so much which has allowed me to play fun things…I know we each have our priorities and it’s all for fun of course

 

[Mistwell]

Because it's dumb that you gain more for being a tiefling celestial warlock than an aasimar one!

More in the sense of counting raw powers on a list maybe, like people did on Day 1 of the PHB 2014 with the Monk. Remember way back then people claiming Monk was overpowered because they counted their powers and saw the quantity outnumbered others and assumed that meant it's power was highest?

But more in terms of actual in-game power? I don't think tiefling gains more than aasimar from going celestial warlock. Indeed, Tiefling's attack cantrips are not very compatible with any version of Warlock.

Let's break it down:

Aasimar powers:
Darkvision: Decent (both have this so not relevant)
Resistance to Necrotic Damage: Decent. Necrotic is a more common damage PCs take
Resistance to Radiant Damage: Weak. Radiant is a very uncommon damage PCs take.
Healing Prof Bonus x d4 to any target 1/day: Decent. Used every day. In the Celestial theme of healing.
Light Cantrip: Weak. almost entirely flavor as someone always has light if needed.
Transformation Damage 1 min: Decent. Not huge but will be used every day.
Flight (or): Very good, will be used every day
Damaging Aura (or): Very good, will be used every day
Fear Aura: Very good, will be used every day.

Aasimar will use their Healing, transformation damage, and Flight/Aura every day with the Celestial Warlock. That's their core abilities and they're complimentary. Necromantic damage will come up sometimes.

Tiefling Powers:
Darkvision: Decent (both have this so not relevant)
Thaumaturgy Cantrip: Weak, entirely flavor
Resistance to Poison and Poison Spray cantrip (or): Decent, poison spray is weaker than Eldritch Blast
Resistance to Necrotic and Chill Touch cantrip (or): Decent, chill touch is weaker than Eldritch Blast
Resistance to Fire and Fire Bolt cantrip: Decent, Fire Bolt weaker than Eldritch Blast but benefits from Radiant Soul.

Spells:
Ray of Sickness and Hold Person (or): OKish, neither is a particularly good spell
False Life and Ray of Enfeeblement: Decent, false life will be used every day but Ray is weak
Hellish Rebuke and Darkness: Good. Hellish Rebuke will be used every day.

Tiefling will use False Life or Hellish Rebuke every day. Resistance to something will come up sometimes. However, most of their other core powers are attack cantrips which are objectively weaker choices than the Warlock's Eldritch Blast,

In terms of compatibility with the Celestial Warlock, Aasimar is better than Tiefling primarily because the Tieflings core attack cantrip ability is redundant or weaker than the Warlock's core Eldritch Blast cantrip (I think Fire Bolt benefitting from Radiant Soul catches it up to at least redundant and not weaker), leaving them with just situational resistances (and the Celestial even has one of those resistances) and two spells that are pretty good but not better than flight or the two auras.

Just because Aasimar loses two weaker abilities (light cantrip and radiant resistance) doesn't mean Tiefling is better for a Celestial Warlock. The abilities they use every day, or which are good when the situation comes up, are better for a Celestial Warlock than the Tiefling's abilities which are used every day or which are good when the situation comes up.

I do think an Infernal Tiefling would make for a pretty decent Celestial Warlock, with Firebolt, Hellish Rebuke and resistance to fire. They could probably skip Eldritch Blast and use Firebolt as their primary attack cantrip due to it's synergy with Radiant Soul. It's not as good as a Warlocks Eldritch Blast with those various combos and multiple bolts we all know about, but it allows for more flexibility in some choices. I don't think it's quite equal to an Aasimar Celestial Warlock, but it certainly competes with it and will be better in some situations due to enhanced flexibility. Both would be fun to play and have interesting flavor.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It's a noted issue with many thematic combos.

A dragonborn draconic sorcerer should never pick the same color for species and class. You get the same elemental resistance.

Personally, I think this is actually mildly interesting. A silver dragonborn/gold dragon sorcerer is actually a pretty neat combo.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Personally, I think this is actually mildly interesting. A silver dragonborn/gold dragon sorcerer is actually a pretty neat combo.

It is interesting. But you shouldn't be penalized through wasted mechanical choices by not choosing it.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So you're saying...accept that your thematically designed PC is going to be less powerful than it would otherwise be (because less versatile & fewer abilities), despite using the same resources as everyone else, and if that's a problem for you you're a munchkin? Don't see how that suggestion is going to go over well.

Quite frankly, yes.

If (general) your thematic ideas of who your character is and who they are narratively is truly the important thing for (general) you... accepting that you can't have that AND a min-maxed character should not that big a deal. It's literally no different than in 5E14 when a player wanted to play an Elven STR-based fighter... knowing full well they weren't going to get a +2 to STR and thus starting with a 15 (when doing point-buy). But if that player really just wanted to play a STR-based fighter (or barbarian or whatever)... they accepted their character was not going to be min-maxed. And it didn't matter. Because the characterization was more important than the numbers and mechanics. Yes, you "got less" that some other combination. But so what? The character is the important thing, not the mechanics. Especially when that "loss" in mechanics was so minor to begin with.

Look, I don't disagree that sure, it'd be nice if the book said "if you get the Light cantrip from two different sources you can swap one out and get something else." But two things with that-- 1) At any home table any single player can just ask of their DM for that anyway. And unless their DM is a total and complete schmuck (and you shouldn't be playing with that DM if that's the case)... the DM should acknowledge that cantrips are so inconsequential to a PC once they reach like 5th level and have spell slots up the wazoo every day that there's zero reason why that DM should ever say "No, you can't have Minor Illusion instead of that second Light cantrip." Having an extra cantrip means virtually nothing in the long run. That's why the game gives PCs two of them with every Magic Initiate feat... because having five, six, eight, ten cantrips just becomes a redundancy of uselessness.

And 2) The book is already written, so no one is getting their way in this anyway. The book isn't suddenly going to get re-printed in the next two weeks with a new line it that goes over what to do in this situation. So every single one of us is going to have to house-rule regardless. So really, what's the point in just complaining about it? What everyone should be doing is working out their own best solution to their problem and solving their issue for themself.

But you know, if people don't actually care about a solution and just want to vent instead... that's fine too. They're free to do so. Just like others are free to question why they are bothering.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

But you know, if people don't actually care about a solution and just want to vent instead... that's fine too. They're free to do so. Just like others are free to question why they are bothering.

DEFCON1 has just accurately described 56% of the threads, and 87% of the arguments, on Enworld!

As always, numbers are both approximate and yet completely accurate. Umbran said so.