Warlock Modifications; Balance?

[Fayd]

Hey y’all. I’m wondering if two changes I am contemplating allowing for a warlock pc in an upcoming game are going to not throw off balance too badly. (Kobold Warlock, Celestial patron; don’t know the rest of the party, this was the first declaration. All Kobolds though)

First: if the player wants, sub Int for Cha for spellcasting/invocation DCs. I don’t think this is a big deal, all things considered and if they want to be bookish I say let them.

Second: add patron spells to spells known for free. This is what I think may throw off the balance. But given how few spells/rest warlocks hey I don’t foresee it causing too many problems.

Thoughts?

[Daelnoron]

Well, along the first: I'm all for anything that gives INT a bigger impact on the Game, that alone won't break anything.

You should propably look into what happens, if your Warlock decides to multiclass into Wizard and whether you want to swich his CHA-Save Proficency to INT as well.

Bladesinger x Bladelock could lead to interesting results.

[Tiadoppler]

I agree, the first modification seems fine, but I'd keep the Save proficiencies the same. At my table, I'd allow it as long as you're not using it for some specific combat min-maxing. In-character reasons (my character's a bookish nerd who isn't especially strong-willed) are good, out-of-character reasons (I want to reduce my MAD and use this multiclass combo for extra damage output) are discouraged.

The second modification gets tricky, I think. That's a big bump to a warlock's versatility. Warlocks are designed to have excellent cantrip/at-will powers already, along with a small number of spells they can use frequently. Adding 10 spells to a class that is balanced around knowing a total of 15 (+invocations and mystic arcanum/other features) may not break anything, but it will bend stuff, and may make any other primary caster quite jealous/irritated by the houserule.

[Fayd]

Well given that multiclassing is a variant rule, I’d discuss it with the party if it comes up. I’ll think on the save issue, thanks for pointing that out. I’ll make sure to discuss it with other primary casters. Communication is key!

[rbstr]

First: Yeah, go ahead that's fine.
Second: I probably wouldn't. Extra spells known doesn't really add power but it does give them more versatility. This basically goes for every casting class. If you give warlock extra spells you probably need to do it for all casters...and that's a ton of extra spells in the warlock's case.
Maybe let them have one at each level for free, if you feel like it's a good idea?

Plus...that kind of ask always seems suspicious to me. Like the player is trying to do something with those spells that they aren't saying outright.

[Fayd]

Oh to clarify: these thoughts are coming first from me, the DM, not from the player themselves. I’ve had warlocks in parties before and they seemed ... limited. Might have been the game itself but...

[Tiadoppler]

I’ve had warlocks in parties before and they seemed ... limited.

That's true, but that's on purpose. Warlocks have lots of at-will power, and options for extra at-will abilities from their Invocations and Short Rest spell slot recovery. Those are things that other casters don't get.

They are not utility casters by default. They make relatively poor utility casters because they have fewer options than a Wizard, Cleric or Druid.


If your player wants to be an Intelligence based utility caster with low Charisma and lots of different spell options, they might want to reconsider the Wizard class.

[Kane0]

I already offer both of these in my games.

INT warlocks works a charm, just dont forget to also change the saving throw prof and agonising blast.

I allow one of the two patron bonus spells of each spell level, chosen by the player and can be swapped on each level up if they like. Works well for my table, but do note that I also have some significant sorcerer changes.

[Honest Tiefling]

If the player wants to play a bookish character and can roleplay it well enough...Who cares? Warlocks already have a strong argument to be intelligence-based neeeeeerds instead of charisma casters.

Second? Hrmmmm...Warlocks aren't usually bad as long as your group does short rests as far as I know. (I do not personally play charisma casters). However, what if the character got patron spells for free...But you, as the DM, chose the spells? Load them up with buffs, healing, and utility and I doubt the party will care. I assume that you don't know if you will have a support caster or healer yet, but do you have any guesses based on past behavior from your group?

Also, how decent is the player at actually playing the game? That should also be a factor.

[Davrix]

The first option is fine as long as there not trying to min-max a multiclass build. If its pure RP all the power to him. But I would keep the save the same

As for the second? Mmmm might be a little to much maybe instead find out what pact they are going to choose and look at the list of extra spells they get and tact on 1 extra spell (your choice as the DM) to that list to help augment their theme and give them a little more to work with.

And if your party winds up not taking many short rests consider the rule we use at my table for a warlock. Which lets him convert his HD into one extra spell slot once per short rest.

Example

If the warlock has a lv 3 spell slot he has to spend 3 HD to create his bonus spell slot. Or 5 HD for a lv 5 spell slot and so forth.

[Nifft]

Second: add patron spells to spells known for free. This is what I think may throw off the balance. But given how few spells/rest warlocks hey I don’t foresee it causing too many problems. Your way won't throw off the game that much. Patron spells aren't game-breaking. It might make Sorcerers and Rangers look at the warlock with undisguised envy.

I've been thinking about giving half of the Patron spells, and you pick which half when you complete a long rest. (So they'd get a bonus of +5 spells known by level 9, instead of +10 spells known, but they could choose which 5 every day.)

I'm considering doing the same for Cleric domain spells, too.

[th3g0dc0mp13x]

Hey y’all. I’m wondering if two changes I am contemplating allowing for a warlock pc in an upcoming game are going to not throw off balance too badly. (Kobold Warlock, Celestial patron; don’t know the rest of the party, this was the first declaration. All Kobolds though)

First: if the player wants, sub Int for Cha for spellcasting/invocation DCs. I don’t think this is a big deal, all things considered and if they want to be bookish I say let them.

Second: add patron spells to spells known for free. This is what I think may throw off the balance. But given how few spells/rest warlocks hey I don’t foresee it causing too many problems.

Thoughts?

The first option should be great since Intelligence is a dump stat for a lot of classes. Gets rid of Bard, Paladin, and Sorcerer shenanigans while opening Wizard shenanigans.

The second option is actually already happening with my group, Though this is primarily because my DM is new and the player hasn't used the class before. It doesn't seem to have broken anything but it gives him some more versatility.

[Daithi]

I like playing warlocks, but the key is to expect to be firing a lot of Eldritch Blast. They don't have the spell slots of other casters. However, they do get some cool Invocations, which are often just 'at will' spells. With Mask of Many Faces they can play a magical Arya Stark from Game of Thrones. Or they can go the turn off the lights and kill all the blind guys route. Or they can go with Eldritch Spear and become the long range sniper in the group. I never felt they were under powered.