Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Wizards & Warlocks -- Hexblades, Raven Queens, and Lore Mastery!

Master of Hexes
Starting at 14th level, you can use your
Hexblade’s Curse again without resting, but
when you apply it to a new target, the curse
immediately ends on the previous target.

Does this mean you can cast it one more time, or over and over again? And does the 1 minute duration reset upon a new target, or does it continue from the previous target?

 

[Parmandur]

To be fair, that kind of design can work really well. See: Star Wars Saga Edition. But that is also a game that needed a damn character builder. Not because the math was complicated, but because there were so many distinct options to go through to mke a character. But the system works very well, and models an enormous array of character archetypes.

But in a game with subclasses that are as small as 5e DnD? Not a chance.

From what I gather, the Saga rules may have been an inspiration: basic class chassis with lots of fiddley options; but I agree, that doesn't fit the rather streamlined 5E approach they ended up with.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This. Even if the warlock is my favorite class ever, I dont understand why ''how you get your powers'' have such a big impact on arcane spellcasters. I mean, we dont have different martial classes because I bought my sword instead of having it being gifted to me, or because I use it left-handed.
And bard, if changed to chanter (I, for one, am thrilled by the Pillars of Eternity PnP), could be a druid subclass based of floklore/ancient spirits inhabiting songs and tales of different people. Druid are more than just tree-huger, animal summoner hermits.

It's pretty Natural and intuitive to imagine that different sources of magic work differently and do different things. In fact, I would say that it would be unusual from the perspective of common stories, folk lore, etc, to have cleric, bard, Druid, and warlock magic all work the same.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I'm kinda with cbwjm on this. I've never really understood the point of the Sorcerer: it's just a Wizard with alternative spell slot mechanics and Charisma as spellcasting stat. Everything else is fluff.

The Warlock feels more distinct, although honestly I detest "Eldritch Blast". I skipped a couple of editions and came back during Next and was stunned that so many players thought that Eldritch Blast defined the Warlock. I was all, "So...they're Evokers, fluffed with a Patron?" A nuker by another name. I wish Warlocks didn't have direct damage cantrips.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think the hexblade could just be handled with an invocation: requirement (pact of blade): you gain proficiency with medium armor and shields. Would require a 3 level dip at least so it is not easily exploitable by multiclass.

Of course errata to give this to the pact of blade upon taking the pact (same with valor bard) would work too but WotC is very skittish about errata these days (I think they overcorrected for 4e excesses).

I would be ok with medium armor and shelds but would really put the charisma on attack rolls on an invokation so it is at least level 2 and costs you an invocation slot. So you really have to pay for the privilege of a single attribute attack stat.

 

[MarkB]

From what I gather, the Saga rules may have been an inspiration: basic class chassis with lots of fiddley options; but I agree, that doesn't fit the rather streamlined 5E approach they ended up with.

Saga's rules were about two steps away from a truly classless character creation system. I was always a little disappointed that 4e didn't take those couple of extra steps.

 

[smbakeresq]

I always take a level of knowledge cleric before starting on wizardly adventures, I envision as wizard as a studious type and I like the armor proficiency and bless. Loremaster provides a different option. It reads OP, less so the more your DM works you. If you do go cleric MC anywhere can you burn those first level spell slots to power these features?

The abilities all save you on feats, at least energy substitution. I would imagine I would spend a feat on medium armor proficiency to save a spell slot.

With the 6th level feature area spells get a huge boost, even sort of crappy damage spells like erupting earth become better. With this feature why would you cast spells in a higher level spot?

I think the DM would have to regulate player knowledge vs PC knowledge to govern the energy substitution and save switching part.

The free limited wish at 14 is sort of crazy. I think I would make the player pick that one in advance.



I was hoping for a better conjurer or more spells to summon creatures or even a form of improved summoning. Hopes dashed again

 

[Chaosmancer]

I read somewhere that in the first days of the playtest, the sorcerer worked differently. I cant find it anywhere on the internet, but IIRC they were developping more martial/melee aptitude as they spent their magic slot. The concept was, as an exemple, that a Dragon sorcerer was slowly becoming himself more and more a dragon the more they manifested their magic, like gaining scales at 4 spells casted in a day, gaining wings at 8 spell casted, etc.

I'd like to have something like this. Let the mage have all the magic in the world, at the end of the day, when they are out of slots, one's a weakling and the other is a dragon.

True, and I still have the old playtest material saved on my computer. If you want I could dig through it all and see if I can find it. Send it to you in a PM or post a link here?

That is not an argument I am making. Sorcerer was a fix for a problem/playstyle that is no longer valid. Sorcerer is the odd duck, imho, not the wizard, and not the Lore Master Archetype (which fits fine with other classes sans sorcerer, and other wizards).
The odd duck is the sorcerer.

Forgive me for being offended by this, but that is relatively insulting to people who like the sorcerer.

"It isn't a problem of being under-powered or having another class take all your toys. You're just obsolete these days and that's the way it is"

Wouldn't that sort of assessment lead to only one of two solutions? Either the sorcerer needs fixed (like I said) or it needs deleted from the game... to make room for this new wizard.

I think my stance on that is going to be clear.

I'm not advocating getting rid of the sorcerer, but you can do all of those things by customising the wizard.

And you can make a sneak thief by customizing the barbarian. Doesn’t necessarily move this conversation along though.

Nope. All of those things you said can't be done with the wizard class, can be done with the wizard class.

Yes, but in the original post she admitted it was kludgy and weird. You can reflavor it, but you know you are breaking with the intention of the class. If this was 1e that might be okay, but we’ve got the sorcerer sitting right there. We have a class concept that fits better what we’re trying to accomplish.

It’s like saying you can turn a wizard into a cleric, with some reflavoring, and therefore we can kick the cleric out of the game. Technically true, but the cleric is sitting right there, why not just play a cleric instead of playing a wizards-as-cleric?

If it is okay to destroy the entire purpose of a class simply because someone else can get kind of close to fulfilling their narrative purpose if you squint…. Then we can reduce everything to wizard, as long as you’re happy with an anime style of game. I don’t mind my fighter swinging his sword and causing explosions after all, and with some reflavoring it completely works.

Yet, I imagine, the history of DnD as a game with distinctive classes instead of a class-less system is going to win out, because that’s what we come to DnD to experience.

 

[Leatherhead]

It’s like saying you can turn a wizard into a cleric, with some reflavoring, and therefore we can kick the cleric out of the game. Technically true, but the cleric is sitting right there, why not just play a cleric instead of playing a wizards-as-cleric?

If it is okay to destroy the entire purpose of a class simply because someone else can get kind of close to fulfilling their narrative purpose if you squint…. Then we can reduce everything to wizard, as long as you’re happy with an anime style of game. I don’t mind my fighter swinging his sword and causing explosions after all, and with some reflavoring it completely works.

You say this, but the Warlock is currently cannibalizing the themes of the Cleric, and has been so for some time now. Why is it ok to take from the Cleric, or the other classes for that matter, but not the Sorcerer?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

For those regarding the Loremaster Wizard's ability to burn extra spell slots to add extra effects as too powerful: Would requiring a higher-level slot (as the 3.x metamagic used to) rather than an additional slot put the subclass into better balance?
Or would it be too far in the other direction?

(So, for example a Fireball with added force damage would cost a 4th-level slot rather than a 3rd and a 1st-level slot. A Fireball with a mile range would cost a 5th-level slot. etc.)

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*