Would Detect Thoughts at will be too good as an Invocation?

[Segev]

I was looking at the Telepathic feat, and noting how Awakened Mind - even with the restriction that it's outgoing only - is superior (as it probably should be, being a subclass feature) in that it works regardless of languages. Interestingly, Telepathic is 60 ft. range, though, vs. Awakened Mind's 30 ft. You could theoretically have both, and be able to talk to anything within 30 ft. and only those which you pick a language they know to think at within 60.

Telepathic also gives you detect thoughts, but not at will. You can cast it once with no slot nor components, then need a long rest to recover it. You also know it to cast with normal 2nd level spell slots, but it says nothing about not needing components then, weirdly enough considering its source being a feat that is all about being telepathic (not a spellcaster).

Would some sort of Improved Awakened Mind Invocation that let you cast detect thoughts at will, possibly without components, be overpowered? What if it also boosted your range on Awakened Mind to 60 ft.?

[OldTrees1]

A Paladin in my current campaign has a Helm of Telepathy which gives Detect Thoughts at will.

They have made very good use of it.

Detect Thoughts at will would be a fine invocation. Maybe even a bit weak. I think it would be fine boosting Awakened Mind to 60ft as a bonus.

[Segev]

A Paladin in my current campaign has a Helm of Telepathy which gives Detect Thoughts at will.

They have made very good use of it.

Detect Thoughts at will would be a fine invocation. Maybe even a bit weak. I think it would be fine boosting Awakened Mind to 60ft as a bonus.

Maybe boost detect thoughts to match the 60 ft. range, too, then? Or is that getting too strong?

[MrStabby]

I would be careful with this - not in terms of raw power but for fun.

My principle is that everyone gets to play. If an intervention lets someone dominate an area of play or mean that the effective contributions of other party members are not needed, then it is a bad thing.

I think that this may cross the line from "a cool thing to do to contribute" to "other PCs stand back whilst I solve this problem by myself". The combination of this as an invocation and being on a charisma focussed class could lead to one player basically dominating the social side of the game.

It is worth noting that this isn't good for that player either - they invest in one part of the game but the other players don't want that type of encounter any more and ratle through it or avoid those sessiosns.

[Eldariel]

I would be careful with this - not in terms of raw power but for fun.

My principle is that everyone gets to play. If an intervention lets someone dominate an area of play or mean that the effective contributions of other party members are not needed, then it is a bad thing.

I think that this may cross the line from "a cool thing to do to contribute" to "other PCs stand back whilst I solve this problem by myself". The combination of this as an invocation and being on a charisma focussed class could lead to one player basically dominating the social side of the game.

It is worth noting that this isn't good for that player either - they invest in one part of the game but the other players don't want that type of encounter any more and ratle through it or avoid those sessiosns.

My experience is that Detect Thoughts is not really that problematic. It's much more convenient to have someone else be asking the questions and directing the target's thoughts while the Thought Detector focuses on acquiring information in the back. Otherwise there's a risk of them giving themselves away as they're reading and talking at the same time (it's easy to say something related to something surprising you read even though it's not been said). Similarly, if you try to invade their mind, it's much better that the invader be further away and not in plain sight. In short, I think it's a good spell for letting multiple people take part in a social "datamining" encounter.

[Segev]

My experience is that Detect Thoughts is not really that problematic. It's much more convenient to have someone else be asking the questions and directing the target's thoughts while the Thought Detector focuses on acquiring information in the back. Otherwise there's a risk of them giving themselves away as they're reading and talking at the same time (it's easy to say something related to something surprising you read even though it's not been said). Similarly, if you try to invade their mind, it's much better that the invader be further away and not in plain sight. In short, I think it's a good spell for letting multiple people take part in a social "datamining" encounter.

That's interesting, and a good point.

I had figured Telepathic gave detect thoughts to permit the return-communication reciprocating from thinking at people, myself, but with only one casting per day, it's kind-of a weak way to go about it.

[OldTrees1]

Maybe boost detect thoughts to match the 60 ft. range, too, then? Or is that getting too strong?

I would leave detect thoughts at 30ft. There are pros and cons to extending the range. Sometimes the shorter range is beneficial.

[Contrast]

I think my inclination would be to lock it behind a slightly higher level cap - 9 or 15 are the usual levels I think so 9 maybe?

[Valmark]

I would leave detect thoughts at 30ft. There are pros and cons to extending the range. Sometimes the shorter range is beneficial.

What's the cons?

[OldTrees1]

What's the cons?


You can also use this spell to detect the presence of thinking creatures you can't see. When you cast the spell or as your action during the Duration, you can Search for thoughts within 30 feet of you. The spell can penetrate barriers, but 2 feet of rock, 2 inches of any metal other than lead, or a thin sheet of lead blocks you. You can't detect a creature with an Intelligence of 3 or lower or one that doesn't speak any language.

What if you are trying to locate that mind? Or use it as a scan for nearby minds. The greater the range the greater the noise.

Find Traps is an example of a spell with too long a range for its effect. While it does cap it at line of sight, there are many cases (anything besides a closet) where the lack of precision means you can't pinpoint.

[Valmark]

What if you are trying to locate that mind? Or use it as a scan for nearby minds. The greater the range the greater the noise.

Find Traps is an example of a spell with too long a range for its effect. While it does cap it at line of sight, there are many cases (anything besides a closet) where the lack of precision means you can't pinpoint.

And why would the 'noise' be a problem? Find Traps has a clause that stops you from knowing where is the trap (making it basically useless even in a 5x10 room) but Detect Thoughts has no such clause.

[OldTrees1]

And why would the 'noise' be a problem? Find Traps has a clause that stops you from knowing where is the trap (making it basically useless even in a 5x10 room) but Detect Thoughts has no such clause.


Considering you are detecting presence (and contents) of thoughts rather than locations, it has the same limitation. It does not grant you Mindsight. It is not saying "there are thoughts 3ft ahead and 5ft to your left". So if you want to detect the location, the shorter range makes it easier.

Also remember it takes a full 2ft of stone to block detect thoughts. If you are inside an increased range might start detecting throughs in a different area of the building. That makes it harder to use it to scope out the next room.

A scalpel and a greatsword have their own uses. But it is easier to do surgery with a scalpel

So pros and cons.

[diplomancer]

I think my inclination would be to lock it behind a slightly higher level cap - 9 or 15 are the usual levels I think so 9 maybe?

Yeah, I have the same feeling that some (high; 9 or 12) level cap is appropriate.

[Valmark]

Considering you are detecting presence (and contents) of thoughts rather than locations, it has the same limitation. It does not grant you Mindsight. It is not saying "there are thoughts 3ft ahead and 5ft to your left". So if you want to detect the location, the shorter range makes it easier.

Also remember it takes a full 2ft of stone to block detect thoughts. If you are inside an increased range might start detecting throughs in a different area of the building. That makes it harder to use it to scope out the next room.

A scalpel and a greatsword have their own uses. But it is easier to do surgery with a scalpel

So pros and cons.

Uh, I see- I was considering it under my ruling, so it makes sense. I let Detect Thoughts tell you the location of a mind (or at least the direction thoughts are coming from) so it wouldn't be a con in my game. With that ruling it'd definitely could be one (note that Mindsight doesn't exist in 5e, so that comparison isn't actually relevant).

[Segev]

I think my inclination would be to lock it behind a slightly higher level cap - 9 or 15 are the usual levels I think so 9 maybe?

Why?

(I should probably point out that I think locking at-will jump behind level 9 is pretty lame, too, rendering the invocation almost not worth taking by the time you can get it.)

[diplomancer]

Why?

(I should probably point out that I think locking at-will jump behind level 9 is pretty lame, too, rendering the invocation almost not worth taking by the time you can get it.)

I might be persuaded to move Jump to 5th level; but the 2nd level spells that DO receive at-will casting as an invocation are either at 9th level (Levitate, and it's further restricted by being self only) or at 15th level (Alter Self)

[OldTrees1]

Uh, I see- I was considering it under my ruling, so it makes sense. I let Detect Thoughts tell you the location of a mind (or at least the direction thoughts are coming from) so it wouldn't be a con in my game. With that ruling it'd definitely could be one (note that Mindsight doesn't exist in 5e, so that comparison isn't actually relevant).

Oh, yes under that valid ruling then I see no significant cons to a longer range.

I used Mindsight as clarification, not evidence. Thank you for catching our rulings differed.

[Contrast]

Why?

(I should probably point out that I think locking at-will jump behind level 9 is pretty lame, too, rendering the invocation almost not worth taking by the time you can get it.)

The at will ability to cast a reasonably good 2nd level spell at level 2 before anyone even had access to level 2 spells at all yet would have me concerned.

I agree the Jump invocation isn't very good but I see at will mind reading as a much more useful ability than jumping more, that will come up more frequently and be more impactful when it does.

I could be convinced a lower level cap would be appropriate but I think some restriction is required *shrugs* there are a couple of Invocations restricted to 5th level but that still felt a bit too early for comfort to me. I think it's generally better to be cautious and buff if necessary than try and nerf something a player already has for homebrew.

[ZRN]

To my mind, the potential problem here isn't combat - it's how this would affect intra-party dynamics. Per the spell you can always briefly detect anyone's surface thoughts with no saving throw, right? So a player could constantly be pinging other party members about what they're thinking about. It would be tough for other PCs to keep secrets or even have private thoughts.

[OldTrees1]

The at will ability to cast a reasonably good 2nd level spell at level 2 before anyone even had access to level 2 spells at all yet would have me concerned.

I agree the Jump invocation isn't very good but I see at will mind reading as a much more useful ability than jumping more, that will come up more frequently and be more impactful when it does.

I could be convinced a lower level cap would be appropriate but I think some restriction is required *shrugs* there are a couple of Invocations restricted to 5th level but that still felt a bit too early for comfort to me. I think it's generally better to be cautious and buff if necessary than try and nerf something a player already has for homebrew.

Sometimes a static feature can be allowed before the flexible option gets it.

If you put a level limit on Detect Thoughts, I suggest 5th level. Personally I think it would be fine at 2nd.

For context: In the campaign I am currently running, someone found a Helm of Telepathy around 7th level IIRC. It would have been fine earlier. They make good use of it but it was not OP at that level.

That said, your instinct of "start weak, then buff" is a reasonable position.


To my mind, the potential problem here isn't combat - it's how this would affect intra-party dynamics. Per the spell you can always briefly detect anyone's surface thoughts with no saving throw, right? So a player could constantly be pinging other party members about what they're thinking about. It would be tough for other PCs to keep secrets or even have private thoughts.

Sounds like something easily solved OOC, but worth having that OOC conversation.

[micahaphone]

Personally I'd put it at 7th or 9th level invocation - it's an incredibly useful multitool of a spell to have always available.

[Segev]

Is this level gating considering the prerequisite of Awakened Mind? I know great Old One is often considered an underpowered Patron.

[diplomancer]

Is this level gating considering the prerequisite of Awakened Mind? I know great Old One is often considered an underpowered Patron.

What do you mean by prerequisite of Awakened Mind? Would this be an invocation only open to Great Old One Warlocks? Then I'd be against it on general principles. If you want to boost the Great Old One patron it would make more sense, to me, to give it for free as a subclass feature, probably alongside the level 10th feature; you block your thoughts, and you simultaneously learn to read other's thoughts at-will.

Furthermore, Detect Thoughts is not really comparable to Awakened Mind. It's a 2nd level spell; if you are going to make it an at-will thing, why not use the same level gating for the invocation that's used for another 2nd level spell like Levitate (i.e, 9th level)?

[Segev]

What do you mean by prerequisite of Awakened Mind? Would this be an invocation only open to Great Old One Warlocks? Then I'd be against it on general principles. If you want to boost the Great Old One patron it would make more sense, to me, to give it for free as a subclass feature, probably alongside the level 10th feature; you block your thoughts, and you simultaneously learn to read other's thoughts at-will.

Furthermore, Detect Thoughts is not really comparable to Awakened Mind. It's a 2nd level spell; if you are going to make it an at-will thing, why not use the same level that's used for another 2nd level spell like Levitate (i.e, 9th level)?

More comparing the combination to the Telepathic feat.

[diplomancer]

More comparing the combination to the Telepathic feat.

But don't you think it makes more sense to compare an invocation that gives an at-will, concentration, 2nd level spell (Levitation, Ascendant Step, 9th level), with another invocation that does the same thing, but with a different spell, like Detect Thoughts?

[Segev]

But don't you think it makes more sense to compare an invocation that gives an at-will, concentration, 2nd level spell (Levitation, Ascendant Step, 9th level), with another invocation that does the same thing, but with a different spell, like Detect Thoughts?

Not really, no; not when the effects are so wildly different. As somebody gave in an example elsewhere, an Invocation that gives shield at will is vastly different in terms of balance considerations than an Invocation that gives jump at will, which is also (obviously, given the level prerequisites, even if I think they're silly) vastly different than one that gives mage armor at will.

[OldTrees1]

Is this level gating considering the prerequisite of Awakened Mind? I know great Old One is often considered an underpowered Patron.

No. I don't think you should balance one area with another area.

I was going under the assumption that Awakened Mind was not a prerequisite despite there being a slight buff to Awakened Mind in it.


But don't you think it makes more sense to compare an invocation that gives an at-will, concentration, 2nd level spell (Levitation, Ascendant Step, 9th level), with another invocation that does the same thing, but with a different spell, like Detect Thoughts?

This is why I suggest level 5 as the maximum requirement.

I have seen this ability used very effectively in a campaign before 9th level, and I still say it should be allowed earlier. In general WotC is excessively harsh on these effects.

There is some variation based on the nature of the spell (as Segev mentions) and I think that works in favor of Detect Thoughts. There are other spells I would stick at higher level requirements.

[diplomancer]

Not really, no; not when the effects are so wildly different. As somebody gave in an example elsewhere, an Invocation that gives shield at will is vastly different in terms of balance considerations than an Invocation that gives jump at will, which is also (obviously, given the level prerequisites, even if I think they're silly) vastly different than one that gives mage armor at will.

If anything, that comparison favours Detect Thoughts; Detect Thoughts remains relevant all the way to 20th level; self-levitation at will, though fun and circumstantially useful, doesn't.

It's why my first instinct was to make it even higher than 9th level.

[Segev]

If anything, that comparison favours Detect Thoughts; Detect Thoughts remains relevant all the way to 20th level; self-levitation at will, though fun and circumstantially useful, doesn't.

It's why my first instinct was to make it even higher than 9th level.

Mage armor remains useful all the way to 20th level, too. Should it as an Invocation be restricted to 9th level or higher?

So does silent image at will.

[Vogie]

It probably wouldn't be "too good", but I know as a DM, it would be "too much work".

Otherworldly Leap and Ascendant Step are perfectly fine as at-will spells because they are situational. Tripling the jump distance is marginally useful at best, and hampered by other design aspects (basing jump on STR, no clear non-multi way to be a STR built warlock, capping at movement speed, et cetera); while At-will levitate on yourself is a combination of feather fall and spider climb... and plenty of "lawl I'm on the ceiling" moments.

Detect Thoughts only requires... anything to be around. Your allies, any hostiles... any creature or plant with an intelligence of 3 or higher that knows ANY language. That is a TON of potential **** you have to make up on the spot. I wouldn't say it couldn't be great, or even fun - the first session or two would be fantastic. Then it'd get annoying. Then frustrating. Then angering. Essentially, at-will detect thoughts is a crappy Tongues and Zone of Truth... at all times. Any type of Deception or intrigue would stop being fun incredibly fast.

If you want to give them the ability to do so as an invocation, sure. Just not an at-will one. Perhaps it'd be similar to learning a spell, where the 'lock can spend a spell slot to do so, but without the VS components (subtle detect magic). Or, if you want to invoke that 'straining to hear the voices' telepath trope, perhaps they can do so once per day for free, then spend hit dice and deal damage to themselves to hear it more.

[Segev]

It probably wouldn't be "too good", but I know as a DM, it would be "too much work".

Otherworldly Leap and Ascendant Step are perfectly fine as at-will spells because they are situational. Tripling the jump distance is marginally useful at best, and hampered by other design aspects (basing jump on STR, no clear non-multi way to be a STR built warlock, capping at movement speed, et cetera); while At-will levitate on yourself is a combination of feather fall and spider climb... and plenty of "lawl I'm on the ceiling" moments.

Detect Thoughts only requires... anything to be around. Your allies, any hostiles... any creature or plant with an intelligence of 3 or higher that knows ANY language. That is a TON of potential **** you have to make up on the spot. I wouldn't say it couldn't be great, or even fun - the first session or two would be fantastic. Then it'd get annoying. Then frustrating. Then angering. Essentially, at-will detect thoughts is a crappy Tongues and Zone of Truth... at all times. Any type of Deception or intrigue would stop being fun incredibly fast.

If you want to give them the ability to do so as an invocation, sure. Just not an at-will one. Perhaps it'd be similar to learning a spell, where the 'lock can spend a spell slot to do so, but without the VS components (subtle detect magic). Or, if you want to invoke that 'straining to hear the voices' telepath trope, perhaps they can do so once per day for free, then spend hit dice and deal damage to themselves to hear it more.

I feel the need to point out that a magic item already does this - the Helm of Telepathy.

And the "annoying" aspect of it can be handled by simply having the DM gives generalities when he doesn't have anything of particular interest. It's no different than giving the answer to the question of a player who asks, "What're people in the crowd talking about? I want to eavesdrop."

[diplomancer]

Mage armor remains useful all the way to 20th level, too. Should it as an Invocation be restricted to 9th level or higher?

So does silent image at will.

Self-Mage Armor is less useful to Warlocks than to Wizards and Sorcerers (and probably NOT useful at all at 20th level actually, because of magic armors) so that's already a balancing factor. The very long duration also makes it being "at-will" relatively unimportant; apart from abjurers, there would be little difference from casting it "at-will" or casting it once per day without using a spell slot

My 3rd level Warlock already gave up on Misty Visions because of the Concentration requirement, and probably won't pick it again, though I grant it WAS useful on level 2.

I gave my reasons why it should be an at least level 9 invocation (i.e, that's the lowest level of an invocation that gives at-will access to a level 2 spell that's actually less generally useful than detect thoughts.) But it's your invocation and your houserule. Do as you wish.

[Vogie]

I feel the need to point out that a magic item already does this - the Helm of Telepathy.

And the "annoying" aspect of it can be handled by simply having the DM gives generalities when he doesn't have anything of particular interest. It's no different than giving the answer to the question of a player who asks, "What're people in the crowd talking about? I want to eavesdrop."

Then I'll feel the need to point out that the Helm of Telepathy costs resources - one of a limited number of Attunement slots (3 for non-artificers). It also has a static DC, not one that would scale with the wearer's ability scores.

So an At-will Detect thoughts that DOES scale with ability scores and proficiency scaling, that only takes one of 2-8 invocation slots, is QUITE different.

It's like you are arguing that the Winged Boots are the same as a Broom of Flying because they're both "major tier uncommon wonderous items that let you fly". It's true, sure, but the boots need attunement, have a set amount of use, and only give you a speed equal to your walking speed... while the broom has neither of the first two and its own set flying speed of 50 ft. They're the same... except they're really, really not.

[Contrast]

The Broom of Flying and Winged Boots are actually quite good examples of why I don't think the Helm of Telepathy argument quite flies. ohoho

The Fly spell comes online at level 5 and is limited by concentration and only lasts 10 minutes, whereas the magic items provide almost unlimited concentrationless flight for most purposes. Yet despite these magic items and spell potentially coming online at the end of T1, sorcerers have to wait until level 14 before they get unlimited concentrationless flight as a class feature - and its still considered a pretty good feature.

I play in a campaign where we've got hold of an Amulet of the Planes. Its basically infinite Planeshift (and infinite teleport if you're prepared to do a bit of plane hopping). There's a risk but given we can stack bardic inspiration, Guidance and Enhance Ability we can now effectively teleport wherever we want, whenever we want. Has it been a problem? No. Do I think that would be a bad idea as a class feature? Yes. Do I think this would be a very bad idea as a class feature at level 2? Defintely yes.

[diplomancer]

The Broom of Flying and Winged Boots are actually quite good examples of why I don't think the Helm of Telepathy argument quite flies. ohoho

The Fly spell comes online at level 5 and is limited by concentration and only lasts 10 minutes, whereas the magic items provide almost unlimited concentrationless flight for most purposes. Yet despite these magic items and spell potentially coming online at the end of T1, sorcerers have to wait until level 14 before they get unlimited concentrationless flight as a class feature - and its still considered a pretty good feature.

I play in a campaign where we've got hold of an Amulet of the Planes. Its basically infinite Planeshift (and infinite teleport if you're prepared to do a bit of plane hopping). There's a risk but given we can stack bardic inspiration, Guidance and Enhance Ability we can now effectively teleport wherever we want, whenever we want. Has it been a problem? No. Do I think that would be a bad idea as a class feature? Yes. Do I think this would be a very bad idea as a class feature at level 2? Defintely yes.

Yeah, magic items are both:
1- not balanced at all, and;
2- entirely up to the DM.

The argument "there's a magic item of rarity tier X that does Y, therefore Y is balanced for tier X" really doesn't fly.

[OldTrees1]

Then I'll feel the need to point out that the Helm of Telepathy costs resources - one of a limited number of Attunement slots (3 for non-artificers). It also has a static DC, not one that would scale with the wearer's ability scores.

So an At-will Detect thoughts that DOES scale with ability scores and proficiency scaling, that only takes one of 2-8 invocation slots, is QUITE different.

It's like you are arguing that the Winged Boots are the same as a Broom of Flying because they're both "major tier uncommon wonderous items that let you fly". It's true, sure, but the boots need attunement, have a set amount of use, and only give you a speed equal to your walking speed... while the broom has neither of the first two and its own set flying speed of 50 ft. They're the same... except they're really, really not.

I was the one that brought up Helm of Telepathy. Let's me refresh the context:

In the campaign I am currently running a PC (a paladin) got a Helm of Telepathy around 7th level. They have made good use of the effect. However my judgement from seeing it in action was that it would be fine, if a bit weak, as an invocation.

You are right that it costs a different resource. In this case the attunement slot cost the Paladin less than an invocation would.
You are right that the DC is static for the Helm and scales for the spell. However many uses bypass the DC.

The argument is: "I happened to DM while a PC happened playtested something comparable at 7th level. It ended up being a little weaker than my expectations for an invocation. Upon reflection it would have been fine during Tier 1 but it could have a lvl 5 prereq"


The argument "there's a magic item of rarity tier X that does Y, therefore Y is balanced for tier X" really doesn't fly.

What about the argument "I playtested something comparable and it was balanced, so this is likely to be fine"?

[diplomancer]

I was the one that brought up Helm of Telepathy. Let's me refresh the context:

In the campaign I am currently running a PC (a paladin) got a Helm of Telepathy around 7th level. They have made good use of the effect. However my judgement from seeing it in action was that it would be fine, if a bit weak, as an invocation.

You are right that it costs a different resource. In this case the attunement slot cost the Paladin less than an invocation would.
You are right that the DC is static for the Helm and scales for the spell. However many uses bypass the DC.

The argument is: "I happened to DM while a PC happened playtested something comparable at 7th level. It ended up being a little weaker than my expectations for an invocation. Upon reflection it would have been fine during Tier 1 but it could have a lvl 5 prereq"



What about the argument "I playtested something comparable and it was balanced, so this is likely to be fine"?

I'd first point out that level 7th is quite close to level 9th, the level-gating I've suggested. I'd continue by saying that "it worked out for my group" is more of a data point than an argument. Finally, I'd say that the utility of this item/invocation is heavily influenced by how the group plays (or, even more, how the player with the item/invocation uses it)

As a counter-example, let's use the broom of flying; non-concentration flight should be very powerful, right? What if the campaign is mostly a dungeon-crawling campaign with low ceilings? Then it's not much more than an increase in movement speed. Useful, for sure, but not really breaking anything. If someone, after playing such a campaign, said "at-will self Fly at 5th level doesn't break anything, I've played with someone that had a broom of flying and it was alright", we all agree that this would not be a good argument, right?

[OldTrees1]

I'd first point out that level 7th is quite close to level 9th, the level-gating I've suggested.
Indeed. It is also quite close to 5th. And the campaign started at 1st so I could somewhat extrapolate backwards too. That is why I have never said you were wrong, just said I think it could be earlier without issue (and then suggest 5th instead of my instinct of 2nd or yours of 9th)


I'd continue by saying that "it worked out for my group" is more of a data point than an argument. Finally, I'd say that the utility of this item/invocation is heavily influenced by how the group plays (or, even more, how the player with the item/invocation uses it)
Yes, it is more a few data points (plural because the campaign was long) than an argument. Just like an ivory tower theory is more of an argument than a reality. The playtest is evidence rather than a proof.

That is why I mentioned that they made good use out of it. It was useful to read minds, locate minds, communicate telepathically. Yet that "good use" seemed balanced with the power I would expect from an invocation, and would not have been an issue at 5th level (or earlier?).



As a counter-example, let's use the broom of flying; non-concentration flight should be very powerful, right? What if the campaign is mostly a dungeon-crawling campaign with low ceilings? Then it's not much more than an increase in movement speed. Useful, for sure, but not really breaking anything.

In s dungeon crawling campaign with low ceilings and too few of the type of traps where flight would be relevant? I would not say they "used it to good effect" to describe their use of the broom of flying in that campaign. If my example had been similarly limited, I would not have mentioned it.

Playtest + used to good effect + was alright => evidence something comparable might be fine.
Playtest + used to poor effect + was alright => evidence that in similarly restricted campaigns, a comparable effect might be fine. Not evidence about the general case. Speak with your GM.

[solidork]

It hasn't been brought up yet, but is there any consideration for giving it a limitation like "once a target saves against this, they're immune for 24 hours"?

You could make it require Pact of the Tome and cause the thoughts to appear as words or images in the book, essentially giving it a 3rd level requirement. Or give it a 5th level requirement.

[OldTrees1]

It hasn't been brought up yet, but is there any consideration for giving it a limitation like "once a target saves against this, they're immune for 24 hours"?

That sounds like a fine limitation for an at will ability. Especially since the save is only for the deeper dive.

[Vogie]

Ah, the good ol' "the plural of anecdote is data" argument. I love the internet.

Does it need to be limited? Yes. That's been the argument. It's probably fine keeping with the "requires level 15" to keep it in line with other warlock invocations of the same caliber (Shroud of Shadow and Master of Myriad Forms) as they have the same qualities:

Non-situational
concentration
2nd level
not-movement related


You could argue, certainly that the SoS, MoMF, Ascendant Step and Otherworldly Leap have a level requirement that is too high - that's fine, but a different argument.


The argument "there's a magic item of rarity tier X that does Y, therefore Y is balanced for tier X" really doesn't fly.

I chose those two specifically because they do, in fact, fly. Literally.

[OldTrees1]

Ah, the good ol' "the plural of anecdote is data" argument. I love the internet.

Playtesting is how you get data points. Multiple data points. You can theorycraft a hypothesis from inside the ivory tower, but then you can go out and gather empirical evidence by playtesting. I am not claiming the sample size of 1 campaign is large (on the contrary, it is small), but it is greater than the sample size of 0 playtesting.

Hypothesis -> Falsification test -> Analyze -> Replication studies -> Repeat replication studies -> etc

PS: And it can catch things like the difference between Detect Thoughts and Invisibility at will.

[diplomancer]

Ah, the good ol' "the plural of anecdote is data" argument. I love the internet.

Does it need to be limited? Yes. That's been the argument. It's probably fine keeping with the "requires level 15" to keep it in line with other warlock invocations of the same caliber (Shroud of Shadow and Master of Myriad Forms) as they have the same qualities:

Non-situational
concentration
2nd level
not-movement related


You could argue, certainly that the SoS, MoMF, Ascendant Step and Otherworldly Leap have a level requirement that is too high - that's fine, but a different argument.

Exactly; if one insists on having a low level limit for this homebrew ability, at least be consistent and also homebrew new level limits for those other abilities. I've mentioned before how I could be persuaded to bring down Otherworldly leap to 5th level; it still wouldn't be too powerful, but it would be flavorful and fun in more frequent situations.

[Kane0]

I'd put at-will Detect Thoughts at a level 7 or 9 requirement as an Invocation, fits next to Ghostly Gaze and Whispers of the Grave.

[Segev]

Exactly; if one insists on having a low level limit for this homebrew ability, at least be consistent and also homebrew new level limits for those other abilities. I've mentioned before how I could be persuaded to bring down Otherworldly leap to 5th level; it still wouldn't be too powerful, but it would be flavorful and fun in more frequent situations.

Honestly, I'd put Otherworldly Leap as having no prerequisite, except that it MIGHT be overpowered via Eldritch Adept. (I'm not sure it would be, but I could see it.) Either that, or make Otherworldly Leap - with its 9th level prerequisite - allow a 1/round jump that doesn't cost movement, in addition to letting you cast jump at will.