Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Starter Spells; Plus UA Returning To Monthly & Sage Advice Returning

Chaos Bolt is the first Sorcerer-only spell. Interesting.

What I've read so far looks really good. I like the idea of Ceremony quite a bit, but some of the effects (Investiture!) might be a little overpowered.

 

[Lanliss]

From a mechanical standpoint, it's actually way more troublesome in the hands of warlocks, because it encourages them to spam short rests. You'd want some wording where the elixir "locks" a warlock's spell slot until it's used, or something like that.

From a flavor standpoint... no, can't get behind it at all. Warlocks have the most selfish and destructive spell list by design, and healing elixir is neither of those things. If you want the archetypical potion-brewing witch to fit in as a warlock, then the entire class needs a pretty drastic overhaul.


So... three-person monogamy, then?

So, the most Witch-like class, shouldn't be able to brew potions. I feel like this is more of that "Warlock can only be evil" sentiment I have been noticing lately.

 

[Prakriti]

I feel like this is more of that "Warlock can only be evil" sentiment I have been noticing lately.

Warlocks are as closely tied to evil as paladins are to good. A good warlock is playing against type, like a goblin paladin or an elven barbarian. There's nothing wrong with turning conventions on their head, of course, but you have to know which side is up before you can do it reliably.

 

[cbwjm]

Warlocks are as closely tied to evil as paladins are to good. A good warlock is playing against type, like a goblin paladin or an elven barbarian. There's nothing wrong with turning conventions on their head, of course, but you have to know which side is up before you can do it reliably.

I think it really depends on the flavour of warlock, I wouldn't necessarily consider a fey pact warlock to be evil. They certainly could be by being bound to the Unseelie Court but I wouldn't think that they were evil right off the bat. I'm also sure that if we looked we could find plenty of examples in literature of characters making a pact with evil, not because they were themselves evil, but because they had no choice if they wished to save the lives of loved ones, etc.

 

[Hussar]

Warlocks are as closely tied to evil as paladins are to good. A good warlock is playing against type, like a goblin paladin or an elven barbarian. There's nothing wrong with turning conventions on their head, of course, but you have to know which side is up before you can do it reliably.

Really? Granted, fair enough, for the Fiend Patron, but Faelock's are tied to evil? In what way? None of their expanded spell list is particularly evil (unless you want to count Dominate Person). 5e paladins are pretty much as closely tied to evil as warlocks are to good. Vengeance paladins are pretty easily evil.

I've never really gotten the tie between warlock and alignment. Not that alignment has any real impact on the game in 5e anyway, but, reading the warlock, I don't get the sense that a good aligned warlock is playing against type, any more than an evil paladin is.

Class defining alignments just isn't really a thing in 5e IMO.

 

[cbwjm]

Really? Granted, fair enough, for the Fiend Patron, but Faelock's are tied to evil? In what way? None of their expanded spell list is particularly evil (unless you want to count Dominate Person). 5e paladins are pretty much as closely tied to evil as warlocks are to good. Vengeance paladins are pretty easily evil.

I've never really gotten the tie between warlock and alignment. Not that alignment has any real impact on the game in 5e anyway, but, reading the warlock, I don't get the sense that a good aligned warlock is playing against type, any more than an evil paladin is.

Class defining alignments just isn't really a thing in 5e IMO.

Yeah, those days are well and truly gone now. I'm not sure how strict people were with them in the past. I know that I tended to ignore the alignment restrictions in 2e on paladins so that other gods could have paladin champions. I also ignored the alignment restrictions on rangers since they didn't really make sense to me.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

So, the most Witch-like class, shouldn't be able to brew potions. I feel like this is more of that "Warlock can only be evil" sentiment I have been noticing lately.

If it were the most witch-like class, it would probably be able to take the Medicine proficiency and cast cure wounds for starters. It's not. Don't be fooled by the name. You want witch, look to the druid or cleric.

On the warlock stuff, I disagree on all points. It's a small amount of healing, and the Warlock only has a couple slots. Most of the time, they won't have one to spare, and when they do, it's fine.

I think you've missed my point. The healing elixir lasts longer than a short rest. So a warlock can wake up, use all his slots to make healing elixirs, short rest, then have those slots back and still have the elixirs. That's the problem. He can even repeat the trick to double or triple up on the free potions. I think given the way the warlock's spellcasting works, it's pretty inadvisable for the class to get beneficial spells that last for more than 1 hour (below 6th level, of course).

I will grant that the small amount of healing and lack of scaling in healing elixir makes this trick unlikely to be worth a warlock's time above maybe 5th level or so. But below that point, it can be pretty darn good.

Thematically, I'm not sure what you objection even is? They...don't have helpful spells...so, they shouldn't get helpful spells?

Does your objection to the wizard getting this spell extend beyond this logic?

Also...the warlock can use the potion themselves. So, if your conception of the warlock is somehow purely selfish and destructive...cool? Don't share, I guess?

It's not my conception. Look at the warlock's spell list and tell me the class makes a viable party-support buffer type. No cures, no bless, no aid, no barkskin or stoneskin, no magic weapon, no haste... you see what I'm getting at here?

 

[Hussar]

[MENTION=6683613]TheCosmicKid[/MENTION] - given how warlocks cast, it's not surprising that they lack buffing. Note, that some of their buffing comes from Invocations - Sculptor of Flesh gives Polymorph for instance, but, yeah, they really aren't going to be rocking the buffing boat any time soon. Makes sense when you have so few slots per short rest. When you're only casting at most 4 spells per 2-3 encounters, it would be very surprising to see them being spent on buffs.

I'd argue that warlocks don't get the Potion spell simply because it's out of what warlocks do with their spells slots. Now, I could see an invocation for creating potions. That would be VERY cool. But, that's a different beast.

OTOH, I really don't get the issue with wizards having this spell. Niche protection is NOT a 5e thing. When clerics can cast fireball and haste, what's the problem with a wizard who can cast a minor heal? Seems to fit nicely with the whole "White Mage" thing people talk about.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Warlocks are as closely tied to evil as paladins are to good. A good warlock is playing against type, like a goblin paladin or an elven barbarian. There's nothing wrong with turning conventions on their head, of course, but you have to know which side is up before you can do it reliably.

No, they aren't.

Especially Fey Warlocks.

But the good warlock has always been a common and valid warlock concept.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

@TheCosmicKid - given how warlocks cast, it's not surprising that they lack buffing. Note, that some of their buffing comes from Invocations - Sculptor of Flesh gives Polymorph for instance, but, yeah, they really aren't going to be rocking the buffing boat any time soon. Makes sense when you have so few slots per short rest. When you're only casting at most 4 spells per 2-3 encounters, it would be very surprising to see them being spent on buffs.

I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree. If it were the bard or cleric that got the warlock-style casting, I could just as easily see the argument being made that it makes more sense for the class to focus on buffs because when you have so few spells it's nice to have them last for the entire fight. I don't think there's any particular bias in the warlock mechanics for or against buffs (apart from the long-duration buff problem I described). I think it's a thematic choice.

I'd argue that warlocks don't get the Potion spell simply because it's out of what warlocks do with their spells slots. Now, I could see an invocation for creating potions. That would be VERY cool. But, that's a different beast.

Sure. And you could tie it to a long rest rather than short rest to get over the slot refresh thing.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

[MENTION=6683613]TheCosmicKid[/MENTION] - given how warlocks cast, it's not surprising that they lack buffing. Note, that some of their buffing comes from Invocations - Sculptor of Flesh gives Polymorph for instance, but, yeah, they really aren't going to be rocking the buffing boat any time soon. Makes sense when you have so few slots per short rest. When you're only casting at most 4 spells per 2-3 encounters, it would be very surprising to see them being spent on buffs.

I'd argue that warlocks don't get the Potion spell simply because it's out of what warlocks do with their spells slots. Now, I could see an invocation for creating potions. That would be VERY cool. But, that's a different beast.

OTOH, I really don't get the issue with wizards having this spell. Niche protection is NOT a 5e thing. When clerics can cast fireball and haste, what's the problem with a wizard who can cast a minor heal? Seems to fit nicely with the whole "White Mage" thing people talk about.

This.

I have no objection to wizards having it, I'm just fine with them not getting it, outside of a white Mage subclass. I'm also fine with them having it.

As for warlocks...they aren't always going to have the spell slots to use the spell. And even if they do, it will be, at most, a couple potions. So what?

If they are able to make potions, rest, rinse, repeat, to the point where it's a problem, that is a DM failure.

The wizard can abuse it just as well, because it has many more slots, and a class feature to regain some slots early, and they last 24 hours.

The warlock can already get an invocation at level 2 that lets them cast Mage Armor or one that lets them cast False Life, at will. Warlocks interact with spell economy differently. That is part of the class.

Thematically, I still don't buy any of the arguments being made against it. They don't have buff spells, so what? That...literally isn't a reason for them not to have this spell.