D&D 5E Warlock, Pact of the Boon Specific Wording Question

[sithramir]

Level 7 paladins can also get MR and it has a radius...AND it gives their CHA bonus to the saves

 

[Paraxis]

The find familiar spell summons a spirit in the form of a creature not the creature itself. So a pseudodragon summoned by the spell is not a normal pseudodragon, you could recast the spell and reshape the familiar into a raven or imp and it would be at it's core the same entity.

So I would say that unless you get a real imp, quasit, or pseudodragon to bond with you the sidebar abilities like shared magic resistance wouldn't apply.

As to the cantrip question, "from any class's spell list" translates to me to allow a choice from multiple and all class lists.
But I can understand how it could be read the other way.

 

[Dausuul]

The problem with familiar-granted magic resistance is that you have to have your familiar within 10 feet, and the familiars in question have 7-10 hit points and poor saves. The first time you use that magic resistance against an area attack, you're apt to lose it. Better make sure you've got plenty of find familiar components on hand. (The incense is less of a problem than the need to tote around a brass brazier and spend 1 hour re-casting the spell.)

I do think it's intended that you should get the resistance; remember that the Monster Manual was released after the PHB. Because the sidebars just happened to all be on monsters that warlocks can get as familiars, I suspect the sidebars were a kind of stealth errata to beef up the Pact of the Chain.

 

[green_destiny]

Interesting conversations here.

The find familiar spell summons a spirit in the form of a creature not the creature itself. So a pseudodragon summoned by the spell is not a normal pseudodragon, you could recast the spell and reshape the familiar into a raven or imp and it would be at it's core the same entity.

But it does use the creature's stats, skills and abilities. Without the Chain pact a PC should learn a find familiar spell or convince a creature to be his familiar. Relatively the Chain pact does grant you access to these types as familiars, that is its main benefit.

Try to compare it to other pact boons. Blade pact gives you a melee weapon, which is considered magical, and you get proficiency in it. Tome pact gets you three cantrips. Both of those benefits are nice, but nowhere close to magic resistance. Chain pact basically gets you a slightly improved 1st-level spell (find familiar). That (IMO) is exactly in line with other boons.

In short, magic resistance won't break the game, but it far outweighs other benefits gained at lower levels.

Regards.

The problem with familiar-granted magic resistance is that you have to have your familiar within 10 feet, and the familiars in question have 7-10 hit points and poor saves. The first time you use that magic resistance against an area attack, you're apt to lose it.

I do think it's intended that you should get the resistance; remember that the Monster Manual was released after the PHB. Because the sidebars just happened to all be on monsters that warlocks can get as familiars, I suspect the sidebars were a kind of stealth errata to beef up the Pact of the Chain.

^This. I was about to point this out.

Warlock's pact boons doesn't end when you get them, we also have consider how the pacts scale thru levels so we have to consider the available warlock invocations.

Among the three, the Chain pact is the pact with the least useful invocations to upgrade it thru higher levels. Leaving you with just an optional invisible familiar that will never improve its statistics or abilities. Easily the Blade and Book have it better thru levels.

*** Pact of Blade ***

1. Thirsting Blade - can be accessible at lvl 5, gives you twice attack per turn with whatever melee weapon form you choose. (great sword or great axe anyone?)

2. Life Drinker - lvl 12, additional necrotic damage per attack!

*** Pact of Tome ***

- besides 3 addtional cantrips from ANY class (cantrips do scale thru levels in this edition) you get...

1. Ancient Secrets - access to 2 ritual spells ANY from class and opening your chance to get ALL ritual spells from ANY class. Available immediately when you get your pact boon.

*** Pact of Chain ***

1. Voice of Chain master - grants you virtually unlimited telephaty with your familiar (but seriously why would a warlock let its familiar be oceans away from him? and how often would a warlock need to do that?) and lets you speak personally thru your familiar (again, whats the advantage on this if my familiar can speak and relay a message for me? or can communicate to others telephatically?)

2. Chain of Carceri - after a gruelling 15 levels, a useful bone was tossed to Chain. A relatively once per day hold monster - but strictly for certain 'rare' creatures (celestial, fiend, elemental) only... perhaps a warlock would need to go the heavens or upper hells for this to be a bit more useful? And I waited 15 levels?

Besides the fact that the magic resistance of these familiars as stated in MM (IMHO), it may seem its a bit advantageous at the first few levels, but chain related invocations or familiars of warlocks will not scale or improve thru levels compared to Blade and Tome. It makes sense why these options were presented in MM.

 

[Cannyjiggit]

The exact wording, from page 108 of the PHB: When you gain this feature, choose three cantrips from any class's spell list.

To put the other perspective and by the strict letters of the sentence, I agree with your DM and other player. I'm not sure whether they thought about this in detail enough when writing it so can't be sure of the actual intent but the "list" is singular rather than plural and why bother specifying "cantrip from spell list" when it would be simpler to write "any cantrip" if that was the intention.

For it to mean any cantrip, the main options when writing it would be:
"Any three cantrips"
"three cantrips from any class spell lists"

compared to
"three cantrips from any single class's spell list"
"three cantrips from any class's spell list"

The magic initiate feat is different because not every spellcasting class list is available to it (paladin for example) so you first choose a class then choose spells from that class's spell list.

As I said though, this is really reading and interpreting the rules by the apostrophe which is not the intent of 5e and I doubt they put sufficient thought into that sentence to make it worthy of such scrutiny. So when the time comes, I will be having the same discussion with my DM about how he wishes to rule it as there is one particular cantrip that will make a significant part of the characters personality when I make it so will need to know whether I will be taking all the other cantrips from that class's spell list.

 

[steeldragons]

In the phrase, "...any class's spell list", the word 'class' is singular.

The plural possessive of class, "belonging to more than one class", is classes' . The phrase is "any [singular] class's", not "any [plural] classes'..."

It is not ambiguous. It is not open for interpretation. If multiple classes were intended, it would have been written as such.

EDIT TO FURTHER NOTE: AND it would say "spell lists" [plural], not "list" [singular].

 

[Perun]

The problem with familiar-granted magic resistance is that you have to have your familiar within 10 feet, and the familiars in question have 7-10 hit points and poor saves. The first time you use that magic resistance against an area attack, you're apt to lose it. Better make sure you've got plenty of find familiar components on hand. (The incense is less of a problem than the need to tote around a brass brazier and spend 1 hour re-casting the spell.)

All familiars are Tiny creatures. If you've got your familiar tucked in your shirt, peeking out of your pouch or basically hiding anywhere on your person, the DM probably won't consider it a target for attacks (unless the opponent is specifically trying to attack the familiar, in which case I expect cover and/or concealment rules would apply).

Otherwise, most area attack spells would get rid of basically any and all familiars in their area of effect (average damage for a basic fireball is 28 points of fire damage (8d6) on a failed save, or 14 points on a successful save -- of all familiars, only an imp would survive that, and even then only because it has immunity to fire damage).

I do think it's intended that you should get the resistance; remember that the Monster Manual was released after the PHB. Because the sidebars just happened to all be on monsters that warlocks can get as familiars, I suspect the sidebars were a kind of stealth errata to beef up the Pact of the Chain.

That would be a very strange case of errata, particularly considering that sprites don't offer magic resistance (and they're on special familiar list), and don't have the familiar sidebar in the MM, meaning that they don't offer even the improved telepathy all other improved familiars do (if you opt for that kind of reading of the rules).

Warlock's pact boons doesn't end when you get them, we also have consider how the pacts scale thru levels so we have to consider the available warlock invocations.

Among the three, the Chain pact is the pact with the least useful invocations to upgrade it thru higher levels. Leaving you with just an optional invisible familiar that will never improve its statistics or abilities. Easily the Blade and Book have it better thru levels.

Much as this entire discussion, that's entirely subjective.

If you take the blade pact, and don't take thirsting blade and/or life drinker, is your character significantly weaker than he would otherwise be? I'd be inclined to argue so (albeit cautiously, since I haven't really looked into this). The 'core' warlock, a weak (at best) melee class needs these two invocations to at least attempt to be good at melee. Otherwise his one melee attack per round won't make much of a difference... If you follow this logic, you could argue that the blade pact is the weakest of the three, as it practically requires you to take related invocations to make the full use of your character.
Also consider that in order to make the best use of this pact boon and it's invocations, you have to build your warlock differently than for other two pact; i.e. you need to invest in Str and/or Dex, and likely Con as well. If the game allows feats, you'll also want to invest in one or two of the armour-improving feats as well, since you're going for a melee-oriented character.

Tome pact is a bit trickier. Cantrips are nice, but are just cantrips, and are pretty much balanced against each other (e.g. vicious mockery might be the only cantrip that deals psychic damage, but it uses a low damage die, d4, and allows for a Wisdom save). Besides, warlocks already get eldritch blast, one of best cantrips in the game (force damage, d10 damage, multiple attacks).
There are currently 32 ritual spells in the PH, and virtually all are utility spells, i.e. nice to have, but likely won't break the adventure. Other classes get access to a lot of rituals (wizards get 17 on their class list, cleric and druid 14 each, and bard gets 12 -- all of those classes get ritual casting as class feature). The warlock has the potential to learn all 32 rituals, but how many will actually be available to him through his gaming career is another matter entirely, particularly rituals from classes that don't normally write their spells down (i.e. any class other than wizard).
Also, unlike the blade pact, tome pact warlock does not require the pact-improvement invocation to be effective. Tome pact warlock without it will be fully effective during adventures even if he picks any other invocation; ancient secrets invocation will just give him more options.

Going back to the chain pact. If you allow MM sidebar rules for warlock familiars, Voice of the Chain master is practically useless to any warlock with imp or quasit familiars. Their telepathic link is already increased to 1 mile radius (as opposed to 100 ft. normal familiars get), which is likely more than you'll ever need, and since both imp and quasit familiars can speak and you're telepathically linked, you can just tell them what to say. Pseudodragon is a bit trickier, since it can't actually speak, but it can communicate telepathically in a somewhat limited fashion. Sprite gets the short end of the stick. Again. I suppose it's just not special enough... Chains of Carceri is, again, mostly flavour. Useful, but not required.

Chain pact main feature is to give you access to find familiar spell, something only wizards normally get. If the wizard opts to get a familiar, the basic one (from the spell description) is the only one he can count one. Basic familiar is not a sub-par option. Besides the wizard, the only other class that can have a familiar is the tome pact warlock who also takes the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation, and he also only gets the basic familiars.
Then, on top of that you get to pick from an expanded list of familiars -- something the class that the spell was designed for doesn't get. These improved familiars are already (mechanically) better than those the spell normally offers (invisibility, Stealth bonuses, shape change, spell-like abilities, etc.).
On top of that, they can attack (ordinary familiars don't get that option) using their master's action. While this will mean less at higher levels, it's fairly good at low levels, since all special familiars get special attacks (poison).

Besides the fact that the magic resistance of these familiars as stated in MM (IMHO), it may seem its a bit advantageous at the first few levels, but chain related invocations or familiars of warlocks will not scale or improve thru levels compared to Blade and Tome. It makes sense why these options were presented in MM.

Pact boon is a feature. It, by itself, doesn't offer a great boon. It's more flavour-oriented. You don't have to build a melee-centered warlock to use pact of the blade. If you focus on eldritch blast and use pact blade only for its 'cool' appearing/disappearing weapon effect, you're not losing much. Compared to that, magic resistance is always useful, regardless of level, regardless of your other class choices. As long as your familiar is there with you (which, traditionally, wasn't much of a problem in the game) you get it. No other class gets it (certain classes offer a similar -- but weaker -- ability, like abjurer at 14th level (and in reply to sithramir, paladins don't get it; Oath of the Ancients paladins get damage resistance from spells at level 7, but that's not magic resistance)).

Magic resistance gives you advantage on all saves against spells or other magical effects. You will never have disadvantage on such saves, ever. This alone is a powerful ability. When you line it with the various warlock pact boons, it so clearly outshines everything else, even the main benefit of the chain pact (additional familiar choices) that I cannot imagine how anyone could expect it to be readily available at 3rd level.

Hmph. I've managed to write a novel here (even if it's a pretty boring one). I think I've managed to say everything I had on the subject I suppose we cold agree to disagree on this one

Besides, from what I understand, there's to be a PH errata soon enough, so we'll see if the designers offer a clarification on the matter

Regards!

 

[TarionzCousin]

To put the other perspective and by the strict letters of the sentence, I agree with your DM and other player. I'm not sure whether they thought about this in detail enough when writing it so can't be sure of the actual intent but the "list" is singular rather than plural and why bother specifying "cantrip from spell list" when it would be simpler to write "any cantrip" if that was the intention.

It is not ambiguous. It is not open for interpretation. If multiple classes were intended, it would have been written as such.

Yeah. Unfortunately, I agree.

 

[Thyrwyn]

If they had written "any cantrip", then it would be still any within the context of being limited to the Warlock's list.

 

[Kobold Stew]

This is an interesting discussion, with some well-argued posts.

FAMILIARS:
Since the best arguments have already been made, I pull together what seems to me to be an unassailable case:

The find familiar spell summons a spirit in the form of a creature not the creature itself. So a pseudodragon summoned by the spell is not a normal pseudodragon, you could recast the spell and reshape the familiar into a raven or imp and it would be at it's core the same entity.

So I would say that unless you get a real imp, quasit, or pseudodragon to bond with you the sidebar abilities like shared magic resistance wouldn't apply.

So we are interpreting this as whenever you call a familiar (by ritual), you can choose any form you wish that time. Not choose one form and stick with it forever. You can even choose depending on your need that time or adventure.

This is true, and it's part of the reason that the form of the creature to be used is the one in the back of the PHB, and not the one in the MM sidebar.

MM sidebar (again, IMO) is there to let the DM use it for NPCs, or as a special reward for a spell caster PC (including clerics, druids, eldritch knights, arcane tricksters, etc.)

CANTRIPS:
I am for free choice.

As to the cantrip question, "from any class's spell list" translates to me to allow a choice from multiple and all class lists.

If they had written "any cantrip", then it would be still any within the context of being limited to the Warlock's list.

Yes. -- the wording is designed to avoid confusion, and we are making things unclear without need.

One route is to compare the wording of the Ritual Caster feat, which is very clear on how deliberate the writers have been when they want to restrict things to a single class.

For the linguistic argument --

In the phrase, "...any class's spell list", the word 'class' is singular.

The plural possessive of class, "belonging to more than one class", is classes' . The phrase is "any [singular] class's", not "any [plural] classes'..."

It is not ambiguous. It is not open for interpretation. If multiple classes were intended, it would have been written as such.

EDIT TO FURTHER NOTE: AND it would say "spell lists" [plural], not "list" [singular].

-- a fuller answer is below, but what is written is correct, and it should be singular (warning: grammar ahead).

[sblock=About steeldragons' linguistic case]
The possessive plural of class is (as said) "classes' " and the plural of list is "lists". This is not in doubt, but it is irrelevant to the question at hand. If "class" were plural, then "list" should be too. Again, no argument.

The ambiguity concerns the use of "any" when placed before (singular) class.

Any is a determiner (wikipedia), specifically one that can be used in negative sentences or to help enumerate.

1. Negative. "There aren't any mandolins at the zoo." is correct; "There isn't any mandolin..." is not. The sentence has "negative polarity" (linguistic encyclopedia entry). That's not the case here. Rather,

2. Enumeration. The enumerative function works exactly the same way that the word "every" does (see "possible polarity" in the link above). Of course, they couldn't write "...from every class's spell list" because that's not what is meant -- while every list is available, players can choose from any list, no matter which (Note: not "any lists".)

If part of speech doesn't grab you, there's the results of lexicography.

The first meaning in the OED notes that it can be singular or plural:

Singular: "a ---, some ---, no matter which, or what".
Plural: "some ---, no matter which , of what kind, or how many: a. Used primarily in interrog[ative], hypothet[ical], and conduit[ional] contexts, ... b With a preceding negative....

none of the primary uses of the plural are applicable here, and "class's spell list" is, as pointed out, singular: is there any meaning there that makes this clear? (again: thought there is more than one, we use the singular naturally). Yes.

"from any class's list [no matter which]" is exactly what is being said in the text, and it is exactly what is meant.

I hope this helps.
[/sblock]