Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="yakuba" data-source="post: 6622825" data-attributes="member: 6698582">I think exactly this is the pain point for a lot of people: The class gives you your proficiencies, cantrips, spell slots, a big spell list, Arcanuum and Invocations.  Your pact gives a 10 new spell options and 4 class features at 3rd, 6th, 10th and 14th level. If you stop right there you have a solid 5e facsimile of the 4e PHB Warlock class. Now the Pacts:Chain gives a the best familiar in the game and the opportunity to invest making that familiar a little better and at very high level invest in one nice but situational control power. That's all it does. Nor is there any flavor text that promises more. But it does hint at a Binder and that hint creates a huge mental illusion as to what's actually being offered hereTome give a few more cantrips and the opportunity to invest in Ritual Casting without a feat. (I want to note here that the 4e Warlock does not have ritual casting unless you invest a feat). Again, that's all that's on the table Finally Blade you get pseudo-weapon proficiency and a summoned pact weapon plus the opportunity to invest in doing more damage with said pact weapon at higher levels. Again, that's all that's there. It hints at a hexblade, but a hexblade that is 80% hex and 20% blade.I think its hard to really look at these feature sets (as they actually are, not as they might be) and say that the intention was for them to be more important than the choice of Patron, or for them to totally change how the class would play.The pacts are smaller than the class feature and smaller than the Patron features, but because they hint at things from previous editions that were entire classes in and of themselves, they project this mental illusion and bring about all of this cognitive dissonance which players are currently experiencing.To be clear, I'm not saying this was the best way to design the class. Hindsight is telling us it almost certainly was not. I'm just stating what the class is.</blockquote>

Verification