Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6783936" data-attributes="member: 6790260">For those asking for the "official ruling," here's <a href="https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/529655572862210048" target="_blank">a relevant Twitter conversation</a>.The specific tweet from Crawford that matters is, "The intent is that a level prerequisite in a warlock invocation refers to warlock level." The PHB was errata'd to add numerous references to this after the first printing. Previously, the phrasing had been ambiguous--clearly you could only gain or change Invocations by taking a Warlock level, but the original prerequisites simply listed "level X" rather than "Warlock level X" (if there were any such prereqs). The rewritten Invocation sections make it explicit that this refers to Warlock levels.This gives at least some credence to the idea that the intent of the ambiguous passages is to refer to class level, rather than character level. Since most subclasses employ the "when you choose this [subclass] at level [N]..." phrasing, the ruling as presented by BoldItalic requires us to treat (near-)identical phrasing as though it had a different intent solely depending on whether N does or does not equal 1. This seems like an unwarranted assumption, given the Warlock invocation intent despite the complete lack of text indicating that intent.Though I still haven't seen a substantive response about the Cleric bonus proficiencies which don't say "when you choose this domain at level 1." Unless it was said and I missed it? I have been known to do that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" /></blockquote>

Verification