Thought Experiment - Int Warlocks

[mer.c]

Here's a thought experiment: What if Warlocks were an Intelligence-based class instead of Charisma-based? In part, what would that mean for pure Warlocks, but also, what would that mean for multiclass Warlocks? Consider also that the multiclass prerequisite would then be 13 Int instead of 13 Cha. What would it mean for class flavor?

[Tanarii]

IMO it would encourage the "scholar warlock" even more over the "cult leader" warlock. The guy who researches the eldritch arcane and falls into a pact with a creature, selling his soul, as a result.

Both are already part of the base warlock concept, if you read between lines of the description stuff in PHB, and look at their skills list.

In terms of multiclassing, it'd make Wizard and EK and AT more attractive over Sorc/Bard/Pally.

IMO it'd be a good change for both of those reasons. I like the idea of scholar warlocks more. And I feel those multiclassing combinations are more thematic.

[PhoenixPhyre]

IMO it would encourage the "scholar warlock" even more over the "cult leader" warlock. The guy who researches the eldritch arcane and falls into a pact with a creature, selling his soul, as a result.

Both are already part of the base warlock concept, if you read between lines of the description stuff in PHB, and look at their skills list.

In terms of multiclassing, it'd make Wizard and EK and AT more attractive over Sorc/Bard/Pally.

IMO it'd be a good change for both of those reasons. I like the idea of scholar warlocks more. And I feel those multiclassing combinations are more thematic.

I agree that it would be an overall positive effect.

A few other effects--half elves would be much worse and tieflings would be slightly worse warlocks. Possible changes to the proficient saves (a minor effect).

One possible compromise--since warlocks are already the most "moving parts" class (have the most conceptually different independent things they can choose at character creation or level up), give them one more. Let them choose (at level 1) whether to use INT or CHA as their casting stat.

[mer.c]

Boy, I was expecting to come in here and get crucified for suggesting such a thing. Glad you think it would be a positive thing.


One possible compromise--since warlocks are already the most "moving parts" class (have the most conceptually different independent things they can choose at character creation or level up), give them one more. Let them choose (at level 1) whether to use INT or CHA as their casting stat.

I'm actually all for doing this generally with mental abilities, within reason. It hasn't come up for me yet, but my players know that if they want to make for example a Wisdom-based Paladin or a Charisma-based Cleric, I'm all ears. That's in part why I floated this; one of my players is going Warlock for our next campaign and I wanted to see how people see that shaking out. (Of course this wouldn't be a unilateral decision.)

[KorvinStarmast]

IMO it would encourage the "scholar warlock" even more over the "cult leader" warlock. The guy who researches the eldritch arcane and falls into a pact with a creature, selling his soul, as a result.

Both are already part of the base warlock concept, if you read between lines of the description stuff in PHB, and look at their skills list.

In terms of multiclassing, it'd make Wizard and EK and AT more attractive over Sorc/Bard/Pally.

IMO it'd be a good change for both of those reasons. I like the idea of scholar warlocks more. And I feel those multiclassing combinations are more thematic. Tanarii nailed it, and I still regret WoTC listening to the fan feedback about Ch based Warlocks, when their initial idea had been to go with Int. If you look at the ability score section of PHB, it matches so well to an int warlock ...

[Emay Ecks]

I do intelligence warlocks in my games for several reasons including:

-I see a pact with an extra-planar entity as something one would need to be knowledgeable to accomplish. How do you contact the entity? How is the power bound? A charisma character feels more like an extra-planar entity just thought this individual was a smooth talker and good looking and decided to give them some power.

-Charisma warlock feels like it's pretty much a slightly different flavor of sorcerer with a different spell system. Instead of being born with their powers, some entity just decided to give them powers.

-There are already too many charisma casters with bards, sorcerers, and paladins. The only int casters are wizards, AT rogues, and EK Fighters. For a more balanced party, it's just easier if there are two intelligence options to choose from for full casters.

-I really don't like the idea of the guy who sold his soul to demons and summons a black void of tentacles being the party face. Why would a non-player character want to deal with a character who deals with devils?

-It hurts the people who want to dip warlock from sorc and paladin (and I have never been a fan of paladins dipping warlock for thematic reasons), so that's just icing on the cake.

[Unoriginal]

Two things worth noting:

-According to Mearls in an interview about the warlock, the Patron only invest power into the Warlock once, at lvl 1.

-According to Crawford, regarding the Xanathar's Invocations, the goal was to make the Warlock more like the searcher of weird magic they're supposed to be and less like someone who's dependent on a Patron throwing them some bones from time to time.

[Max_Killjoy]

I thought I'd read somewhere that previous editions had an INT option for Warlocks.

[MrStabby]

I have played an int warlock and it works really well. So many invocations feel like they work well with it. Eyes of the runekeeper feels scholastic for example.

[Tanarii]

Tanarii nailed it, and I still regret WoTC listening to the fan feedback about Ch based Warlocks, when their initial idea had been to go with Int. If you look at the ability score section of PHB, it matches so well to an int warlock ...on the other hand and iirc Warlock was Cha in 3e. And cha or con with int secondary in 4e. So it would have been a somewhat significant change.


According to Mearls in an interview about the warlock, the Patron only invest power into the Warlock once, at lvl 1.
Either way works with the sell your soul concept as far as I'm concerned. The one time thing less so with the cult leader idea.

[Kane0]

Works fine, I've been giving the option for Warlocks to be Int or Cha based for about a year now and it's a nice choice to have without breaking anything.

[Theodoxus]

I'm the guy that sees a change like this and thinks "wait a sec, here, hold my beer." I'll see you offering up warlocks the option of Int vs Cha and raise you 'allowing them to also use spell points'. Boom. My warlocks gots ALL the options.

Seriously though, as KaneO said, it works, it doesn't break anything. Some players prefer the fluff of int to cha, some prefer cha to int. Mechanically they're close enough to not be an issue. One's brainy, the other beauty... 'saul goodman.

[Unoriginal]

IMO I like even the "scholar of weird magic" warlock to be CHA based, because it helps show they're not just Wizards studying conventional spellcasting. The Warlock is kind of messing with obscure corners of magic, and willing them to work for the Warlock.

[Tanarii]

IMO I like even the "scholar of weird magic" warlock to be CHA based, because it helps show they're not just Wizards studying conventional spellcasting. The Warlock is kind of messing with obscure corners of magic, and willing them to work for the Warlock.
Fair enough. I envision that kind of Warlock as a cthulhu-esque researcher of eldritch and forbidden lores.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Fair enough. I envision that kind of Warlock as a cthulhu-esque researcher of eldritch and forbidden lores.

But then you also have the "unwillingly-chosen champion" warlocks (fey especially), the "forced contract" fiend warlocks (taking a contract to save a relative who had summoned the thing in the first place) and the "touched by the beyond" warlocks who may have been meditating (or just dreaming) and brushed against the fringes of a GOO and it awakened something in them and forged a connection that the GOO may not even know or care about.

All of these are valid CHA warlocks. The INT ones ("looked too long into the abyss", the "frustrated wizard student", etc) are also all valid.

[Naanomi]

I had a GM play chainlocks as CHA, Tomelocks as INT, and Bladelocks as CON... no one was playing a warlock at the time I played though

[Tanarii]

All of these are valid CHA warlocks. The INT ones ("looked too long into the abyss", the "frustrated wizard student", etc) are also all valid.
Yeah. I don't have anything against Cha locks. And if as it stands there's nothing wrong with a non-blade lock making Int their secondary score, taking the Sage background (with the personality trait "sold my soul for knowledge to boot), and taking 2 more Int skills.

[Rhynear]

I always thought of it as being that you managed to convince your patron to give you a reasonably fair and useful pact, which would make it Charisma based.

Also, I could see problems with a Hexblade/Bladesinger multiclass as it would get AC, Spell and Weapon Attacks, and Spell saves on the same stat, so would only have to raise Int and Con.

[Rebonack]

I had a GM play chainlocks as CHA, Tomelocks as INT, and Bladelocks as CON... no one was playing a warlock at the time I played though

Now that's an interesting idea.

To take it a step forward, grant the Boon at first level rather than third and have the Patron feature kick in at third rather than first. That would make for some VERY well defined Warlocks. The scholar of forbidden lore, the binder, and the eldritch warrior. Casting off Con would help out the Blade Boon path a TON.

[D-naras]

Now that's an interesting idea.

To take it a step forward, grant the Boon at first level rather than third and have the Patron feature kick in at third rather than first. That would make for some VERY well defined Warlocks. The scholar of forbidden lore, the binder, and the eldritch warrior. Casting off Con would help out the Blade Boon path a TON.

Love the idea and immediately wrote this:

Warlock

Level 1 : Pact Boon, Pact Magic
Level 2 : Eldritch Invocations
Level 3 : Eldritch Patron
Level 4-20 : same as before

Pact Boon:
At first level you receive or discover or manifest a mysterious eldritch boon. This boon determines your spellcasting ability.
• Tome: You have delved into arcane knowledge that only you can make sense of. Your spellcasting ability modifier is Intelligence. You gain an eldritch tome that contains any 1 cantrip of your choice for any class's spell list and it counts as a warlock cantrip for you. At 3rd level, you gain 2 more cantrips from any spell list and they count as warlock cantrips for you.

• Blade: Your vitality is almost otherwordly. Your spellcasting ability is Constitution. You can summon a simple weapon as an action. At level 3, you can summon any martial or simple melee weapon that you are automatically proficient with. During the same action, you can summon a medium armor that you are proficient with. At level 3, you also gain the rest of the regular Blade Boon benefits such as binding magic weapons, make the blade count as magic, etc.

• Chain: Your force of personality makes a spirit beholden to you. Your spellcasting ability is Charisma. You learn the Summon Familiar spell and can cast it as a ritual. You can change the form of you familiar by spending 1 minute concentrating on it instead of requiring you to cast the spell again. At level 3, you gain the rest of the Chain pact benefits such as the special familiars that can attack.

Pact magic
Same as before, only you don't have access to patron specific spells yet.

Eldritch Invocations
Same as before

Eldritch Patron
Same as before, only this time the Patron actually appears to the warlock (physical, mental manifestation or in a dream) to seal their pact. The previous class features were like samples of the patron's power. This has the added benefit of making multiclassing warlock easier from a fluff perspective. They allow a warlock to swap known spells for those in their list and grant their 1st level feature at this point.

[carrdrivesyou]

I saw in someone's signature this quote that defined being a warlock quite well:

“Not everyone has the resources or the ability to become a wizard or a sorcerer. After all, being a Warlock just requires a pact; very democratic really. Doesn't require wealth or a magical lineage; just a promise, and all of your problems will go away.”

This gives me two thoughts:

1. If you were smart, perhaps you wouldn't be selling your soul in the first place, and turn to a rogue or fighter class instead. But you are CHA based, so you do some not so great bargaining for power.

2. Maybe you were smart enough to figure out that selling your soul isn't such a bad thing, as some Patrons are benign.

The RP of either idea is fantastic, and I think that having a choice between being INT or CHA based at the start could open up some interesting options. Maybe just make it a choice at character creation. You are either smart enough to do all the right research, and make a simple trade, OR you are so great at wordplay that you just summoned up a demon and bargained well. Something along those lines.

Mechanically, everything would remain the same other than the fact that your casting and class ability core stat would change depending on your choice at first level.

As an aside, I think that only having ONE INT based full caster (wizard) is kind of awful. With any luck the Mystic will get published and will solve this deficiency.

[JMS]

and, this solution weakens dipping hexblade, while not messing up others

[robbie374]

1. If you were smart, perhaps you wouldn't be selling your soul in the first place, and turn to a rogue or fighter class instead. But you are CHA based, so you do some not so great bargaining for power.

2. Maybe you were smart enough to figure out that selling your soul isn't such a bad thing, as some Patrons are benign.

In English we often mix up the word "smart" to mean both "intelligent" and "wise". An Int Warlock might know a lot, but he could be a complete fool with low Wisdom, making horrible choices.

[PhoenixPhyre]

In English we often mix up the word "smart" to mean both "intelligent" and "wise". An Int Warlock might know a lot, but he could be a complete fool with low Wisdom, making horrible choices.

I can confirm. I know plenty of intelligent (PhD science folks) who are crap at making good personal or other decisions. For that matter, that describes me a lot of the time.

[Millstone85]

In English we often mix up the word "smart" to mean both "intelligent" and "wise". An Int Warlock might know a lot, but he could be a complete fool with low Wisdom, making horrible choices.And then, in D&D, neither your Intelligence nor Wisdom score has much to do with making good decisions. They are more about your memory and attention skills.

[carrdrivesyou]

In English we often mix up the word "smart" to mean both "intelligent" and "wise". An Int Warlock might know a lot, but he could be a complete fool with low Wisdom, making horrible choices.

You make a good point! I didn't consider that when I was thinking earlier. Perhaps I should say that an Intelligent person should know better than to do so??

[DarkKnightJin]

Boy, I was expecting to come in here and get crucified for suggesting such a thing. Glad you think it would be a positive thing.



I'm actually all for doing this generally with mental abilities, within reason. It hasn't come up for me yet, but my players know that if they want to make for example a Wisdom-based Paladin or a Charisma-based Cleric, I'm all ears. That's in part why I floated this; one of my players is going Warlock for our next campaign and I wanted to see how people see that shaking out. (Of course this wouldn't be a unilateral decision.)

While I don't really see how to get a Cha Cleric fluffwise, a Wisdom Pally or Int Warlock actually sounds like it could be a lot of fun to run with.

Of course, I'm also trying to keep the non-combat pillars in mind here. A lot of people seems to focus on the biggest numbers to whack folks with..
What if I want to make a Pally that's good at noticing things, but not super outgoing or 'present' as a high Cha would imply?

[mer.c]

and, this solution weakens dipping hexblade, while not messing up others

Part of my raising this question was 1) to see how people think this would shake out, and 2) to see what broken combinations could arise. Got to be prepared before opening up the floodgates, after all. :)

[PhoenixPhyre]

You make a good point! I didn't consider that when I was thinking earlier. Perhaps I should say that an Intelligent person should know better than to do so??

Lots of intelligent people do things they know better than to do. Intelligence is uncorrelated with good decisions, except at the extreme low end.

And in 5e, none of the scores have anything to do with decision-making ability.

INT is about recall of lore and pattern matching.
WIS is about sensing what's really there, by sight or by intuition.
CHA is force of personality/sense of self.

Decision-making is a property that is under the sole direction of the players, not the character sheet. That also means you can't rightfully blame the character for your knowingly bad choices of action.

[Unoriginal]

Should be noted that most Warlocks don't literally sell their souls.

I mean, if you're ready to sell your soul, you can A LOT better than a beginer warlock's power.

Canonicaly, some beings get their Pact by doing some thing like gifting an interesting -often magical -item to the Patron, while selling your soul is the price Orcus typically ask to reveal the secrets to become a Lich.


Anyone who actually sell their souls is probably also sending money to a Chultian Prince in order to touch a surprise inheritance and buying various bridges accros the land.

[Eric Diaz]

I used a Int Sorcerer - a "Mathmagician" character makes sense to me, specially some crazy wizard - but there are lots os good points made for an Int warlock here.

The idea of allowing either to choose between Int and Cha is also very good and doesn't break anything IMO, and the idea of allowing the Bladelock to use Con (or maybe even Wis) gives them a decent boost.

I think it would mess with MCing but I don't like MCing anyway... speacially with Paladins; thematically I don't see the point.

[Temperjoke]

Should be noted that most Warlocks don't literally sell their souls.

I mean, if you're ready to sell your soul, you can A LOT better than a beginer warlock's power.

Canonicaly, some beings get their Pact by doing some thing like gifting an interesting -often magical -item to the Patron, while selling your soul is the price Orcus typically ask to reveal the secrets to become a Lich.


I always saw it as souls are and aren't as valuable as people imagine they are. I mean, any demon/devil worth the name can start a cult and get souls that way. On the other hand, invest a mortal with power, tempt and corrupt them, let them establish themselves, build a reputation. Once that mortal is notorious among the planes, then collect his/her soul and watch your peers gnash their teeth in jealously that you were the one to collect this valuable soul.

As for the original CHA vs INT, I've always seen CHA as force of personality. Sometimes it's based in physical looks, frightening or beautiful, but just as often it's rooted in strength of will and determination that inspires and influences people. Sure, otherworldly being will make a deal with someone who has the knowledge to make the proper approach, but at the same time, a lot of sales and negotiation comes down to one person's force of personality against another person's force of personality.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I always saw it as souls are and aren't as valuable as people imagine they are. I mean, any demon/devil worth the name can start a cult and get souls that way. On the other hand, invest a mortal with power, tempt and corrupt them, let them establish themselves, build a reputation. Once that mortal is notorious among the planes, then collect his/her soul and watch your peers gnash their teeth in jealously that you were the one to collect this valuable soul.

As for the original CHA vs INT, I've always seen CHA as force of personality. Sometimes it's based in physical looks, frightening or beautiful, but just as often it's rooted in strength of will and determination that inspires and influences people. Sure, otherworldly being will make a deal with someone who has the knowledge to make the proper approach, but at the same time, a lot of sales and negotiation comes down to one person's force of personality against another person's force of personality.

I see casting stats (CHA vs INT vs WIS) not as how they gained that power but how they exercise that power. Being better at making the contract in the first place doesn't help you hit harder with that eldritch blast, nor would it make sense to gain power as your stat increases.

INT casters cast their spells better the more knowledge they can hold in-mind at a time. The more parameters they can account for in their spells.

WIS casters cast through intervention of other things--a better caster is more in-tune and is a better channel for this external manipulation. The words of the prayer, for example, just set up the channel. The knowledge of the spell is external and you have to perceive the right flow of energy to be better at this.

CHA casters are the brute-force casters or the manipulators. They convince the universe that there really was supposed to be a fireball there. Bards do it by manipulating sound and rhythm (tricking reality into creating that fireball), paladins do it by sheer bloody-minded confidence ("no, I'm telling you that there always was a fireball there"), sorcerers do it directly by force of will and word.

Warlocks withstand and channel otherworldly might. Unlike a cleric, they're using stored or unnatural energies by hosting a fragment of the patron's power, not by letting the other power use them as an instrument. Unlike a cleric, a warlock isn't calling out to the patron each time and letting the patron shape the spell; they're drawing on an independent gift of power and forcing the spell into shape themselves. I could also see warlocks as INT casters--the patron gives knowledge and the warlock manipulates it from there like a wizard.

[Sigreid]

on the other hand and iirc Warlock was Cha in 3e. And cha or con with int secondary in 4e. So it would have been a somewhat significant change.


Either way works with the sell your soul concept as far as I'm concerned. The one time thing less so with the cult leader idea.

It doesn't have to be a sell your soul situation. Whatever entity could awaken the potential within the warlock in exchange for a service that is important to them. In all likely hood the warlock will have no idea why the entity wants what they want so badly. Maybe a village judge is bribed with power to let someone off the hook. Maybe you're lad holds a place of power for the being and he wants it for his cult. Maybe you got the power to protect your home at the cost of one sacrifice, not knowing it's the chose of some god or whatever.

[Millstone85]

I like to think that warlocks do not use their charisma as their spellcasting ability, but use their spellcasting ability as their charisma. There have a fey/fiendish charm about them, or a fascinating glitter of madness in their eyes.

Though I know it doesn't quite work with the crunch of multiclassing to warlock.

[Marcloure]

I thought I'd read somewhere that previous editions had an INT option for Warlocks.

D&D 4e had Int as a secondary option for warlocks. Well, 4e broke a lot of ability-class restraints, having builds for Int Sorc and Str Wizards for instance.

[Marcloure]

On one hand, it would nerf palalocks and sorlocks. On the other, you would get EKlocks and Wizlocks.
But I think the later both is more "in line" then the first. Short rest Divine Smite and Quickened Eldritch Blasts seem to be more powerful than a hexblade EK or AT (not sure though)

[Tanarii]

This gives me two thoughts:

1. If you were smart, perhaps you wouldn't be selling your soul in the first place, and turn to a rogue or fighter class instead. But you are CHA based, so you do some not so great bargaining for power.

2. Maybe you were smart enough to figure out that selling your soul isn't such a bad thing, as some Patrons are benign.



And in 5e, none of the scores have anything to do with decision-making ability.

INT is about recall of lore and pattern matching.
WIS is about sensing what's really there, by sight or by intuition.
CHA is force of personality/sense of self.

Decision-making is a property that is under the sole direction of the players, not the character sheet. That also means you can't rightfully blame the character for your knowingly bad choices of action.Yeah, 5e has radically and intentionally departed from older thinking on ability scores. Or at least made it clear on how they should work, since some older editions (especially the really old ones) already worked this way. Ability scores have been separated from decison making. Decision making is in the hands of the players, ability scores only measure the ability of the PC to resolve things. Their ability to execute, so to speak. That's an important separation.

That's not even including that certain kinds of highly intelligent people (using the common IRL term) are infamous for making poor decisions at both the 'big decision' level and the every day 'common sense' level. That doesn't mean they really do, just that it's at least a stereotype.


Should be noted that most Warlocks don't literally sell their souls.


It doesn't have to be a sell your soul situation.Of course not. The bargain can be for various terms. I was using it as the generic catch phrase of making a shady, dangerous and possibly short-sighted bargain for power, with a (usually malevolent) supernatural creature of extreme power.

In fact, I'd expect 'cult leader' Warlocks (actual Cult not necessary), the ones that have a goal of expressly accomplishing their Infernal Patron's goals, spreading their power base, and/or worship in the Prime, to rarely have to bargain away their soul. They're already giving the Patron a lot in return for power. But isuch Warlock is basically garunteeing their soul to dam nation in the process anyway. That wouldn't mean the Patron is specifically getting it, of course.