Player asked me for a houserule, but is it unbalancing?

[punkerke]

Hey all, I've just started playing dnd again, as the dm for my friends.

Now in general I have a very relaxed approach to the rulings, aka, I make stuff up on the fly if I'm not sure, and generally allow some leniancy on certain rulings if they bring a situation in a creative and innovative way in RP etc.

Now I've asked my players to make characters, send in backgrounds, and been asked about possible houserule options (considering some class perks or background traits etc) and I'm not opposed to it. If they want to switch a proficiency from a background to really match their character, or do some minor adaptations to certain perks for flavour, then I'm generally all in favor. The more personalized the character, the more they'll be involved, wich is good.

But now one player has asked me for a houseruling, of wich I'm a bit dubious in mind. And I find my lack of experience with the 5e dnd (and some previous, last I played was 3.5 :/ )

He's rolling a warlock that will multiclass into sorc/wiz arround lvl 5 or 6.

And he's asked me if he could use the entangle spell as an at will invocation.

So I read over the invocations, and got back to him with this proposition:

Invocation for 1st lvl, can cast entangle as a 1st lvl spell once/long rest, uses a warlock spell slot.

To me this seemed like pretty much in line with how the invocations worked.
Unfortunatly he doesn't agree with it and really wants it to be an at will invocation, free to cast like a cantrip.

Like I said, I've not too much experience with the 5e (and it really has changed quite a bit).

So I want to come and see what more experienced players/dm's think of this. Would it be too powerful to the point of possibly unbalancing (wich is what I fear), or is it really just a harmless flavor tool and at will or not isn't really too impactful for a spell like entangle?

[bid]

Most the at-will invocations affect the caster, none are offensive. What he's asking is way stronger than silent image.

[rudy]

Yeah, no. Bad idea.

This is comparable to the Wizard 18th level "Signature Spell" in power. As stated above, other at-will abilities are self buffs, not offensive spells.

[Sigreid]

To expand on what has been said, this would give him nearly complete control of almost any battle field. I'd love to have it, but it's crazy powerful.

[punkerke]

First of all, thanks for the quick responses.

And so it is as I feared.. would be too powerful.

Glad to get some feedback from more experienced players.. atleast now I can get back to him a little more sure of my case. :-)

[Gastronomie]

If anything it's about the power level of a 15-th level Invocation.

Perhaps consider something like:

So I Heard You Like Entangling
Prerequiste: Liking the Entangle spell, Warlock level 3 or higher
You can convert a Pact Magic spell slot into level 1 spell slots which can be used only to cast the Entangle spell. The number of created level 1 spell slots is equal to the level of the expended Pact Magic spell slot divided by 2, rounded up. You can use this ability only once per short rest, and when you end a short rest, the level 1 spell slots created by this invocation disappear.

[Stan]

Once per short rest would make it good but not too good.

[Tanarii]

Entangle 1/day using a spell slot is too weak though. Because it doesn't scale up automatically as the spell slots do. He'll need to ditch it for something better fast, probably at level 3.

[Goober4473]

What I'd do is either allow adding it to his spell list, or have an invocation that lets him cast it 1/day without spending a spell slot.

I've personally house-ruled all of the "cast 1/day but it costs a spell slot" to not use a spell slot, but still be cast at their normal spell slot level, which makes them a lot less terrible.

[punkerke]

Hm.. those could be interesting approaches too.

Will propose that entangling one to him, or offer to drop the spell slot cost, wich seems like a reasonable alternative too.

[ad_hoc]

What I'd do is either allow adding it to his spell list, or have an invocation that lets him cast it 1/day without spending a spell slot.

I've personally house-ruled all of the "cast 1/day but it costs a spell slot" to not use a spell slot, but still be cast at their normal spell slot level, which makes them a lot less terrible.

I have 2 issues with that houserule. One is that I feel, though haven't tested, that a Warlock with a lot of those invocations would have a lot of spell slots. Most of the good invocations right now are utility spells/abilities (with a couple exceptions). Having a lot of combat invocations wouldn't be great. The other thiing I don't like is that the lower level spells become obsolete, well mostly just Bane but it is a flaw in the design.

Here is a proposed change:

Curse
When you select this invocation choose any one spell below. You may cast this spell without expending a spell slot. You can't do so again until you finish a long rest.

Bane
Prerequisite 5th level: Bestow Curse
Prerequisite 5th level: Slow
Prerequisite 7th level: Compulsion
Prerequisite 7th level: Confusion
Prerequisite 9th level: Geas

[Slipperychicken]

Once per short rest would make it good but not too good.

I'm with stan on this one.