Survey Launch | Player's Handbook Playtest 5 | Unearthed Arcana | D&D
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 май 2023
- The feedback survey will be available on May 17th! dndbeyond.link/yt_mainsurveyp...
In this new Unearthed Arcana document for the 2024 Core Rulebooks, we explore material designed for the next version of the Player’s Handbook. This playtest document presents the rules on the Weapon Mastery property, updates to weapons, new and revised spells, several new feats, and five classes: Barbarian, Fighter, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard. You will also find an updated rules glossary that supercedes the glossary of any previous playtest documents.
This Is Playtest Content
The material in Unearthed Arcana is presented for playtesting and to spark your imagination. These game mechanics are in draft form, usable in your D&D campaign but not refined by final game development. They are not officially part of the game. For these reasons, material in this column is not legal in D&D Adventurers League events.
#dnd #dungeonsanddragons #unearthedarcana 
Развлечения
The best way to provide more players a taste of high level play is to make another official adventure/campaign book that goes all the way to 20.
Absolutely. I also love how third-party creators say they are there to make supplements for the game to fill in the holes left by Wizards yet they seldom write for tier 4 either.
And one that isn't a sequel to an already existing game! I don't wanna feel like I'm missing out on content or need to buy another book in order to get to level 20 😭
Well put!
OR starts at lvl 10
Agree. If they came out with an adventure that goes from 1 to 20 I would buy it right now.
If anyone wants to go more in-depth to the warlock’s class power, Treantmonk’s Temple did a wonderful in-depth review of the class’s power in comparison to what it had before.
It's okay for things to not be as powerful as before. Not everything is about power. We can't just continue to make players options infinitely more powerful. Things can change and be less or more powerful. It's okay. Nobody is taking old warlock or old 5e away from anybody. Just use the old stuff and let the system change.
I second this recommendation. I think Treantmonk's strongest argument is that the class progression table by itself is misleading in terms of what kind of character you can build with the new chassis
This 100%. The community is going hate mob the new warlock to death without even giving it a proper look. Treantmonk does an excellent job analyzing it.
@@spooderous there is a pretty concerted effort by some people to say the PT Warlock is _way_ worse than the old one though, so what Treantmonk's video does it dispel that myth while walking through the class changes with an even hand, pointing out both pros and cons.
Yep a must-watch for anyone who read the Warlock and thought it'd been gutted. There's a couple awkward levels at 3-4 before mystic arcanums kick in, but other than that it's a pretty substantial; buff at all but the most short rest heavy tables.
Always thought it was weird how Warlocks get Invocations to make up for their lack of spellslots but some Invocations take spellslots to use.
It definitely is odd, but given some of those are spells like Polymorph, I think it was given the once per day limitation on top of that just to avoid being able to cast Polymorph 6 times a day at level 7. That would be a tad silly.
Warlocks don't get invocations to make up for their lack of spell slots.
Warlocks regain spell slots on a short rest to make up for their lack of spell slots. You get 2 spells per fight, but they're always max level and you don't have to worry about running out over the course of a day.
Invocation are a separate feature that has nothing to do with their spell slots.
Those invocations made up for their trash spell list, not their slots. But now they have the Wizard's spell list, so they didn't make sense.
I currently play one, and we got to level up last session, so i took a look at all the invocations i could take. Turns out, a number of those "choices" are absolute garbage compared to others, essentially cutting down the actual number of decent choices to only a handful. I was absolutely stunned when i read that some do indeed cost a spell slot for only some meager benefit, while you only have 2. What person would ever take such a costly feature if there are literal free choices that are usually better...
@@TheGregamonster 2 spells per fight eh? Your parties have only a single actual encounter per short rest? That's mighty generous of the GM..
I love Eldritch Invocations that let the Warlock do things that Wizards and Sorcerers can't (or at least allow the Warlock to do those things earlier than the Sorcerer or Wizard can). [A good examples of that is Devil's Sight.] That fits into the story that a Warlock is making a pact as a shortcut to power, rather than doing the intense amount of work required to become an archmage.
And sadly I feel that there are only 1 or 2 of those on the current list, which makes it feel like they wanted us to use most of our invocations on Mystic Arcanum to try and be a real spellcaster.
@@johncox7169 luckily we can still use Tasha's invocations and hopefully there'll be more. I'm just mad they're making you spend invocations on Mystic Arcanum which you got for free prior. I mean Warlocks were fun but mid level power level only, and WotC thought "hmm mid tier is too strong, we better dial them back, oh and capstone will be Hex cause everyone uses that at high levels" lol meanwhile Wizards can create their own bloody spells and store them, Sorcerers get more spells than before and crazy Wish, Fighters kept their extra feats and got weapon masteries, better indomitable, etc. I would say Barbarians were also kind of left in the lurch a bit on this play test, but they should still improve a bit with the new weapon mastery system at least.
Getting some 1st level spells as cantrips (misty visions, beast speech, eldritch sight) is a 15th (previously 18th) level wizard thing and is the best example of this imo. Misy Visions is my favorite invocation.
Choosing between fun flavorful options like speaking with animals and the *main progression of your class* like full caster progression is always a tough and painful choice that everyone regrets. It's a problem with feats and now it's a problem with invocations. Non choices aren't actually fun I'd rather they'd be kept separate so I have both in reasonable supply without feeling like I'm losing out on character identity or build viability
Agreed
Yep, they went too far with Warlocks and basically nerfed a class that was only mid tier to start off with. Some improvements were made but i'd say the nerfs trump them slightly or at most equal them out so not much has changed except you now have less options for fun and unique builds. They killed Pact of the Chain in my opinion, it was my favourite and Imps were amazing to use out of combat.
@24:00 - Draconic Sorcerer wings: No, Jeremy, it is not lower level. The PHB subclass gets its permanent wings at level 14, and the playtest gives its wings at 14. It's not lowering the level of the feature, which means using that as a justification for nerfing it does not hold. Note that I do really like the idea of tying features to the Sorcery Incarnate spell, but this particular aspect is a very poor match.
Also, the Divine Soul also gets its flight at 14th level. Storm Sorcerer gets its flight at 18th level, but it has a higher speed and can be shared, so it being higher level is more reasonable.
I also really don't like the new version of Draconic Flight/tying features to Sorcery Incarnate. Not only is it a weak spell, but it would just feel very boring and repetitive if we say it on every subclass.
Anyone who argues that permanent flight is op at 14th level has probably never played at higher levels before. There are plenty monsters that have either a ranged attack or flying speed, and traps/puzzles that are easily solved with flight has already run its course by the time wizards got the flight spell/teleportation spells and monks could run on walls.
Kind of crazy that a lead designer not only doesn't know their own game, they also went on record and stated their own ignorance.
I know everyone is talking about the casters and Fighter alot, so let me just say this as a Barbarian main. I LOVE pretty much all the changes that have been made to it, more OoC utility, more ways to use & keep using Rage, Berserker buff, etc. My only problem is that they've done literally nothing to remedy the tier 3 & 4 plummet of the Barbarian.
In 5e, not just at optimized tables but just in general, the Barbarian's power scales terribly beyond 8th level due to the fact that your only way of actually increasing damage by that point is by critting. That's fine for a subclass feature sure, or an optional feature for Tasha's, but the fact that this has been a core feature of the class for a decade has meant that once you reach level 8, unless you're Totem or Zealot Barbarian there's really no good incentive to keep taking Barbarian levels. You quickly fall behind not just the casters, but all other martials, including ones you were outpacing for a long time like Rogue and Monk. All this playtest has done is exacerbate the issue, and this needs to be fixed. Throw out Brutal Critical and give us something worth sticking around for.
I agree they didn’t need to nerf the barbarian capstone either because it was at least one cool ability that barbarians got at high levels.
I definitely like the new barbarian though and our dedicated barbarian player at our table is just foaming at the mouth looking at the new rage buffs.
I feel like, what with sorcerer getting exploding dice, I think barbarian should get some variation of that too.
I always felt like the rage bonus never leveled well either
At first i was going to say barbarians worked with crits, but then i realized that's BS... their crits hurt more, but that's 5% of all attacks, which is actually pretty lame, especially when compared to every other class gaining consistent damage buffs all the way to lvl 20. So you're right. Barbs DO need something to keep them interesting at later levels.
For Endgame sorcerers I wanna see more of these transformation features that put your bloodline front and center. For example the Storm Sorcerer just shares Flying, I wanna turn into a manifestation of storms or something
I've always wanted sorcerers to have more identity moved into their subclass. It feels like it should be a real defining feature about them. But in 1DnD seems to be doing the complete opposite.
You mean like turning into an Air Elemental?
Free far step maybe?
@@frumpkin9282 I mean, sure, you could focus on the move from 1st to 3rd level for subclasses. But I think that there's more identity in the Draconic subclass we've seen compared to the original. The fact that your draconic heritage is implemented in almost every feature now is huge, as it really incorporates the thing that makes the subclass unique into the stuff that you're going to do with the character.
Compared to how the old subclass had you pick your heritage at 1st level, wait 5 levels to do anything with said heritage, and then never do anything with it again, I'd say this is a major improvement upon the original.
Disagree. I actually hate the sorcerer bloodlines are even a mechanic. The less sorcery is related to ancestry the better.
The idea of full caster slot progression with half caster slot numbers for warlock is actually a wonderful idea and I’d love to see that in the next UA. I still think mystic arcanum should never be an invocation since it provides players with a false choice, like no one is choosing devils sight over a 6-9 level spell. It trivializes the others.
I'd be perfectly happy with just autopicking mystic Arcanum and adjusting invocations accordingly, although I would like to see mystic Arcanum for 2nd level spells to get them on time, and maybe +1 invocations after the reduction although maybe that's me being greedy. I also would love to see the crap invocations like the Jump one buffed, like they did with the sorceror metamagics. Even if the new result isn't that good, it still feels like more of a possible option
@@zachricca4546 I personally think adding options that are essentially a necessary pick is realistically just no fun. It’s just locking a class feature behind the illusion of choice. There should be nothing that is so good you have to pick it. Options should be something you opt into if you know what I mean. But yeah big agree on the buffing of invocations, some of them feel quite useless and I’d love to see them do more with at will casting of situational spells or unique abilities like devils sight or gaze of the two minds.
The invocation count in the UA is deceptive though, counting pact boon's 2 invocations, the Pact Spells feature and the 9 assignable invocations, you get to level 17 with the benefits of like 12 invocations, 9 of which you can choose. On top of that you get the ability to cast significantly more low to mid level spells per day.
The 5 or 6 invocations you'll have after getting mystic arcanums is directly comparable to current Warlock who needs to invest invocations into powering up their pact boon and eldritch blast.
@@jojorose1947 The Pacts all received various nerfs with their buffs such that the overall effect is at most, one free invocation. So at best after the invocations required for your 6-9 spells, you have 6 invocations vs 8 in 2014 Warlock.
This version of warlock trades 31% of their spell casting power (by spell point numbers & slot power numbers) for medium armor, a flexible casting stat and some small buffs to subclass. Doesn't pass the smell test for me.
I disagree having mystic arcanum as optional is AWESOME because you can have a melee warlock using the more powerful always on abilities like True Sight, Devil Sight and at-will spellcasting. This means you can stack so many more invocations to make really unique combinations .. Then still have the option of grabbing a few spells as needed.
I'm always surprised when they say how many tables report not using feats.
Yeah, that can't be right.
I'm wondering if they're using data they get at conventions? Or like where that number comes from. At conventions I get not wanting to overcomplicate things with feats for something that is likely a 1-2 shot thing but like out of the dozens of groups I've been involved in, not a single one didn't allow feats.
because the alternative is to take a feat and not help the skills you're constantly using
@@christianemerson4622 plenty of feats raise ability scores tho
@@joshcarroll2237 it's not necessarily that they aren't allowed, just that they aren't being used. If you've ever watched the oxventure, I'm pretty sure they've only, or at least mostly, chosen to take ASIs over feats. considering they're one of the most popular actual play series on yt, and lots of people learn how to play by watching those kinds of series, it would make sense if a new dm (like me, when I was starting out) either didn't know about, understand, or want to use feats.
as an example, being that most of my players were also new to the game, I basically told everyone to just take an ASI at level 4, to give them a chance to shore up issues they may not have realized during character creation, or further buff the things they were having fun with. Then, when UA dropped with 1st level feats, I let them all take one, and for future ASI/Feat levels it will be entirely their choice.
The problem with sorcery incarnate is that it takes your concentration, and as a sorcerer it feels too restrictive, you want to be able to do different cool things with your concentration and don't feel bad for not using your class features too much
It’s also a very weak spell especially for the spell slot it’s at.
I think it's good as the opener for longer fights or a spell you use before a fight begins, besides if you have advantage on all spells you want to be casting a spell every turn instead of holding concentration spells
@@neoramaredzone8544 it doesn't really matter if it's weak or not, if it was strong my problem would still stand. It's just bad design, imho, you don't want to force your primary spellcasters to forgo their concentration if they want to use their class features. If they want to tie subclass perks to this spell, they need to drop the concentration part
I couldnt agree more
@@user-mb1ym5ck8v I know it being weak just compounds the issue.
"A lot of people are feat curious." 😂 That statement alone is worth a like on this video.
I find it concerning that JC doesn't know that the draconic sorcerer wings are at the same level, and is balancing as if they are at different level.
Less than half of groups use feats? I have never seen a single group that doesn't. Wild.
It might be due to all the groups running the starter set or essentials kit content skewing the numbers.
Same lol
I wonder if many of those groups never had experience with feats since 5th is their first encounter with DnD. The comment below about using the starter or essential kits is probably what most people are exposed to and may not get much beyond them. Now, those of us who are a bit older\more experienced with previous editions that used feats, we would be the more likely group who would at least consider them.
Can only see it if point buy stats or standard array. And a game not going beyond 10. Roll for stats more likely to see feats I'd think. In point buy or standard array probably not.
Unless they were like variant human or custom lineage. Though it probably like other people said of like starter kits skewing numbers or just random one shots of like lower level
Every time I've had the option, it's been 3-4 feats gained before i start to asi, and every group I've been in has done that with pretty much all characters.
I think that the UA warlock is not that bad, but needs some tweaks to make it satisfying to warlock players. My idea for a fix would be to make Mystic Arcanum a class feature, not an Invocation. I'd start it at level 3 with a 2nd level spell, so warlocks will have at least one spell per day that is at the same power as a full caster. If that's done, making warlocks half casters isn't actually that bad. Crawford is right that warlocks are hybrid casters like paladins and rangers, but they're closer to full casters than either of those classes, and making Mystic Arcanum an invocation makes that key part of the warlock identity optional rather than in the heart and soul of the class the way it should be (imo).
I like it. I had a similar thought but went one step further. Also allow the Warlock to upcast any spell they have prepared by sacrificing a Mystic Arcanum spell/ slot of the level they want to upcast to.
I fixed in my games by giving it cantrip progression. The invocation is no longer repeatable; but it also no longer has a level cap (so at 2nd lvl you could frab it for early 2nd lvl spells) and you get an additional spell to use with mystic arcanums at 5th, 11th, and 17th lvls; each spell having to be a different level of course.
i like that fix. similar to what i've thrown around. Make MA 6-9th be features again like in (2014) but make MA invocation for spells 2-5th. still under a full casters spell progression, but more than traditional half casters.
They function more as 3/4 casters due to their unique position.
I do like at least giving them 1 spell equal to a full caster progression. I was also thinking if we go back to short rest Pact slots, give them a once a day 10 minute ritual to regain Pact slots, ensuring even if your group doesn't take a short rest in a day you'll at least get Pact slots back once (and after that its regular short rest recharge). Also, increase Pact slots starting at lvl 7 to 3, then lvl 11 to 4 slots, lvl 15 to 5 slots, and 18 to 6 slots. Obviously give MA back to them for free at lvl 11. Keep the changes for different modifiers, that is a nice change. And maybe give them a number of 1st lvl spells only equal to half their proficiency bonus (rounded up) per long rest just to give them an extra one or two utility spell options per day.
I made a similar comment on another video talking about this, but what I would do for the Warlock would be to keep the spell progression and Mystic Arcanum as it is in the 2014 PHB, but give them the number of spell slots equal to double your proficiency bonus. When their proficiency bonus increases, so do their number of spell slots. Have only spells up to 5th level be able to recharge on a short rest. Keep the number of Invocations and their progression like the new UA playtest.
The biggest buy-in for me is the reworked blade pact and base medium armor proficiency for Warlocks. I always resented that the only patron that gave me what I was looking for gameplay-wise was the Hexblade. Now I can be the laser beaming off-paladin I always wanted to be!
This man is living his best hexed life
Hearing your design viewpoints is hugely helpful. I hope everyone (folks who are liking this revision AND those who aren’t) fill out the survey tomorrow. Being upset on the internet is just a waste of time if you don’t actually participate.
The replacement for Twin Spell should be called Echo Spell. Twin Spell should replace the insane mess that is Wish++ at 18th level
And i still wouldn't take it. The new version of twinned spell feels utterly useless.. why would i want to cast the same leveled spell twice in a row? The only spells worth the twinning were concentration spells. And guess which spells don't work now anymore...
I agree. Echo Spell or Duplicate Spell.
@@shaclown7721 No, it's not great regardless of what it's called, but I think they'd do better to make Twin Spell a very high level option, rather than giving the name to something entirely different and far less impactful
This is actually a great idea. It’s about the power level one would expect from a capstone.
@@danielbeshers1689 agreed!
I wonder if they ever considered fixing the warlock by going the other way, expanding the usefulness of short rests for the other classes to make them more common and less of a pain point.
The first part of this discussion is spot on. The problem with Warlock was that it leaned too hard on short rests. All classes should rely roughly the same on short rests, otherwise it makes for massive imbalances in balance/power depending on how many short rests you can fit in a single adventuring day, which is inconsistent both table to table and session to session.
ya but it was fun to have Warlocks always upcast, made them feel unique and powerful. Half caster is boring and redundant in my opinion. Why not give Warlocks a special ability to regain spell slots over a 10 minute ritual period vs a full 1 hour long short rest? Or if thats too powerful, say they can use this 10 minute ritual only once per day, but also increase Pact Slots given by 1 and earlier. So instead of getting 3 pact slots at lvl 11 currently, give them 3 slots at lvl 7, and 4 slots at lvl 11, and 5 slots at lvl 15 and 6 slots at lvl 18 with a new capstone. That would greatly increase their ability to cast more spells but still make them unique with pact slots and upcasting. Just a thought.
I personally dislike the half caster approach… I like the sound of the full caster with the reduced amount of slots, that is probably what is going in my survey.
Yeah. A Fifth level Warlock with 3/2/1 spell slots that recharge on a long rest would be perfectly fun to play.
I think the answer is just to make it more worthwhile to short rest more often for the rest of the party. Or give Warlock's a "Take Five" feature to make it clear a short rest isn't a full nights sleep, that Warlock's literally just need a breather between fights to negotiate with their patron, since some DM's use the "short rest" = sleep and "long rest" = 1 week of downtime insane alternate rule.
This isn't that hard people. Bring back pact slots at full caster progression and give them 50% more at all levels. Then somewhere in tier 2, give them a 1 minute ritual recharge they can use once per day. Boom- they have enough spells to feel like casters in combat but their full day's resources are still gated behind 2 separate encounters so they can't out nova the full casters who can blow their whole day's resources in one encounter if need be.
That one change + the rest of the UA changes would make them a viable alternative full caster to the power levels of sorcerer & wizard.
Literally was thinking the same thing
WotC: People don't like that classes rely on short rests for their core resource.
Players: So, monks are getting a massive boost for their ki points, right?
WotC: Sorcerers getting fly all the time is too broken.
Owlin: Okay.
Winged Tiefling: Okay.
Fairy: Okay.
Aarakocra: Okay.
Correction, WotC: Sorcerers getting to fly all the time at 14th level is too broken. So now they can instead fly for 4 minutes, if they want to use their subclass features that is 🙃
Wotc is changing design directions that's exactly what we're asking for. We will get to aarakokra when we get there and it actually appears in a play test
@Mr_Maiq_The_Liar But it is also worth noting that sorcerers can give themselves and eventually their allies limited flight with concentration starting at 5th level.
Is the fly spell too broken at 5th? If not, why are we talking about 14th level like concentration using limited flight is STILL potentially too powerful?
@@MrSeals1000 And having to use that "spell" before being able to use their wings is one of the worst spells possible to cast.
To fix the warlock short rest just make it be a 10 minute ritual to get back spell slots. It wouldn't count as a short rest just a new feature to replace the old. Amount of times useable would be spell cast modifier.
Then give them 1 of ANY first lvl spell from the warlock spell list or new list, cast at 1st lvl and regain on the new 10 minutes ritual i came up with and long rest. Either use spell cast mod or proficiency to determine how many 1st lvls u can prepare. Its treated and normal prepared spells so you can upcast them and not use the 1 free spell slot. Then from the subclass all the spells are prepared automatically.
All together would fix the limited amount of spell slots giving you a first lvl spell slot if u wished to use defensively or out of combat.
As for fighters they NEED out of combat utility.
I was thinking the same, 10 minute short rests for a Warlock or once a day you get a 10 minute short rest usage (similar to Arcane Recovery is used only once a day) but also you get more pact slots starting at lvl 7 (to 3 slots), lvl 11 (4 slots), lvl 15 (5 slots) and 18 you get 6 slots and a better capstone. I like the first level spell idea as well just for something not to upcast all the time with.
I was thinking the exact same thing with the 10 minute ritual to regain spell slots. But instead of a free 1st level spell slot, I think warlocks should get "spell points" that they use to cast spells, where casting a 1st level spell costs 1 point, a 2nd level spell costs 2 points, etc., and just give them enough spell points so that they can cast their current spells plus a few lower level spells. This would make it easier to tweak their power level and give them more options in how many spells they can cast per "short rest".
If you want more control on spell slot for warlock; just put in the core mechanic the number of time you can get your spellslot back. It could be a 10 min ritual to your source of power to get it back. The ritual could be specific to your subclass. It could be perform x number of times based on lvl of unlocked threw magic arcanum.
My hopes for feats is that they add more feats exclusive for middle tier characters. A lot of the problems with feats like GWM arise because martial characters got them too early and could abuse the early levels. As a result of this, martial characters also have nothing to do customization wise past level 4 since they already took the best option. Casters are always choosing new and useful spells every few levels, let powerful mid game feats give the martial characters unique choices too!
A problem with that is Wizards hatred of martials
There is also the problem that there simply aren't a lot of feats.
If you are a longsword main... what combat feats are even available? But if you are a polearm main... GWM, Sentinel, PAM. Which is a very hefty combat boost when combined
Feats are pretty popular for long time 5e fans, so hearing that only half of play groups use them is pretty wild.
I’d just really like more rp options in my fighter. Just played a session and I did loads of damage (as promised), but really struggled to do anything beyond that. Which felt bad the moment we moved to skill challenges and social thinfs
You might like the Samurai it has some social buffs. But all in all, RP is really just up to you. You only make the Fighter as boring as you want.
RP potential of any class is dependent on the player. You can have all the flavor in the world and just not use it. Just like you can play fighter and show the most immersive experience in whole campaign.
If you need any inspiration just look at clips of Orym, from Critical Role Campaign 3.
@@nightingale8178 I appreciate that in a very out of combat, roleplay heavy group. My group isn’t critical role and isn’t as committed, the world interaction is more mechanical. I don’t have any innate tools.
If it was a way more rp focused table it wouldn’t matter as much.
Orymm is very cool though and it is a great example of RP a fighter
@@TheOnceandFutureJake they're asking for features that help with things that arent just combat. Barbarian got their funky str stealth and such. This is what they are asking for.
@@maybevoldemort8995 Ok, I can see your point here.
My point was purely in context of RP, so you're right there. Some mechanical stuff around skill's or flavor would be nice and fun to have on a fighter, but I suspect that kind of features would appear more likely with a subclass in this case. On a Barbarian its tasefull and needed because, they dont really care about INT/WIS/CHA which most mechanics are based on. But if you add it to a base fighter it might step on the territory of Expert Classes.
I have a really hard time believing that a majority of groups don't use feats. I've never been in or even heard of a single group that doesn't allow feats.
I hate the removal of Pact Slots and short rest recharge. The Warlock doesn't need 'fixing'. What needs fixing is thr short rest. Give other classes more reasons to take a short rest. Maybe give a small amount of spell slots back on a short rest (like the Wizard's Arcane Recovery). I'm playing a Warlock right now (for the first time) and I love everything about it - including the restrictions. It's my favourite class. As a DM, I sometimes allow minor slot recovery on short rest (or even let players transfer slots to each other - with an ability check). There are no Warlocks in that party.
I'll say it again: Warlocks don't need fixing; short rests do.
BTW, I like a lot of the other updates to the Warlock - especially the subclass at level 3 and option for multiple patrons. I wasn't on board with it at first, but the recent video announcing it (not this one) sold me on the concept.
Talking about actual power vs potential power, this is something druids face too. So many of the druid's abilities are tied to wildshape, yet wildshape is also something most druids don't regularly use. This is because unless you're a Moon Druid, wildshape is mostly detrimental to use in combat encounters. Outside of combat, wildshape is also not always useful. Whether a druid gets to use wildshape is heavily dependent on the type of adventure/campaign.
Thus, wildshape is often becomes a potential power that many druids do not use daily.
True. Which is why it's exciting that they're going to do more with "Channel Nature" in the future
Fully agree. The way they should balance is letting wild shape abilities be powered up by using spell slots but then letting Channel Nature recharge spell slots similar to harness divine power. So that if you WANT to go all in on shapeshifting, you can make yourself strong enough to do that BUT if you want to be a nature wizard, you don't have part of your power budget tied up in a set of abilities you never use.
WotC: Has short rest mechanic.
Warlocks: Unsure if I get short rest.
WotC: Removes 90% of short rest features from all other classes.
Also WotC: We want warlocks to have actual power, not just potential power.
Note! Why not just make more short rest powers!
At this point you might as well remove short rest from the game entirely.
Wouldn't change a lot tbh. Even without a warlock, most groups rarely take short rests. When you're racing against time or traveling through hostile territory, you don't have the luxury of resting for an hour. Maybe once per day, but that's it.
I would really love if they removed short rests entirely. I prefer to just run 1-2 encounters per day, so I always have to homebrew something for warlocks and monks to make them more powerful.
@@VinceValentine What if they just shorten them back to 10 minutes like they were in 4e, and then limit how often you can take them to prevent abuse?
@@dragonboyjgh Too complicated for 5e. The whole point of 5e was that previous editions had too many special rules you had to look up. Remember grappling or Attacks of Opportunity in 3.5? A nightmare, especially for DMs. And 10 minutes are still 100 combat rounds, a lot can happen in that time.
@@VinceValentine how is "short rests are 10 minutes but you can only benefit from them once an hour" too complicated for 5e?
It's the same as the rule about long rests being 8 hours but only 1 every 24 hours, but smaller durations.
Wow u guys are uploading lots of videos, i love it!!!! I feel like this improves the transparancy by 100%, thank you guys
I'm not a fan of warlock getting half caster progression at all. It felt great to get spells but still keep up with martials in terms of abilities that recharge. I get that not every group uses short rests, but I feel like that's a group centric issue. Just like with feats, it's a rule that some tables use over others. And if you really want to play a warlock, you can try it out at those tables
That's the problem though. "And if you really want to play a warlock, you can try it out [at those tables]", but Warlocks are a class, not a variant feature, they shouldn't be just available for some tables. So making them more accessible is a good thing.
@@RasmusVJS totally agree in theory, but in practice, you play a warlock because it has such a unique identity set apart from martials and spell casters. The new version of it strips that identity and homogenizes with other half casters. For all other classes so far, apart from maybe ranger, it felt like I was still playing the same class, just a streamlined version with 1dnd. With the new warlock, it just doesnt have that same wonderful spark. And if it doesnt even evoke that feeling, then warlock isn't really getting better or more accessible. It's just being replaced with something else with the same name
The way they talk about how the warlock's core resource being on a different cycle implies that they're going to change how the monk's Ki Points regenerate too.
Kinda gonna be sad to Pact Magic cycled out if they do go that direction because i think it gave some real unique flavor to the warlock.
They're def going after ki points. Fighters, monks, and warlocks are the short rest classes and they're getting those abilities rewritten. Fighters and warlocks both got that changed in this last pdf
Most definitely. I'm not surprised at all that Monk is being saved for last. Outside of the super casual and memey players (who still think Ranger is the worst), Monk is by far the worst class in 5e and recognized as such, therefore, it'll likely have the most changes. Treantmonk said it best, "The more changes to the class, good or bad, the more mixed the reaction will be as a whole."
It does make them mechanically unique, but as a DM, I really dislike having my players be on drastically different rest schedules. Balancing the number of short rests that warlocks need is kinda just a headache for me.
@Mal Masterson my first ever dm said Monks were OP lmao
@Help Me don't martials get stuff back on short rests too? First thing that comes to mind is obviously monk ki points but fighters get their action surge and 2nd wind back.
I feel like short rests are just completely under utilized in DnD and it's just long rest after long rest. This makes it so classes that utilize short rests feel weaker because the casters can spam all their spells and go to the next battle after a long rest, not having to save resources for an entire day.
By swapping all classes to rely on long rests they're basically removing short rests from the game
"more then half the groups out there are not using feats"
I would* *love* to see this data, the survey and the source of data points.
I get that PC options are important, but as a DM I'd really like some information or videos about us and how our role is changing. What is being done about exploration mechanics? Are dungeon turns and wandering creatures coming back? What about the monster changes? The months are going by and it's is worrying that the DMG is going to get the short end of the stick again.
it's so weird to me that Jeremy says that less than half of groups use feats, because I've played with many different groups and never once played with a DM who disallowed feats. Now, I've met plenty of individual players who choose not to take feats for one reason or another, but to me that is a very different thing.
there's lots of tables that don't use feats. players are too powerful without them. d&d isn't a superhero game, it's supposed to be a medieval fantasy game.
Right, Adam? I've had a similar experience (granted, I don't play in America): never found a group that didn't allow feats.
@@sabotooth I strongly disagree that player characters are too powerful, with or without feats, simply because the DM has ultimate control. PCs doing more damage than you expected? Oh look, suddenly the enemy has twice as many hit points. I'm sure there are many tables that don't use feats, it just surprises me that it's *that* many.
It sounds crazy to me, but I think it's less, not allowing fears and more, if casters are not taking Warcaster they are skipping those feats. That means Sharpshooter and GWM since XBow may just straight up not be what they want to use. So I've used them all the time but quite a few playmates do not.
Plus it sounds close to 51% 49% the way he put it.
@@Ebonzai I think what Adam means is the DM going "No, you can't take any feat, at all, because they're an optional rule"
I think every class should still have their own spell list. I like the idea of putting them into the 3 categories divine, arcane, whatever the 3rd one is. But I think that's more of a helpful thing for the appendicies
Nature/primal
Ah yes. The 4e way of "power sources"
General spell lists make life much easier as it allows for new classes and features in future splat books to use them without having the refer to other specific books.
However, I do think there needs to be space for class-specifc spells representing iconic features of a class. E.g smite spells on a paladin
So I like how it's moving towards the that
I love the explanation to why 'suboptimal' yet mechanically simple features (like the flex mastery) exist in dnd.
There are times where a newcomer is encouraged to play a strong yet relatively complex build; this usually leads to slower combat and the player being backseated because they can't understand their own character sheet. Not all players focus on the 'Game' part of Role-playing Games.
Just remember cantrip damage is added 2 more times depending on the lv unless ur a fighter and is done at 120 range, flex is melee only and because of this I feel it should scale at lv 11 add 1 extra damage or +2 more to hit like the archery fighting style
@@hectoravila4682 Fighters can replace flex with another weapon mastery at that level
I just love how he went with the worst weapon feature as the example.. flex is such a worthless feature to take.. why not just give it a flat 1 damage bonus? At least in that case it deals at least 2 damage when swinging with both hands..
Man, Im so shoocked, I love feats, they have always been available for me since the first time I played D&D 5e in 2014, till now 2023.
Now I feel like D&D is not completado without Feats, feats make it so much more interesting, roleplay, combat, etc. Try it out people!!
I've always played with feats, but when I think about it, most games I play actually don't make use of them anyway. An ASI is almost always is chosen instead.
@@cliveklg7739 That's an opinion, and it is valid.
But I understand that not all DMs have the same skill to male stuff on the fly, feats are great in that case, because you can make your rp or themed or power fantasy within the 5e rules, thats cool imo, maybe you had bad experiences with minmaxer players and im sorry for that, but in my case, even minmaxwr players where so friendly, they just wanted to make their "themed character or gimick" real, not "WIN" at the game 😅 in any case, that has to do more with what typw of players you play with.
And yeah, in higher levels of play it can get clunky, but no specifically because of feats.
@@unusuallycloudy Maan, that's shame, can't remembwr how many times have a friend saved my character with sentinel or how many funny and creative thibgs had my teammates done with magic iniciate or me with the Mobile feat, but yeah I mean it is fine if your dm still keeps it interesting.
You and I both. I am very active in the D&D sphere, and it is exceptionally rare to hear about a featless table. It just takes away so much from the game to not have them tbh.
Just give Warlocks a couple more slots. not go the basic spell caster route. DO not want to use short rests. Have Warlock choose to perform a 10-minute ritual to regain their spells slots or after a long rest. OR spend a number of Hit Die based on Warlock Level but not regain any HP.
Honestly spending hit-die to get spells slots back isn't a bad idea. That also fits the flavor of warlocks pretty well.
@@shaclown7721 just limit it to twice/LR and it's very balanced with the other Spellcasters. Or if you want to go LOL RANDOM mode, roll a d3 to find out how many times you can recover/LR
Guys, just fix short rests. In 4e, when you introduced it, ot was 5 minutes and worked perfectly fine.
Groups arent using short rests because either theyre not jsing a full adventuring day, or they cant short rest because theyre in a dungeon and its unreasonable narratively to take an hour break.
10 minutes, the same as a ritual spell.
Thats one of the reasons that genie warlock is my favorite. At lvl 10 they get just that, 10 minutes short rest for whole party. Aswell as them being able to short rest in the vessel while the rest of the party is adventuring. It makes it much more convenient instead of holding your party back from whatever your doing.
3 gripes with the new warlock.
Mystic arcanum is a fake invocation choice. No one is going to not take it, so it’s pointless to have it be an invocation. Make it function like it does now if everyone always took it, but make it a class feature, and just give fewer invocation slots in total.
Hex master is an awful capstone, because hex requires concentration, at this level you have much better things to do than casting hex. Make it make hex better or make it completely different.
Many invocations are still very bad to the degree that I would never consider taking them. Do some balancing, either lowering level requirements, or beefing them up.
Otherwise the new warlock is fantastic, the direction is great.
i agree with you except the mystic arcanums are a good choice, it gives you some flexibility. yeah you probably should take them, but you don't have to, that is not a false choice. and it doesn't matter if everyone takes that choice, it's still worthwhile to have the choice.
Yeah the false choice is a bit of an awkward one. On the one hand, being able to choose just how heavily to lean into casting is cool. Do you just grab the highest couple? The whole lot? Somewhere inbetween? That's where the real choice lies, not whether to take any or not. On the other, having mandatory choices feels bad. When you're 17th level, you can't in good faith say that access to a 9th level spell of your choice from the arcane spell list is just "an option". It does kinda feel like an invocation tax.
Maybe something like prof/2 rounded down are essentially "free" as extra invocations that can only be used for Mystic Arcanums would be a good addition. That way, the spells you're choosing may actually be competitive with other invocations, rather than straight up better.
This
@@Richybabes the nice thing about the mystic arcanum invocation is that you could just take it once and switch the spell when you level up do to invocation switching. But I agree as it is now you are almost required to take it at least once or twice.
@@neoramaredzone8544 yeah first thing I thought was I'll be trading these out as I level. Can do it such that you always have one of every spell level, as your half casting progression catches up.
5:35 As someone who's favorite class is Warlock and felt super burned by this playtest, THIS IS WHAT I WANT!!
(seriously, with the current playtest,, Imagine being the guy who sold your soul to the devil for power and you can’t get both fireball and counterspell until 9th level.)
That actually makes sense, you took the shortcut, so you only get 1. If you really wanted the best results, you should have studied. I hope you learned your lesson young man.
@@RasmusVJS nah man, current fiendlock has that ability at 5th level, and a lot of games end around 10th, not fun
You know, guys, Short rest problems don't just affect the Warlock right? You know Fighters are a 'short rest' focused class that relies on Short rests to get their power back right? So why aren't Fighters ALSO being moved to a long rest class instead of being limited to Short rest recharges if this is such a big problem that you redesigned the entire Warlock class.
I'm very curious to see the monk UA. The class needed an overhaul anyways, but if they're looking at long rest mechanics. I can only imagine what ki looks like.
23:59 "The feature that gives the wings is lower level" bruh they're unlocked at level 14 in the 2014 PHB AND level 14 in the Unearthed Arcana what are you on about
Also, I know so many people who are fine with Short Recovery Pact slots. Whats he mean other classes don't use this for core features? Fighter, Action Surge, Second Wind, Battle Master Maneuvers. Wizard Arcane Recovery. Druid Wildshape. Cleric and Paladin Channel Divinity. Bard Inspiration (after lvl 5).
Why not give Warlocks a once a day feature that a short rest can be consumed in 1 minute or 10 minutes or something? Give them that combined with adding extra pact slots at lvl 7, 11, 15, etc and you've got a powerful and happy Warlock.
The problem with Flex...is that it's essentially a +1 to damage...that's it...compared to something like Vex or Topple...it's just really lackluster and is the definition of a 'newbie trap' option.
The problem for me is that thw warlock has a lot of jack of all trades feel which i felt was the whole deal for experts, its a spellcaster and should do that better than a ranger and paladin
it does... most of the invocations are spells, arcanums are spells, you get up to ninth level spells. how do you think that paladins and rangers are better spellcasters??
@@sabotooth They didn't say Paladins and Rangers are better spellcasters. Implied in their message is that their spellpower is the same, due to the identical progression.
And yes, you get spells from your invocations, but the problem is that rather than Invocations being something you can choose to give yourself small, cool abilities, and customize the kind of Warlock you are, now you are forced to use it to pick Mystic Arcanum or other spells, if you want to be able to keep up, leaving you almost nothing for any other special ability.
@@1Kapuchu100 definitely, they need to give Mystic Arcanum back for free or increase Invocations by 4 at least. Or just go back to pact slots up to 5th lvl with free Mystic Arcanum for 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th spells, give a once a day 10 minute ritual to recover pact slots (and then the usual short rests) and increase pact slots earlier, starting at lvl 7 getting 3 slots, lvl 11 getting 4 slots, etc. With the once a day ritual you're guaranteed to get your pact slots back even if your group doesn't take a short rest in a day, and you get some slots a bit earlier starting at lvl 7. Just a thought.
Simple give the Warlock a kind of half-caster spell-progression and 2 "Power-Slots".
The "Power-Slots" are cast allways at a spellslot level one higher, then for example a wizards highest spellslot at the same level.
Example: On 5th level the Warlock has 4 times 1st level spellslot, 2 times 2nd level spellslot and 2 4th level "Power-Spell-Slots".
The "Power-Spell-Slots" can be used only for Subclass specific Spells, that are provided in a seperat spelllist. Theese spells are cast at will without any need for components, they recharge at a shortrest, at a longrest, or at a subclass specific ritual.
While the "normal" Spell-slots are only replenished by a longrest.
Example: Fiendwarlock with "Powerspell" polymorph when reaching 5th level in that class. Casts it 2 times during a battle, and performs a "satanic" sacrifice of a living creature (enemy / animal / ... depends on roleplay and subclass) in a 10 min ritual to regain theese spellslots.
With Invocations (Mysthic arcanum out of One D&D UA for example) they can expand their potential "Power-Spells".
Obviously its just a pitch, and I am not a professional game-designer. Nonetheless it would keep the Iconic 2 strong spells in the Warlock kit, while at the same time giving them some "minor" magic, which gives the player more options and at the same time lowers the threshold of players holding back their spells and not casting them.
I think it is of outmost importance, to give the warlock a limited amount of very powerfull spelloption that make them stand out in comparision to other casters, and giving them strictly limited access to higher-level spells / Spellslots earlier then other casters could be a very defining identity option for warlocks.
I will not be changing from short rest spell slots on Warlocks at my table, its what makes them feel different. If you really want to nail the intended outcome, I would just use the 4th edition idea, of Encounter, and just say that at initiative or a short rest, they regain spell slots. Then there wouldnt be any reason to hang on to them.
I like the idea of the Warlock getting a full caster progression but with half caster number of slots. I recommended the same on that video.
I would also suggest that Mystic Arcanum invocations be from level 1 to 5 with the progressing the same levels as half caster basically you get your 5th level mystic arcanum at level 17.
Really interesting to hear about the intentionality asymmetrical design. I think that might be the source of the disconnect between the designers and some of the community with regard to the power attack feats: the community sees them as crucial to martials' viability in comparison to casters, whereas the designers aren't even interested in balancing those two groups against each other.
I find the issue with this is they have said we wanted you to have more spell slots, so we are going to give you more but they will be weaker.
This nurfs the class to much. A first level spell cast 3 times is worse than fireball even if it could do more damage due to it taking 3 rounds and not 1.
Keep the pact magic how it is and maybe add more slots like you get a third at fith or sixth level.
The best thing about the utility of the warlock is using your invocations on non damage things. Now you will be using them on getting a third level spell before like 9th level. Or what ever it is now.
Can we get an artificer added to the core classes?
Please?! I’ve never played one but it sucks that they don’t really acknowledge its existence outside of saying that it would work with the new PHB.
I feel like the obvious choice for sorcerous burts is 2d4 and the die explodes everytime they land in the same number, otherwise firebolt is just better imo, I get if it has a limit on exploding in this case, but this sems like the best option.
The problem isn't with the Warlock, it's with short rests. Make them actually short, five or ten minutes, and add a limit on how many times they can get their works back in a day and you address most of their problems.
Wow very well said. Im going to try this in my upcoming campaign.
Maybe that’s what they were trying with the genie warlock
Roll for how many slots you get back on a short rest.
No, the problem is having classes that are, at their core, far more reliant on short rests than the others. If we want the game to be more balanced, then at the most basic fundamental level everyone's basic resources should be replenished the same way.
Video title: "Survey Launch". Actual topic: "Pre-survey feedback/questions/concerns"
Get rid of the spells for Warlock and just go with a Tiered Invocation system and Eldritch Blast Manipulation. More invocations made into an at will caster.
Cool idea
Basically let the warlock be the spellcasting mirror of the rogue: no major resources, just consistency per turn.
@@TherinCreative thats what they were in 3.5 right?
@@galensturupcomeau1242 Pretty much. It was an interesting class.
I'm really confused about the sorcerous burst comment. How is comparing it to other cantrips in the game "not helpful?" If a player is choosing what to cast, they are going to compare their cantrips, and I'm guessing they don't use the exploding d6 cantrip unless they're bad math.
Hey, ya know what would be really nice? If you guys could write some rules for concealing the fact that a character is casting a spell. The specific thing that prompts this in my head is that, like... I've never been in a situation where I could use Hex for it's utility purpose (IE: giving a guy disadvantage on wisdom or charisma checks) without that guy and everyone in a five mile radius immediately wanting to throw hands; but also for other things where I might want to put a whammy on an NPC, or buff up one of my allies, in a situation where casting spells isn't really an appropriate thing to be doing.
Also, I really like the idea of the weapon mastery properties, but as presented it needs to be taken further. Two handed weapons have like 5 properties to choose from, while ranged weapons have *two.* I think that some of those restrictions should be lifted, and I also think that there should be some mastery properties that don't come standard on any weapons; that way, a DM can make a sword special in another way than just making it have a +1 or whatever, AND it gives high level fighters a bigger pool of options to choose from that are unique to them.
I never understood why cantrips scaled with character level, but weapon attacks didn't. A 4 Fight/1War shouldn't be dealing more damage as a Warlock dip than as a Fighter main.
Eldritch Invocations should offer more at-will spell options and those options should scale as though a half-caster in terms of level requirement.
Pact Magic should return, but with a Long Rest recharge and scaling of number of slots to reflect that. I'm guessing they should end up with 12 slots of 5th level power by endgame. Maybe they'll adjust that number somewhat(probably downward). I dont like the half-casting+spending invocations for Arcanum system right now. It feels very bad to feel like I need to give up half my invocations to get back what used to be a core feature(and feels like it should still be one).
If they do end up keeping half-casting, Arcanum should just be a core feature.
As for Eldritch Blast, I think we can justify reducing the power of Agonizing Blast to apply extra damage once per turn. Same with Repelling Blast. If we fix the spellcasting, then we dont need to have EB carry the whole class on its shoulders.
I have to say my inner game designer geak is really enjoying these discussions & explanations of the playtest process.
I don’t think I’d engaging with the the playtest quite so much other wise. These videos are so well done.
Great communication. I’m a player of many different rpgs but thanks to Jeremy and Todd these in depth discussions are superb and keeping me onboard and abreast with the design process, looking into classes which I haven’t deeply considered or played. Fascinating 👍
Very much agree. I disagree with alot of the proposed changes, but I enjoy the attempts at transparency of process they are making. Helps content my inner project manager lol.
I think the no feat groups also roll for stats. Using standard array highlights the disparity between the classes and basically requires martials to use feats (especially MAD classes like paladin, monk, barbarian)
Warlocks; Just feel like the Eldritch Invocations and Mystic Arcanum with the UA is a dramatic reduction of spell power. While the proposal provides an additional EI, the last 4 would almost certainly be competing with mystic arcanum in a situation that they wouldn't previously. It's a situation of having 9 EI's and 4 MA's down to 10 EI's where 5 of them will compete and likely be used for MA's. Obviously, the changes are big when considering the totality at level 20's, but it absolutely wrecks the most popular range of play during the mid-game, from levels 9-12, warlocks are absolutely shut out of higher level spell options.
For the Warlock spell slot progression I was playing with inverting the spell slot levels of the half casters. So by the end of the game they have 4 5th level spells slots and 3 4th level etc... More spell slots and more higher spell slots.
Remember... the fighter barbarian in this ua out dps the old one with -5 to hit, +10 damage. Those features aren't big losses right now.
But the problem is if they outdo non fighter group classes right? And they are flatly just worse than casters if you want to be doing control and utility and only somewhat surpasses them in damage
"But... but Eldritch Blast is the baseline!!! Need more damage!"
Remember that all the tests with the ua fighter/barbarian had feats.
The new fighter would be blown out the water if they didn't take the same revised feats. Feats are still Must Haves. They said that the damage should be coming from the Class, yet all the tests have either feats that allow BA attacks, add PB to damage, or give a damage dealing option that the class didn't have.
23:48 So, you say that one of the reasons you removed the Draconic Sorcerers permanent wings is because they're getting the feature at a lower level, but I have the 2014 Player's Handbook in front of me right now and they're not, they're getting it at the exact same level.
PHB pg. 103 "Dragon Wings: at 14th level, you gain the ability to sprout a pair of dragon wings from your back..."
For the Warlock, maybe it would be worthwhile to have the few spellslots (maybe 2 per tier maximum, but still keeping lower tiers as they progress? GIves them more than they've got while still being much less than standard casters) and having an optional external cost in order to 'buy' them back between combats. A bit like how the Sorcerer can convert Sorcery Points into spell slots and vice versa, maybe warlocks could have a cost to regain slots outside of rests that changes based on their patron. Things like hit dice, gold, 'memories' in the form of skill proficiencies. Things they can get back later, but will still suffer minor costs in the short term if they want to really unload in a future fight but don't have time for a full rest.
Mystic Arcanum should be a class feature, NOT an invocation. This is really the only problem with the warlock. The wizards create spell feature needs some adjusting and so do a few metamagic options but ill include my comments for them in the survey
But then you couldn't retrain the lower level Mistic Arcanum when you no longer need them.
Also the sorcerers free wish is just too op
@@benhuntsman6753 Give them four Mystic Arcanum slots (eventually) and allow them to replace spells when they reach higher levels.
The only problem? Really? what about mystic arcanum not letting you upcast spells? What about not being able to choose which spell you want to use with it? There's a lot of problems with the warlock and the mystic arcanum is one of the least ones.
Warlocks should get spell points. half caster worth of spell points they can spend on spells that have spell level caps that increase at the same rate as full casters. warlocks juiced up cantrips deal more than 1st and 2nd level spells at 5th level and have more effects. why would you ever cast one when your EB can deal 2d10+2xmod and push back 2 enemies 10ft or 1 enemy 20ft? you might as well save it for utility since the damage boost is marginal. but a 3rd level spell like fireball would be much more worth it.
The focus on making each class more distinct and having their own unique spells sounds great! The sense of class fantasy is a big appeal of the game. This is good news for the next iteration of the game at my table 👍
I don't get why he is saying Draconic Wings is at a "lower level". It is literally at the same level. If anything, its been bumped up to the subclass's capstone. I really don't get why it was nerfed (other than "experiementing with sorcery incarnate, which is also very weak).
For the Warlock, why not just use the Wizard spell progression, but give them half of the slots that a Wizard would get? It would still work with the spellcasting feature and would still limit the number of spells that a Warlock has, but still opens it up to Mystic Arcanum at the normal levels and Eldritch Invocations that add spells, would allow you to still use those invocations.
Because then it doesn't work with multiclassing, and they can't move away from 3e multiclassing EVER.
So to compensate not being a full caster, a warlock gets invocations instead, then all its best invocations are mystic arcana which are less flexible spells ; so you trade half your spells progression and get some spells back, not a very good trade imho.🤔
having warlocks be a half caster but get the slots twice as quickly would make for a super strong hexadin build. Especially for mid levels, where most campaigns end. You basically end up with a paladin that can 5th level smite at lvl ~13
I’d be fine with warlock being a half caster, so long as Mystic Arcanum happens at every level full casters get a new slot level edit: WITHOUT being an invocation. It’s not fair to say it’s an option when it’s so far above the other options at most levels
100% agree
being forced to burn Invocations to get Mystic Arcanums feels awful, please let us realistically have both.
And I'm open to half-caster Warlock, but that doesn't actually help them "cast more often". The half-caster spell slots may look like they are more spells cast, but they actually feel like far less, because you lose so much power from most of them not being higher level. Gaining 4 or even 5 level 1 casts is not worth losing even 1 level 5 cast.
edit: also, the pact of the chain familiars need serious buffs. If you're going to tie their utility to attacks hitting, they need an actual chance of hitting their attacks, and not getting killed immediately. Either buff them into real combat options, or let their utility be just an action, as opposed to an attack.
That might be a bit complicated, but I have an easy solution.
At [insert level where you Warlock invocations normally don’t increase], you gain an additional Warlock Invocation. This invocation must be spent on the Mystic Arcanum invocation.
This is very similar to Armorer’s ability and I think it would keep the class from feeling clunky with two different types of Mystic Arcanum.
What if it was 2 spell slots that increase over level and you know two spells from the arcane list of that level.
as a fan of the new warlock this. absolutely this is the way.
One of the things is, though, is that Invocations can be swapped out, so you could take the Mystic Arcanum at level 5 to get a 3rd level spell, and then when you get regular 3rd level spell slots at level 9, you can replace that Mystic Arcanum with a different one that gives you a 5th level spell. And you also get an additional Invocation at that level, so you could switch out that lower level Mystic Arcanum and still pick up a different Invocation on top of it.
Treantmonk did a video looking into Warlock, and found that if you do that Mystic Arcanum juggling you end up making a Warlock that is closer to a 3/4th or a 4/5th caster than a half-caster, in that it has the same spell level progression as a full caster, but with slightly fewer total spell slots than a full caster.
The basic summary of that build is:
1. At 5th level, use your new Invocation to pick up a 3rd level Mystic Arcanum
2. At 7th level, use your new Invocation to pick up a 4th level Mystic Arcanum
3. At 9th level, swap out the 3rd level Arcanum (since you now have 3rd level spell slots) for a 5th level one, and use the Invocation at that level for whatever you want.
4. At 11th level, use your new Invocation to pick up a 6th level Mystic Arcanum.
5. At 13th level, you gain 4th level spell slots, so switch out the 4th level Arcanum for a 7th level one, and use the Invocation you get at that level for whatever you want.
6. At 15th level, use your new Invocation to pick up an 8th level Mystic Arcanum.
7. At 17th level, swap out the 5th level Arcanum (since you now have 5th level spell slots) for a 9th level one, and use the Invocation you get at that level for whatever you want.
That progression maximizes the Warlock's spell level progression while simultaneously ensuring the same levels of Mystic Arcanums as the current Warlock with a minimal Invocation tax.
Would be cool to see an exchange mechanism of sacrificing hit dice for spell slots. Fits warlock theme imo
Thematically warlocks should get their higher level casting sooner than all other casters. While wizards have to spend years studying, and sorcerers have to learn to control their inner magic prowess. Warlocks just make a deal to receive their power.
An I’m not selling my soul for a 1d10 cantrip an hex. Give us proficiency bonus spell slots. that upcast to level 5. And full caster progression. Then mystic arcanum like a prepared caster. So we can switch on long rest. Same progression as wizard. Subclass spells automatically known. 9 real invocations. None of the mystic arcanum as a invocation bs.
My request on Twin Spell is that it deserves a rebrand to “Echo Spell” instead so it’s more clear that it’s a round by round effect, rather than a twin effect. It’s cool because Echo Spell allows Sorcs to make a spell iconic for them just by making their best spell spammable.
Pact Boons as spells makes it very inconvenient for players to look up their class features since they are in a different part of the book.
Same with Wiz and Sorc to a lesser extent
Those things never should've been spells in the first place.. really trippes me up when i saw that the first time..
Shout out to the interviewer for having a near perfect reaction face at all times.
Never have to ask ANY questions about Twinned Spell now. I doubt it will be used. There is no flavor to it any more, it's just math of resource discount, with limitations, and not a big discount.
I really dont understand why they dont give warlocks their old spellcasting, but instead give a certain number of uses of a "Pact Favors" each long rest or smthn that refresh your spell slots as an action. That way they could build in that two short rest intended design without running out of slots. Seems odd to change their core function instead of just leaning into their flavor of asking your patron for power and keeping the same format
Pact of madness gain extra slot as pact contract Claus .
Pact of power gain one spell from the arcane list as at will spell or proficiency use
I like the idea of giving more higher level slots at the cost of lower level ones. Right now there's an invocation tax of Mystic Arcanum to get your once per day top spells, and there's no option for up casting. If they narrow the progression by stretching it upwards, then they can rewrite mystic arcanum to award more lower level slots, so you can choose to become a more full caster at a cost that isn't mandatory.
that's... actually a solid idea... here I thought the endless sea of players would never come up with an idea that I would never have in a hundred years, but... that is actually such a sick idea, I haven't done the maths on it, but that actually sounds really cool
There’s an invocation tax, but you also get more invocations now and multiple invocations are given for free as class features, so there isn’t really a tax.
@@dwil0311 You get 1 more invocation over the course of 20 levels, and have to spend 4 invocations to get 6, 7, 8, 9 level spells at level 20. So yes, that's a tax. And you'll want to burn at least 2 at lower levels to get 3rd, 4th, and 5th level spells at the same pace as full casters (which you'll switch to higher level spells as those slots come online later). Giving 1 invocation to have to spend 4 to get what we had before in Mystic Arcanum is, in fact, a tax.
It's not the worst tax in the world, esp because the cantrips include invocationy stuff in them as you say, but it is a tax.
@@jefftheless You are ignoring the 3+ (depending on pact/subclass) invocations you get that are now class features that you would’ve been taxed with previously but are now free.
My idea for warlock spell slots is half progression but double the slots of whatever particular spell level they have.
Like 5 or 6, 5th level slots are 17th level
Let the classes have their unique mechanics. It is the fun of playing different classes. Give warlocks unique features, not make warlocks half casters. It's a lazy solution.
Anyone else prefer separating ASI from Feats? Feats at 2, 6, 10, 14 and ASI at 4, 8, 12, 16. Would that break anything? I’m going to add that to my survey.
Why would per encounter make a class OP? Other casters can forgo casting in most fights to then unload a ton in harder fights where you need the power, but Warlock (or the martials, or whoever) would just be consistent damage. You would need to lower their out of combat utility potentially so they don't overshadow martials, but the full spell slot casters already do that with their slots per day.
I like the thincaster approach, if we get good invocation in return.
I don't feel like they're going to keep the warlock spell slots as they are now in the UA. I think people liked the pact slots feel too much. One of the biggest problems I remember hearing is that a warlock doesn't have the extra low level spell slots to use on spells like shield, which don't upcast, so their pact slots are kinda wasted on them. For those situations, they could make an invocation that gives you x amount of casts of shield or something, equal to your proficiency level or half your warlock level or something like that. But another thing I think they could do is at a certain level, they could give you a second group of spell slots. So like as you level up you have 2 2nd level slots, then 2 3rd level, then 2 4th level, and then maybe you get 2 4th level and 2 1st level.
For sorcerers burst i would like it to explode on a 1 as well as on a 6. This would make up for the d6 and give more chances to explode. The current math stills shows fire bolt as the superior damage cantrip at earlier levels.
I was thinking a 5 or a 6. The point is that it’s really good or really bad. Also… if it was a 5 or 6, I could see using a single sorcery point on a bad roll to up the chances of an explosion.
I was thinking make it 2d4, explode on 4s, increase by 2d4 at the higher levels
Any d8 cantrip is better
The problem is with the short rest, it's not short. One hour is too long to expect a party to rest, is should be more like a coffee break 10-15 minutes. DM's and parties would be more willing to use the short rest if that were an option; then limit to either you must use a hit die, or max number of times per day equal to your proficiency bonus to avoid over using it.
"We didn't want to take away the warlock's class identity, so we took away their class identity."
Change the short rest mechanic to: "your spellslots recharge either on a short rest, or when you roll initiative" this opens up the warlock to using their spells outside of combat. I really do not see how this is overpowered? There is literaly nothing stopping the party from short resting after combat in 99% of cases. In fact, realistically, it doesn't make sense in most cases to NOT short rest, unless they are on a race against the clock.
I've never even heard of a game that doesn't use feats nor have I ever seen a poll anywhere that says any less than 80% of tables use feats.
The reason feats aren't used has more to do with the fact that there's only a single feat in the srd and many people play for free. It has absolutely nothing to do with design and more to do with where the pay wall is placed