Level Up (A5E) Warlock Archetype Curse scaling

[Anonymous3]

Sorry, I made an error with the quotes. I had a bunch and clicked the wrong one, posted without checking, deleted, couldn't quote again,... had to copy and paste and use the quote function.

 

[Anonymous3]

unfortunately this creates the same problem as the exertion being on a long rest in that now you have to create a multiclassing exemption again so we're back at square one.

This how I feel at the moment. Square one. Good roller-coaster though

What if we just kept spellcasting and exertion separate for Herald? They receive exertion as a Fighter. They keep their spells. Now a Fighter dip doesn't get the benefit of another exertion pool. Fighters gain ways to reduce exertion spent. Heralds gain abilities to use spell slots to power their abilities.

Does this create another problem that I cannot see?

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Sorry if I'm not getting this. The exertion point values (like Warlock spell points) seems the easiest to implement but I don't see how that solves the Fighter dip problem of stacking exertion pools.

if you get a regular exertion pool you can't get another. so if heralds get a regular exertion pool then a fighter dip doesn't give them a second, even if the herald can spend exertion to cast herald spells.

This how I feel at the moment. Square one. Good roller-coaster though

What if we just kept spellcasting and exertion separate for Herald? They receive exertion as a Fighter. They keep their spells. Now a Fighter dip doesn't get the benefit of another exertion pool. Fighters gain ways to reduce exertion spent. Heralds gain abilities to use spell slots to power their abilities.

Does this create another problem that I cannot see?

not a major one, just that it kind of removes some of the herald's identity with its exertion and spells sharing the same resource.

 

[Anonymous3]

Damn, I'm tired and forgot the basics of multiclassing.

 

[Distracted DM]

Sorry if I'm not getting this. The exertion point values (like Warlock spell points) seems the easiest to implement but I don't see how that solves the Fighter dip problem of stacking exertion pools.

I don't see how this avoids the Fighter dip issue either. Whether we start as Fighter or Herald we will have a two separate ways of getting exertion and thus have two separate pools.

This does not happen when the wording is the same, eg., Fighter/Berserker. What am I missing?

unfortunately this creates the same problem as the exertion being on a long rest in that now you have to create a multiclassing exemption again so we're back at square one.

that said, pb*3 is much less of a problem then converting the spell slots you'd have into exertion to be regained on a long rest + pb*2, and both are less of a problem then the current method since perfect assault would wipe both pools out, thus negating that specific exploit.

...why did the site say this quoted my post...?

I didn't explain enough.

One reason my herald players multiclass to fighter is to get a standard exertion pool. There are other reasons, a better maneuver progression and fighting style etc.

But if you give Herald a standard exertion pool, but make it only equal to PB, (they can still burn spells for temp exertion like normal) that's one less reason to MC

 

[W'rkncacnter]

But if you give Herald a standard exertion pool, but make it only equal to PB, (they can still burn spells for temp exertion like normal) that's one less reason to MC

okay, let me explain why this doesn't work.

let's say you start as a herald and multiclass into fighter. okay, your exertion pool is equal to your PB. now let's say you start as a fighter and multiclass into herald. okay, your exertion pool is equal to twice your PB.

this is the inconsistency i was referring to. you're not actually solving the problem - you're just making starting as a herald worse.

 

[lichmaster]

(though this would require standardizing maneuver degree progression, which...is intentionally not standardized for reasons i will never understand).

I was dabbling on this a while ago, but never posted it.
If I have time I'll create a post for this, as it has always bothered me (I love unified progression).
I think it can be done reasonably, with the caveat that classes will then have to have some bonus exertion or bonus maneuver at some specific levels to recover their original progression.

 

[Tessarael]

Giving Heralds a pool of exertion = PB (rather than others PB*2) can help avoid the optimal-fighter-dip, I think. It won't help their maneuver progression ofc but I try to make it clear to players that the herald isn't a maneuver-master. That doesn't really sell them though, they still want to maneuver it up :'D

That doesn't work, unfortunately. With the approach that you're suggesting, when they level dip into Fighter, they still get the additional proficiency bonus exertion points (i.e., 2x proficiency bonus in total), which has a similar problem to before, just not as bad.

You have to give the Herald the same exertion pool as the Fighter, 2x proficiency bonus not stacking, to avoid the level dip problem. A Herald X/Fighter 1 will still get access to higher level maneuvers, and it is still a good combination, but it solves them getting a hunk of exertion with a single level dip.