New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    The City of Presidents
    Gender
    Male

    Default Rate my house rules!

    Finally wrote up my houserules! Let me know what you think:

    Subclass Changes

    Circle of the Moon
    Circle Forms


    The rites of your circle grant you the ability to transform into more dangerous animal forms. Starting at 2nd level, you can use your Wild Shape to transform into a beast with a challenge rating as high as 1/2. (you ignore the Max. CR column of the Beast Shapes table, but must abide by the other limitations there). Starting at 4th level, the rating can be high as 1.

    Starting at 6th level, you can transform into a beast with a challenge rating as high as your druid level divided by 3, rounded down.

    Hexblade Patron


    Is now called Shadowfell patron, and has nothing to do with sentient weapons. Instead, your patron is a mysterious entity from the Shadowfell. Hex Warrior is removed from the subclass features, and the Expanded Spells is now as follows:
    1st. Dissonant Whispers, Fog Cloud
    2nd. Blur, Silence
    3rd . Blink, Life Transference
    4th. Compulsion, Phantasmal Killer
    5th. Cone of Cold, Mislead

    Pact of the Blade

    You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it (see chapter 5 for weapon options). You are proficient with it while you wield it, and when you attack with that weapon, you can use your Charisma modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, for the attack and damage rolls. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.

    +1 Weapons/Armor

    Due to the low magic nature of the world of Silverpeak, magical items are a bit harder to find than other worlds. However, +1 weapons and armor can be purchased from expert craftsmen. The +1 here is not magical (though it is considered magical for the purposes of resistance), but represents the exquisite skill in crafting the finest materials. You must find a craftsmen capable of creating these items, and pay a minimum of 1,000 gp +2x the base item price to commission it.

    Knocking an Enemy Unconscious/Non-lethal Damage

    A character may decide to knock an enemy unconscious if they make a melee attack with a weapon that deals bludgeoning damage. If instead the weapon deals slashing or piercing damage, the attack roll must be made with disadvantage.

    If the damage dealt this way reduces the target to 0 hit points, they are unconscious but considered stable, and regain one hit point and become conscious in 1d4 hours. If the total damage exceeds their hit point maximum, they make death saving throws at the beginning of each of their turns.

    Ranged attacks may not be made nonlethally unless they deal bludgeoning damage, in which case the attacker makes the roll with disadvantage.

    No magical damage from spells or spell effects can be made nonlethal.

    Firing into Melee

    If a you target a creature with a ranged attack, and another creature that is not incapacitated and of the same size is adjacent to it and between you and your target, the target is considered to have half cover.


    Flanking


    If a creature has two hostile creatures on opposite sides of it, it is considered flanked. If flanked, all melee attack rolls against the creature get +2 added to their attack rolls.

    If a creature is huge or larger, it cannot be flanked, nor can it benefit from flanking an enemy.

    Resurrection Rules
    (Courtesy Matt Mercer, with one additional rule by me: Revivify confers a level of exhaustion when successful)

    Three party members have the potential to gain access to revival magic in this campaign. Though it may never come up, I'm putting these rules in place for resurrection attempts.

    If a character is dead, and a resurrection is attempted by a spell or spell effect with longer than a 1 action casting time, a Resurrection Challenge is initiated. Up to 3 members of the adventuring party can offer to contribute to the ritual via a Contribution Skill Check. The DM asks them each to make a skill check based on their form of contribution, with the DC of the check adjusting to how helpful/impactful the DM feels the contribution would be.

    For example, praying to the god of the devout, fallen character may require an Intelligence (Religion) check at an easy to medium difficulty, where loudly demanding the soul of the fallen to return from the aether may require a Charisma (Intimidation) check at a very hard or nearly impossible difficulty. Advantage and disadvantage can apply here based on how perfect, or off base, the contribution offered is.

    After all contributions are completed, the DM then rolls a single, final Resurrection success check with no modifier. The base DC for the final resurrection check is 10, increasing by 1 for each previous successful resurrection the character has undergone (signifying the slow erosion of the soul’s connection to this world). For each successful contribution skill check, this DC is decreased by 2, whereas each failed contribution skill check increases the DC by 1.

    Upon a successful resurrection check, the player’s soul (should it be willing) will be returned to the body, and the ritual succeeded. On a failed check, the soul does not return and the character is lost.

    Only the strongest of magical incantations can bypass this resurrection challenge, in the form of the True Resurrection or Wish spells. These spells can also restore a character to life who was lost due to a failed resurrection ritual.

    If a spell with a casting time of 1 action is used to attempt to restore life (via the Revivify spell or similar effects), no contribution skill checks are allowed. The character casting the spell makes a Rapid Resurrection check, rolling a d20 and adding their spellcasting ability modifier. The DC is 10, increasing by 1 for each previous successful resurrection the character has undergone. On a failure, the character’s soul is not lost, but the resurrection fails and increases any future Resurrection checks’ DC by 1. No further attempts can be made to restore this character to life until a resurrection spell with a casting time higher than 1 action is attempted. On success, the now revived target takes a level of exhauston.

    Epic Critical/Epic Fumble

    (Fiddly, silly, and ultimately may never even come up in a campaign, but it's a sink for Luck rolls, a big boon for Champions, and my players think it's fun. I hate stupid effects that happen when you roll a 1, like snapping your bow string, but when you roll two natural 1's it just feels like something disastrous should happen.)

    If you make a roll with advantage or use a luck point on a critical success and roll two critical successes, the Gods have favored you in this moment, and something spectacular happens at the DM's discretion.
    However, if you make a roll with disadvantage and roll two natural 1's, roll a second 1 with the halfling's luck feature, or roll a natural 1 on a Luck roll after rolling a natural 1, the God's have seen fit to punish you in a particularly tragic manner, at the DM's discretion.

    Feat Tweaks

    Heavy Armor Master

    Prerequisites: Proficiency with heavy armor

    You can use your armor to deflect strikes that would kill others. You gain the following benefits:

    • Increase your Strength score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
    • While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take is reduced by a number equal to your proficiency bonus.



    Warlock Class Changes


    The eldritch blast cantrip is removed from the Warlock spell list. Instead, they gain the following feature at level 1:

    Eldritch Blast

    You can use an action on your turn to channel energy directly from your patron to protect yourself. This magical energy materializes as powerful rays the shoot forward from your hand or arcane focus. Make a ranged spell attack against any creature you can see within 120 feet. On a hit, the target takes 1d10 of a damage type determined by your patron, consult the table below. When you reach level 5 in this class, you can conjure an additional ray with this blast, which can target another creature in range or the same target. You gain an additional ray at 11th and again at 17th level.

    • Archfey Patron: Lightning Damage
    • Celestial Patron: Radiant Damage
    • Fiend Patron: Fire Damage
    • Great Old One Patron: Psychic Damage
    • Shadowfell Patron: Necrotic damage
    • Undying Patron: Cold Damage



    Eldritch Invocation Alterations

    • Any invocation that allows a warlock to cast a spell by using a spell slot once per long rest can now cast said spell without expending a spell slot. They still must take a long rest before casting the spell again.
    • Agonizing blast now has the prerequisite of 3rd level.
    • Any invocation that applies additional effects to a target upon hitting them with eldritch blast now specify the effect only occurs once per target, this includes Agonizing Blast.
    • Grasp of Hadar and Repelling Blast now specify the creature must be Large or smaller.


    Additional Eldritch Invocations:


    From the new UA: Chain Master's fury, Eldritch Armor, Far Scribe, Gift of the Protectors, Investment of the Chain Master
    Last edited by KOLE; 2020-05-01 at 03:25 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by heavyfuel View Post
    Even if they don't have a Reaction, they can now talk through "brief utterances", which certainly includes stuff like "Help!", "Assassin!!", or "AAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRRRGGGGG!!!!!"

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    What about the Undying patron?
    Also wouldn't poison be better for Archfey?
    Other than that, they seem pretty cool. I'd probably only use a few of them personally though.
    6/10
    Last edited by TigerT20; 2020-04-30 at 03:24 PM.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    The City of Presidents
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by TigerT20 View Post
    What about the Undying patron?
    Also wouldn't poison be better for Archfey?
    Other than that, they seem pretty cool. I'd probably only use a few of them personally though.
    6/10
    Honestly, I completely forgot the Undying Existed. Necrotic, like the Shadowfell. Archfey gets lightening because several Fey creatures have lightning spells and it feels fitting considering they're more connected to nature than other Patrons, also because Poison is so commonly resisted. I wanted it to be more interesting and more resisted than force, but not be a huge nerf.

    Which rules could you see yourself using?
    Last edited by KOLE; 2020-04-30 at 03:49 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by heavyfuel View Post
    Even if they don't have a Reaction, they can now talk through "brief utterances", which certainly includes stuff like "Help!", "Assassin!!", or "AAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRRRGGGGG!!!!!"

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Finally wrote up my houserules! Let me know what you think:
    Circle of the Moon
    Snip
    Looks fine.

    Hexblade Patron

    SNIP
    Needs something to replace the Hex warrior feature, even if it's just a ribbon. Maybe something related to the spectre you can summon? Wrathful smite should honestly be replaced by shield, as wrathful smite is no use to a character who's not going to melee. Also, I really liked the flavor of Hexblade

    Pact of the Blade
    SNIP
    Looks nice. Even if you didn't remove hex warrior I'd say that this is the natural move.

    +1 Weapons/Armor
    SNIP
    As someone who's playing with a near identical rule (we use the name masterwork for them, and they take 3x as long to make, and are 3x as expensive to make, and therefore are charged 5-8x as much) will you allow them to be enchanted? If not, I'd say your prices are reasonable, if so, it would probably be best to increase the cost. My character forged his own Masterwork shield, and got it enchanted, for a +4 shield in a very high magic campaign. It cost him a good deal of time and money however.

    Knocking an Enemy Unconscious/Non-lethal Damage
    SNIP
    Makes sense. It's rather funny that PC's are the only ones who get to benefit from death saves normally.
    Firing into Melee
    SNIP
    This rule irked me in previous editions, and it still annoys me. If your players are fine with it, sure, but I find it annoying.

    Flanking

    SNIP
    Does this replace the advantage, or add to it?
    Resurrection Rules
    SNIP
    Seems to be pretty good rules.
    Epic Critical/Epic Fumble
    SNIP
    RAF ftw.
    Feat Tweaks

    Heavy Armor Master

    SNIP
    Its definitely an improvement on a lackluster feat.

    Warlock Class Changes


    Eldritch Blast
    SNIP

    Eldritch Invocation Alterations

    SNIP
    Changing the damage types might add flavor, but also makes EB significantly weaker. Fire damage is commonly resisted, and HB and Undying warlocks can't EB vs undead, a staple of many campaigs. On top of that, you nerfed it further, by removing the majority of its damage. Warlocks rely on cantrips due to the low number of spell slots. Their spell list doesn't have the same flashy spells as sorcerers, bards and wizards. Taking away agonizing blast makes them the worst arcane caster, and makes pact of the blade the best option for actually dealing damage. In addition, it might be best to word it as "once per turn," as "once per target" means the warlock is totally useless against BBEG's, where it used to excel.

    If you really didn't want sorlocks, and that's what you were worried about, you had already taken care of that by making EB a feature. Its not a spell, and you don't need to worry about that.


    Additional Eldritch Invocations:

    SNIP
    I personally think Eldritch Armor from the new UA is adequate for the armor.

    So all in all, this homebrew has a few things borrowed from older editions, a few things that make it more fun, and makes me never want to play a blaster warlock.

    Was going to say 7/10 before, but since essentially an entire class was demolished, it's 4/10 at best.
    Last edited by WaroftheCrans; 2020-04-30 at 06:56 PM.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2016

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    • Agonizing blast now has the prerequisite of 3rd level.
    • Any invocation that applies additional effects to a target upon hitting them with eldritch blast now specify the effect only occurs once per target, this includes Agonizing Blast.
    I'm not really sure why you're messing with Agonising Blast. You made Eldritch Blast a class feature so people aren't going to be dipping warlock for decent ranged DPS with a two level dip anymore - straight warlock has never been overpowered, why do you think it needs a nerf?

    Edit - ninjad
    Last edited by Contrast; 2020-04-30 at 06:31 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2017

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    I'm totally fine with most of these changes, but I don't care for the changes to Eldritch Blast at all. Running in to an enemy with resistance or immunity to your Eldritch Blast type means your one safety net is worthless and you'd better hope you can do something useful with your two spell slots. Frankly, I don't think it needs to be changed from a force-based cantrip at all since you've already cut off the big Hexblade dip anyway. The Eldritch Blast Invocation changes (all good!) just serve to further reduce abuse of a Warlock dip. If someone wants to take Magic Initiate or something to pick up Eldritch Blast, it's frankly not that much better than Firebolt or Toll the Dead.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nidgit View Post
    I'm totally fine with most of these changes, but I don't care for the changes to Eldritch Blast at all. Running in to an enemy with resistance or immunity to your Eldritch Blast type means your one safety net is worthless and you'd better hope you can do something useful with your two spell slots. Frankly, I don't think it needs to be changed from a force-based cantrip at all since you've already cut off the big Hexblade dip anyway. The Eldritch Blast Invocation changes (all good!) just serve to further reduce abuse of a Warlock dip. If someone wants to take Magic Initiate or something to pick up Eldritch Blast, it's frankly not that much better than Firebolt or Toll the Dead.
    He made it a class feature that scales with warlock level, preventing dips, and then nerfed it further. You're entirely right, its not better than Firebolt or Toll the dead, its worse. Like you say, they had better hope they can do something better with 2 spell slots. It destroys the warlock class for all but pact of the blade (which is sub-optimal already)

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2020

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Sorlocks (NOTE: I don't make coffeelocks) are my favorite multiclass so you can bet I wouldn't be very happy playing under your houserules. The worst of it is the Eldritch Blast/Agonizing Blast changes. Many others have already delved deeper into why it's terrible so I don't feel that I need to.

    I also disagree with the ranged weapon & +1 weapon stuff because I disagree with any changes that negatively affect martials on principle. Unless it's Paladins only, I guess -- Aura of Protection needs nerfed hard (maybe make it a reaction ability to apply the bonus so it's 1/turn). Then again I always take Sharpshooter if playing a ranged martial so I guess the half cover doesn't matter as much? I still don't much like it. Martials should, without question, be doing more damage than casters, because generally that's all they can do. Making it harder to damage things that resist nonmagical weapons (by making those weapons harder to obtain) just makes the balance more skewed in favor of casters.

    Anything that nerfs Hexblade (specifically Hexblade, without touching other Warlock class features) is a plus, though. The rest is eh.

    4/10 for ruining my favorite multiclass and screwing Warlocks in general.
    Last edited by ArtIzon; 2020-04-30 at 09:40 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    The City of Presidents
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    This is exactly the critique I was hoping for! My players are either too nice or too Munchkin illiterate to read through the lines and see the real impact of these rules. I was hoping you guys would tear this apart!

    Quote Originally Posted by WaroftheCrans View Post
    Needs something to replace the Hex warrior feature, even if it's just a ribbon. Maybe something related to the spectre you can summon? Wrathful smite should honestly be replaced by shield, as wrathful smite is no use to a character who's not going to melee.
    All the other Warlock patrons with the exception of Celestial get only one feature at level 1 other than the Expanded Spell List. Hexblade's Curse is strong by itself. What makes the Shadowfell patron so special that it deserves more than everyone else? The only other pact that is an exception is the Celestial, which just gets two fluff cantrips.
    Also, I really liked the flavor of Hexblade
    You are literally the only person I've ever heard say that.

    As someone who's playing with a near identical rule (we use the name masterwork for them, and they take 3x as long to make, and are 3x as expensive to make, and therefore are charged 5-8x as much) will you allow them to be enchanted?
    Masterwork is a good name. This rule does not mean that +1 Weapons will never appear in loot, it's just an option for players with money and nothing to spend it on. To answer your question, the answer is basically no, but only because my campaign is low magic and normal enchantment is mostly impossible. I have still given them a lot of magical loot because they're badasses who explore dangerous places that most people are scared of.

    This rule irked me in previous editions, and it still annoys me. If your players are fine with it, sure, but I find it annoying.
    Fair enough! I've only played 5th so I assure this isn't any holdover. It's for versimillitude first of all, secondly I feel that spellcasters and ranged martials have a big advantage over melee martials, this serves to bridge the gap a little bit. But I'm also pretty generous in letting ranged characters move a couple squares in a direction to get a good angle so the target doesn't benefit, hence the "between you and the target" clause.
    Does this replace the advantage, or add to it?
    Instead of advantage! Advantage is so strong, +2 is a happy medium, and very intentionally only for melee to give melee martials another boon.

    RAF ftw.
    Exactly! It's only for fun.

    I personally think Eldritch Armor from the new UA is adequate for the armor.
    I might actually agree with you here. I didn't like that feature until I remembered it's a three level dip, making it expensive for multiclassing. I might just include that and cut my additions.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArtIzon View Post
    Sorlocks (NOTE: I don't make coffeelocks) are my favorite multiclass so you can bet I wouldn't be very happy playing under your houserules.
    Sorlocks are pure cheese, so I'm very happy to upset you.

    I also disagree with the ranged weapon & +1 weapon stuff because I disagree with any changes that negatively affect martials on principle. Unless it's Paladins only, I guess -- Aura of Protection needs nerfed hard (maybe make it a reaction ability to apply the bonus so it's 1/turn). Martials should, without question, be doing more damage than casters, because generally that's all they can do.
    A lot of good spells require ranged spell attacks, meaning this rule affects ranged martials and spellcasters equally, leaving only up-close martials untouched, which was my intent.

    Making it harder to damage things that resist nonmagical weapons (by making those weapons harder to obtain) just makes the balance more skewed in favor of casters.
    I am not keeping magical weapons from the party. This is just a way to get them easier by saving money.

    Unsurprisingly, my Warlock changes have been controversial! I'll make a blanket thesis on my decisions and then address some stuff individually.

    • I have actually played with an Archfey straight warlock that did not take EB. They were still a terrific addition to the party.
    • Additionally, by making EB a class feature, Warlock's gain an additional cantrip to spend on whatever they want to counteract immunities/resistances on their individual EB damage types.
    • I have played, played with, and run Warlocks as a DM. I am not convinced that they are suboptimal as a straight class.
    • I hate Eldritch Blast as a base ability. It allows a Warlock to beat most optimized martials in turn for turn damage and is a damage type that literally no one resists and only one monster is immune to. Just because their slots are short-rest based does not mean they are allowed a get-out-of-jail free card that triviliazes martial contribution to combat. Seriously. At level one they get a cantrip that allows them to equal a fighter that takes the Crossbow Expert feat and only attacks with a Heavy Crossbow for their entire career while also being a full caster. Sure, they're not technically a full caster, but they really are. I'm not okay with it.


    Changing the damage types might add flavor, but also makes EB significantly weaker.
    That was the intent.

    Fire damage is commonly resisted,
    A feature, not a bug. Fiend is a very strong patron, thus they get a damage type that's more commonly resisted.

    HB and Undying warlocks can't EB vs undead, a staple of many campaigs.
    This is actually a really good point that I hadn't considered. I'll revise this, I didn't realize how common Necrotic resistance is.

    Warlocks rely on cantrips due to the low number of spell slots. Their spell list doesn't have the same flashy spells as sorcerers, bards and wizards. Taking away agonizing blast makes them the worst arcane caster, and makes pact of the blade the best option for actually dealing damage. In addition, it might be best to word it as "once per turn," as "once per target" means the warlock is totally useless against BBEG's, where it used to excel.
    I don't buy it. If your DM runs an appropriate amount of encounter per short rest, the Warlock does not suffer for spell slots. If they do, either find a new DM or don't run these rules. I, as a DM, am generous with short rests, so our Celestial Warlock kicks some serious ass. Once per target is a feature, not a bug. AB allows Warlocks to be great at killing mobs but not Gods at single target DPR.
    Quote Originally Posted by heavyfuel View Post
    Even if they don't have a Reaction, they can now talk through "brief utterances", which certainly includes stuff like "Help!", "Assassin!!", or "AAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRRRGGGGG!!!!!"

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2016

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    I hate Eldritch Blast as a base ability. It allows a Warlock to beat most optimized martials in turn for turn damage and is a damage type that literally no one resists and only one monster is immune to. Just because their slots are short-rest based does not mean they are allowed a get-out-of-jail free card that triviliazes martial contribution to combat. Seriously. At level one they get a cantrip that allows them to equal a fighter that takes the Crossbow Expert feat and only attacks with a Heavy Crossbow for their entire career while also being a full caster. Sure, they're not technically a full caster, but they really are. I'm not okay with it.
    To be clear, a fighter with the Crossbow Expert feat shooting with a heavy crossbow is very low levels of optimisation. (edit - and I think the fighter would actually still do more damage given archery style unless the warlock started investing spell slots in Hex and that's without factoring in things like subclasses or action surging /edit).

    For context - my experience is that combats usually last between 3 and 5 rounds and warlocks typically need to spread their spell slots out so they're spending a spell slot every 1 or 2 fights (on the one hand sometimes warlocks will get caught out by casting utility spells between combats, on the other hand they can also sometimes sneak in more utility spells with no cost so I'll call that a wash). So they'll likely be cantriping about anywhere between 66% and 90% of their rounds in combat. This is much higher than I find for many other full spellcasters. I also personally generally find their spell list a little underwhelming comapred to some other classes as well.

    To understand your approach - are you saying that you find straight warlocks to be OP? Too powerful at both spellcasting and damage dealing?

    Would you say they are the most powerful class in the game? If so, that is very surprising to me and is not reflective of my experiences at the table. If not, why are you singling them out for nerfs?
    Last edited by Contrast; 2020-05-01 at 09:02 AM.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2020

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Red = you're flat-out wrong
    Blue = irrelevant
    Green = factually correct

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Sorlocks are pure cheese, so I'm very happy to upset you.
    There is no such thing as cheese, only good and bad strategy. Multiclasses like Sorlock exist to reward players who take the time to learn about the game's rules and mechanics. Whether or not that was the design intent is irrelevant. Not rewarding system knowledge is a laughable concept -- it's obvious that the person who puts 3-4 hours into optimizing their character deserves to have a better character than the one who spent 10 minutes. Same deal with RP/backstory -- put in more effort, get more plot involvement.

    Also, it doesn't technically upset me because I'm not playing at your table. The only thing that's changed is now I know I wouldn't if I had the option.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    I have actually played with an Archfey straight warlock that did not take EB. They were still a terrific addition to the party.
    This is campaign-dependent and needs qualification.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Additionally, by making EB a class feature, Warlock's gain an additional cantrip to spend on whatever they want to counteract immunities/resistances on their individual EB damage types.
    This is basically a slap in the face to Warlocks. "I'm taking one of your best options, but you can have a freebie to make you feel better!"

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    I have played, played with, and run Warlocks as a DM. I am not convinced that they are suboptimal as a straight class.
    This is strictly anecdotal. You have not otherwise justified this claim, and at least one portion of justification you might have provided is disproven by the next section.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    I hate Eldritch Blast as a base ability. It allows a Warlock to beat most optimized martials in turn for turn damage and is a damage type that literally no one resists and only one monster is immune to. Just because their slots are short-rest based does not mean they are allowed a get-out-of-jail free card that triviliazes martial contribution to combat. Seriously. At level one they get a cantrip that allows them to equal a fighter that takes the Crossbow Expert feat and only attacks with a Heavy Crossbow for their entire career while also being a full caster. Sure, they're not technically a full caster, but they really are. I'm not okay with it.
    ...No it doesn't.

    A warlock using Agonizing Blast and Hex will do 2d10+2d6+10 each round at 5th level. With an attack bonus of +8 against the average level 5 AC of 15, that's 19.1 DPR, or 25.415 with advantage.

    A fighter using a longbow with Sharpshooter will do 2d8+30 each round at 5th level. With an attack bonus of +5 (+2 from archery, -5 from sharpshooter) against the same AC, that's 21 DPR without advantage and 31 DPR with it. Before adding things like maneuvers, and ignoring the fact that the warlock needed to spend a spell slot on Hex to even be comparable.

    If we're assuming point buy rather than rolled stats, everything goes down a little, but the ratios are the same, and the fighter pulls further ahead at 6th level when they get another ASI.

    So...I suspect you have an experiential basis for your claim rather than a theoretical one, and it's probably based on somebody who doesn't know how to play martials very well. Martials need more versatility for sure -- but they aren't generally outdone in damage, at least not against single targets.

    Ultimately, you can do whatever you want. They're your house rules. I just figured I'd clarify some things.

    SOURCES:
    I'm using LudicSavant's DPR calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...#gid=151780215

    and my AC numbers are coming from here: https://rpgbot.net/dnd5/characters/f...ntal_math.html
    Last edited by ArtIzon; 2020-05-01 at 09:34 AM.
    http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html -- I feel this is required reading for everyone on the internet. Feel free to call me out on it if I violate any principles contained herein.
    If I quote your post and highlight colors: Green = this is factually correct. Blue = this is irrelevant to the discussion. Purple = I agree but with conceits. Red = Please fact-check this, it is wrong.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2016

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by ArtIzon View Post
    Not rewarding system knowledge is a laughable concept -- it's obvious that the person who puts 3-4 hours into optimizing their character deserves to have a better character than the one who spent 10 minutes. Same deal with RP/backstory -- put in more effort, get more plot involvement.
    Just to say the idea that a game system should reward a player with mechanical power for being willing to invest more time in a complicated character creation system is defintely not universally seen as a good thing. I would in fact say the fact that 5E sharply reduced the ability to do this from 3.5 is one of the things that helped its popularity boom.

    If someone told me an RPG I hadn't tried before had a character creation system that you could spend 10 mins on and make a rubbish character or 4 hours and make a good one, I would view that as being actively detrimental and would probably not be super keen to bother trying it out.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2020

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Purple = I sort of agree? I should put these colors in my signature.

    Quote Originally Posted by Contrast View Post
    Just to say the idea that a game system should reward a player with mechanical power for being willing to invest more time in a complicated character creation system is defintely not universally seen as a good thing. I would in fact say the fact that 5E sharply reduced the ability to do this from 3.5 is one of the things that helped its popularity boom.
    Well, to an extent. I think making it more accessible doesn't necessarily mean fully removing complex elements or the importance of player skill/knowledge, rather it means making those more complex elements optional when playing with people to whom they do not yet apply. It's more that it's easier to sit down and have fun with 5e with little prior experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by Contrast View Post
    If someone told me an RPG I hadn't tried before had a character creation system that you could spend 10 mins on and make a rubbish character or 4 hours and make a good one, I would view that as being actively detrimental and would probably not be super keen to bother trying it out.
    That is somewhat of a strawman, but I assume that is unintentional and to be fair I also didn't spend very much time qualifying what I meant. So I guess treat this more as me clarifying my perspective rather than saying you're wrong and why.

    1. It is very difficult to make a strictly "rubbish" character (i.e. one that cannot effectively contribute to the party) in 5e. I suspect we agree that this should be made difficult. We could go back and forth about Beastmaster or 4 Elements Monk (because I have seen a wide variety of takes on those topics) but generally I believe it is agreed that most build options are at least viable.

    2. I think we would also agree that the gap between an optimized character and an unoptimized one in 5e is not that large, except perhaps in the extreme example of Sorcadin, which has to be played fairly tactically to be effective until mid-high levels. 5e has many flaws but is generally a better-balanced game than 3.5.

    3. I do not think going back to the way 3.5 did things is a particularly good idea.

    I agree that having a rubbish character after 10 minutes and a powerful one after 4 hours is a bad thing. I am referring more to having a powerful character after 10 minutes and an even MORE powerful one after 4 hours (for example). Diminishing returns on that added power are to be expected -- I would be fine with a system where 10 minutes gets you an 8/10 character, and 4 hours gets you a 10/10 character. In fact, making it linear would be ridiculous. If the gap is too large, new players will be discouraged. If the gap is too small or nonexistent, there is no point in learning anything more about building characters.

    And yes, to an extent power is relative, but a character being effective is based on a comparison of the character to the campaign's challenges, not a character to other characters in the party or other characters that could possibly be created in the system.

    The short version is that the skill/knowledge floor for enjoying 5e is lower than 3.5, and that's a good thing. But I don't think that the skill/knowledge ceiling for getting more out of the game should reduced to the point where spending time learning the game's mechanics and learning about optimal multiclasses is pointless. I'm also not saying that's what you did or didn't say, just clarifying that it is part of my perspective.
    Last edited by ArtIzon; 2020-05-01 at 10:59 AM.
    http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html -- I feel this is required reading for everyone on the internet. Feel free to call me out on it if I violate any principles contained herein.
    If I quote your post and highlight colors: Green = this is factually correct. Blue = this is irrelevant to the discussion. Purple = I agree but with conceits. Red = Please fact-check this, it is wrong.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2016

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Circle of the Moon
    Circle Forms


    The rites of your circle grant you the ability to transform into more dangerous animal forms. Starting at 2nd level, you can use your Wild Shape to transform into a beast with a challenge rating as high as 1/2. (you ignore the Max. CR column of the Beast Shapes table, but must abide by the other limitations there). Starting at 4th level, the rating can be high as 1.

    Starting at 6th level, you can transform into a beast with a challenge rating as high as your druid level divided by 3, rounded down.
    This seems perfectly fine, nothing wrong with it here. It brings the Moon Druid more into line with the rest of the classes, and does so without hamstringing the entire class.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Hexblade Patron[/B]

    Is now called Shadowfell patron, and has nothing to do with sentient weapons. Instead, your patron is a mysterious entity from the Shadowfell. Hex Warrior is removed from the subclass features, and the Expanded Spells is now as follows:
    1st. Dissonant Whispers, Wrathful Smite
    2nd. Blur, Silence
    3rd . Blink, Life Transference
    4th. Compulsion, Phantasmal Killer
    5th. Cone of Cold, Mislead

    Pact of the Blade

    You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it (see chapter 5 for weapon options). You are proficient with it while you wield it, and when you attack with that weapon, you can use your Charisma modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, for the attack and damage rolls. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage.
    There's no reason to remove Hex Warrior. You can change it to where they just gain access to Medium Armor and Shields since you put the Charisma attack on Pact of the Blade, but Hexblades need Medium Armor and Shields. Mage Armor alone isn't enough to make a GISH class, they need some other way to increase AC or be able to get in and out of melee. I mean, take a look at the Bladesinger, a Wizard GISH. They gain a bonus to AC equal to their Int mod, meaning their AC maxes out at 20, and they have Shield to increase it to 25. And even then they're really frail. Or Valor Bard, they gain Medium Armor and Shields. That said, Pact of the Blade is perfect.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    +1 Weapons/Armor

    Due to the low magic nature of the world of Silverpeak, magical items are a bit harder to find than other worlds. However, +1 weapons and armor can be purchased from expert craftsmen. The +1 here is not magical (though it is considered magical for the purposes of resistance), but represents the exquisite skill in crafting the finest materials. You must find a craftsmen capable of creating these items, and pay a minimum of 1,000 gp +2x the base item price to commission it.
    This seems fine to me, no issue here.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Knocking an Enemy Unconscious/Non-lethal Damage

    A character may decide to knock an enemy unconscious if they make a melee attack with a weapon that deals bludgeoning damage. If instead the weapon deals slashing or piercing damage, the attack roll must be made with disadvantage.

    If the damage dealt this way reduces the target to 0 hit points, they are unconscious but considered stable, and regain one hit point and become conscious in 1d4 hours. If the total damage exceeds their hit point maximum, they make death saving throws at the beginning of each of their turns.

    Ranged attacks may not be made nonlethally unless they deal bludgeoning damage, in which case the attacker makes the roll with disadvantage.

    No magical damage from spells or spell effects can be made nonlethal.
    This also seems fine to me. If a player wants to play a character that doesn't kill, they'll need to put more work into it, which can be rewarding.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Firing into Melee

    If a you target a creature with a ranged attack, and another creature that is not incapacitated and of the same size is adjacent to it and between you and your target, the target is considered to have half cover.
    Might I make a suggestion? Something that I personally enjoy for ranged combat. If you target a creature with a ranged attack that is next to another creature that is not incapacitated and is within one size category of it, the target has half cover. Additionally, if the attacker rolls a 1, they must make an attack roll against the adjacent creature as if they fired at that creature. Sharpshooter removes the chance of hitting the adjacent creature. Having the chance to hit your ally is something that I really miss.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post

    Flanking


    If a creature has two hostile creatures on opposite sides of it, it is considered flanked. If flanked, all melee attack rolls against the creature get +2 added to their attack rolls.

    If a creature is huge or larger, it cannot be flanked, nor can it benefit from flanking an enemy.
    This seems ok...though I'm curious as to why Huge or larger creatures can't flank or be flanked. That seems a bit odd.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Resurrection Rules
    (Courtesy Matt Mercer, with one additional rule by me: Revivify confers a level of exhaustion when successful)

    Three party members have the potential to gain access to revival magic in this campaign. Though it may never come up, I'm putting these rules in place for resurrection attempts.

    If a character is dead, and a resurrection is attempted by a spell or spell effect with longer than a 1 action casting time, a Resurrection Challenge is initiated. Up to 3 members of the adventuring party can offer to contribute to the ritual via a Contribution Skill Check. The DM asks them each to make a skill check based on their form of contribution, with the DC of the check adjusting to how helpful/impactful the DM feels the contribution would be.

    For example, praying to the god of the devout, fallen character may require an Intelligence (Religion) check at an easy to medium difficulty, where loudly demanding the soul of the fallen to return from the aether may require a Charisma (Intimidation) check at a very hard or nearly impossible difficulty. Advantage and disadvantage can apply here based on how perfect, or off base, the contribution offered is.

    After all contributions are completed, the DM then rolls a single, final Resurrection success check with no modifier. The base DC for the final resurrection check is 10, increasing by 1 for each previous successful resurrection the character has undergone (signifying the slow erosion of the soul’s connection to this world). For each successful contribution skill check, this DC is decreased by 2, whereas each failed contribution skill check increases the DC by 1.

    Upon a successful resurrection check, the player’s soul (should it be willing) will be returned to the body, and the ritual succeeded. On a failed check, the soul does not return and the character is lost.

    Only the strongest of magical incantations can bypass this resurrection challenge, in the form of the True Resurrection or Wish spells. These spells can also restore a character to life who was lost due to a failed resurrection ritual.

    If a spell with a casting time of 1 action is used to attempt to restore life (via the Revivify spell or similar effects), no contribution skill checks are allowed. The character casting the spell makes a Rapid Resurrection check, rolling a d20 and adding their spellcasting ability modifier. The DC is 10, increasing by 1 for each previous successful resurrection the character has undergone. On a failure, the character’s soul is not lost, but the resurrection fails and increases any future Resurrection checks’ DC by 1. No further attempts can be made to restore this character to life until a resurrection spell with a casting time higher than 1 action is attempted. On success, the now revived target takes a level of exhauston.
    So, this is both good and bad. First off, the exhaustion is perfectly fine to me, that seems like a fair trade for being resurrected. It used to be that you suffered ability score penalties for being returned from the dead. That said, I think making a player have to make a random check followed by you making a d20 roll is far too much. I mean, I can see there needing to be a check to appeal to the Gods to resurrect someone, that seems fine to me, and given you allow other players to help with this check its fine, provided the check isn't absurdly high. But I would remove the random 1d20 check that you roll at the very end.

    If I were you, I'd have the DC to appeal to the Gods be between 16 and 20 for a medium check. If they succeed, they can bring the person back. Increase the DC by 1 for every time a character is resurrected.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post

    Epic Critical/Epic Fumble

    (Fiddly, silly, and ultimately may never even come up in a campaign, but it's a sink for Luck rolls, a big boon for Champions, and my players think it's fun. I hate stupid effects that happen when you roll a 1, like snapping your bow string, but when you roll two natural 1's it just feels like something disastrous should happen.)

    If you make a roll with advantage or use a luck point on a critical success and roll two critical successes, the Gods have favored you in this moment, and something spectacular happens at the DM's discretion.
    However, if you make a roll with disadvantage and roll two natural 1's, roll a second 1 with the halfling's luck feature, or roll a natural 1 on a Luck roll after rolling a natural 1, the God's have seen fit to punish you in a particularly tragic manner, at the DM's discretion.
    I approve of this, very much


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Feat Tweaks

    Heavy Armor Master

    Prerequisites: Proficiency with heavy armor

    You can use your armor to deflect strikes that would kill others. You gain the following benefits:

    • Increase your Strength score by 1, to a maximum of 20.
    • While you are wearing heavy armor, bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage that you take is reduced by a number equal to your proficiency bonus.
    This is a much needed change for HAM, I like it.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post

    Warlock Class Changes


    The eldritch blast cantrip is removed from the Warlock spell list. Instead, they gain the following feature at level 1:

    Eldritch Blast

    You can use an action on your turn to channel energy directly from your patron to protect yourself. This magical energy materializes as powerful rays the shoot forward from your hand or arcane focus. Make a ranged spell attack against any creature you can see within a hundred twenty feet. On a hit, the target takes 1d10 of a damage type determined by your patron, consult the table below. When you reach level 5 in this class, you can conjure an additional ray with this blast, which can target another creature in range or the same target. You gain an additional ray at 11th and again at 17th level.

    • Archfey Patron: Lightning Damage
    • Celestial Patron: Radiant Damage
    • Fiend Patron: Fire Damage
    • Great Old One Patron: Psychic Damage
    • Shadowfell/Undying Patron: Necrotic damage

    So, there's a lot to unpack here, so I'll split the invocations and warlock changes into two critiques. Binding Eldritch Blast to Warlock is fine, nothing bad there. However, the rest of this heavily nerfs a class that, in my opinion, is borderline trash as it is. And I say that after having tried warlock on three separate occasions...all three times I found the class had too few resources to effectively do anything.

    Leave EB as Force damage. Its the Warlock's one saving grace. I'm sure you have played a Feylock without EB before, and I'm equally sure you made about no contributions in combat outside of your two spell slots since your only damage options would have been Chill Touch, Blade cantrips, and Toll of the Dead. Without a decent way to deal damage that isn't resisted, Warlocks become the worst casters, bar none, due to their lack of spell slots. And while their slots do come back on a short rest, unless you're short resting after every encounter, you won't be able to bring that power to bear very often.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post

    Eldritch Invocation Alterations

    • Any invocation that allows a warlock to cast a spell by using a spell slot once per long rest can now cast said spell without expending a spell slot. They still must take a long rest before casting the spell again.
    • Agonizing blast now has the prerequisite of 3rd level.
    • Any invocation that applies additional effects to a target upon hitting them with eldritch blast now specify the effect only occurs once per target, this includes Agonizing Blast.
    • Grasp of Hadar and Repelling Blast now specify the creature must be Large or smaller.
    The change to allow you to cast spells without using a spell slot is good, Warlocks need all the spells they can get. That said, there's no reason to make Agonizing Blast third level. You already need to be 2nd level to get it, and since EB scales to your warlock level there's little reason to dip into Warlock just for that.

    You should not nerf Agonizing Blast to add the damage to a single hit. This nerfs EB even further, and pro tip, EB doesn't need to be nerfed. At all. I get that you want to nerf EB for some odd reason, but there's really no reason to do so. Warlocks don't have many ways to contribute to the party in combat without EB. If you played a Feylock without it, I wanna know how you did any sort of damage at all with just two spell slots and Chill Touch, because you have no other options as a Warlock.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Additional Eldritch Invocations:


    From the new UA: Chain Master's fury, Far Scribe, Gift of the Protectors, Investment of the Chain Master

    Eldritch Warrior
    Prerequisites: 4th level, Pact of the Blade

    You gain proficiency in medium armor.

    Improved Eldritch Warrior

    Prerequisites: 8th level, Pact of the Blade

    You gain proficiency in Medium armor, Heavy armor, and shields. Wearing heavy armor does not slow your movement.
    These are all fine except Eldritch Warrior. Don't make Medium Armor require an Invocation. Blade Pact Warlocks have too many Invocation taxes as it is. A Pact of the Blade has to spend half of their total invocations on things just to make them as good as a Fighter, and if they want to focus on being a Blade Pact entirely have to spend every invocation they have on Blade Pact buffs until level 7. I'm ok with Improved Eldritch Warrior if only because they don't need Heavy Armor, provided Medium Armor is obtainable outside of an Invocation.


    All in all, not bad changes for the most part. However, you're nerfing a class that has no need to be nerfed, and actually needs to be buffed. I say this as someone who has seen a lot of warlocks. I've tried playing them, I've played Hexblades, GOOlocks, Fiends, and Fey, and I hated every single one of them because they have too few resources to do anything. I've seen countless warlocks in AL, and none of them have ever been really useful to the party outside of one. And that one Warlock only did so because they were pact of the chain, and used Find Familiar to scout ahead. Every other Warlock has been outpaced by every other class. Heck, my Paladin/Sorcerer has often times been a better caster and had more utility then the warlocks I've played with. A Warlock nerf is not needed, neither is an Eldritch Blast nerf.
    Never let the fluff of a class define the personality of a character. Let Clerics be Atheist, let Barbarians be cowardly or calm, let Druids hate nature, and let Wizards know nothing about the arcane

    Fun Fact: A monk in armor loses Martial Arts, Unarmored Defense, and Unarmored Movement, but keep all of their other abilities, including subclass features, and Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks. Make a Monk in Fullplate with a Greatsword >=D


  15. - Top - End - #15
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    The City of Presidents
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by Contrast View Post
    To be clear, a fighter with the Crossbow Expert feat shooting with a heavy crossbow is very low levels of optimisation. (edit - and I think the fighter would actually still do more damage given archery style unless the warlock started investing spell slots in Hex and that's without factoring in things like subclasses or action surging /edit).
    First of all, I'm surprised to hear Crossbow Expert is low optimization- I think it's an excellent feat. That being aid, it's an overly simplistic analysis on my part, but here's why it's relevant: going by RAW, and not my houserules, a Point buy optimized Fighter vs. a EB AB spamming warlock are almost identical in DPR except the Fighter has to use a feat to get the exact same damage die for 20 less feet of range. They get to fire point blank with no penalty though, which tips the scales in their favor, but the Warlock gets their capstone extra attack three levels early and doesn't have to worry about finding a magical crossbow to deal with a whole bunch of monsters who resist his normal bow. The Warlock never has to worry about resistance or immunity in fact, except for literally one monster.

    If a Warlock uses no other resources they can outdo the Fighter all day. If they use only Hex they're really starting to pass them up. and it gets worse as they both level up considering the gets all this and a bag of chips. At level 17, not only are they getting that fourth attack earlier than the fighter, but they also get access to 9th level spells.

    Also, let's keep in mind feats are optional, but all the stuff I mentioned is PHB RAW compliant, so at certain tables the Fighter never gets to catch up.

    It's too much.
    For context - my experience is that combats usually last between 3 and 5 rounds and warlocks typically need to spread their spell slots out so they're spending a spell slot every 1 or 2 fights (on the one hand sometimes warlocks will get caught out by casting utility spells between combats, on the other hand they can also sometimes sneak in more utility spells with no cost so I'll call that a wash). So they'll likely be cantriping about anywhere between 66% and 90% of their rounds in combat
    They have the exact same choice as all the other martials than. "Use this cool feature/use my action for something else or attack?" Except Warlocks don't have to worry about resistances, can blast from plenty far away, cast solid bonus action spells, or use their action to do more than their usual damage or some other useful effect. Once again, they get more than the martials, so it doesn't bother me in the least.

    I also personally generally find their spell list a little underwhelming comapred to some other classes as well.
    I would disagree with this, but that's another thread.
    To understand your approach - are you saying that you find straight warlocks to be OP? Too powerful at both spellcasting and damage dealing?
    OP is a strong word. Warlocks as a class are not unbalanced but I think WOTC overcompensated for fear of short rest casting not being competitive enough when they decide to throw EB into the game. The spell itself is too much, and I dislike it.

    If not, why are you singling them out for nerfs?
    I'm really not. People seem to ignore the fact that there is plenty of buffs to 'Locks here as well. They get to cast their invocation spell for free, Pact of the Blade is now viable without Hexblade, and they have access to some very powerful new Invocations. I only tweaked EB, the rest is nothing but buffs.


    There is no such thing as cheese, only good and bad strategy.
    Glad I'm not at your table TBH.

    This is campaign-dependent and needs qualification.
    Fine, but I think it's relevant to say the changes I made are based on actual experience. Not looking to sell you beyond that.

    "I'm taking one of your best options, but you can have a freebie to make you feel better!"
    No. It's an opportunity to take a cantrip to compensate for the disadvantages that your Eldritch Blast may or may not have now. Diversify your cantrips to deal with more situations. You know, exactly like how every other caster has to operate.

    This is strictly anecdotal. You have not otherwise justified this claim
    Fair enough. I just like Warlocks, I have seen them do great things, and am not convinced tweaking one tool in their set is enough to destroy the entire thing.

    A warlock using Agonizing Blast and Hex will do 2d10+2d6+10 each round at 5th level. With an attack bonus of +8 against the average level 5 AC of 15, that's 19.1 DPR, or 25.415 with advantage.

    A fighter using a longbow with Sharpshooter will do 2d8+30 each round at 5th level. With an attack bonus of +5 (+2 from archery, -5 from sharpshooter) against the same AC, that's 21 DPR without advantage and 31 DPR with it.
    Not all tables use feats, their optional. You should be pretty close to balance without needing feats to compensate. Without having to invest in feats or anything other than AB a RAW Warlock is better than a fighter all day long. Even in you Sharpshooter example, the DPR gap really isn't that wide, and that's with heavy investment/optimization. Personal experience has also shown me that even with Archery FS and max dex, that -5 is punishing. Sure, that's anecdotal, but my cheesed Ranger missed a lot of crucial shots because of Sharpshooter, leaving me feeling like it wasn't the optimization Hail Mary I had been told. But that's my experience. You also have to remember a lot of Monster resist nonmagical damage. If you don't get a magical weapon quick your DPR is going to get brutalized, while the PHB Warlock never has to worry about that. Unless your DM is throwing entirely Helmed Horrors at you, which I can't help you with.

    Before adding things like maneuvers, and ignoring the fact that the warlock needed to spend a spell slot on Hex to even be comparable.
    Also before adding things like Fireball, if we've got a Fiendlock, or Hypnotic Pattern, or Hunger Of Hadar, all of which are going to start tipping the tides more and more into the Warlocks favor.
    [QUOTE]
    So...I suspect you have an experiential basis for your claim rather than a theoretical one, and it's probably based on somebody who doesn't know how to play martials very well.
    As I said above, it's mostly my bias against Sharpshooter being the end all, be all of ranged optimization. I personally dislike it even after my Cheeseball ranger with a +1 longbow tried his best to convince me otherwise. Therefore, I don't value your idea of an optimized fighter as much as you do, leading me to rate the Warlock higher and decide to bring the balance in check.

    Ultimately, you can do whatever you want. They're your house rules.
    For sure. This topic is not intended to sell everyone else on my idea of D&D. It's purely for the very smart folk of this forum to tear my rules apart so I can see what needs to be patched up and help me formulate all my reasonings. Which you are doing a terrific job of, so thanks for the help.
    Quote Originally Posted by heavyfuel View Post
    Even if they don't have a Reaction, they can now talk through "brief utterances", which certainly includes stuff like "Help!", "Assassin!!", or "AAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRRRGGGGG!!!!!"

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2016

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    All the other Warlock patrons with the exception of Celestial get only one feature at level 1 other than the Expanded Spell List. Hexblade's Curse is strong by itself. What makes the Shadowfell patron so special that it deserves more than everyone else? The only other pact that is an exception is the Celestial, which just gets two fluff cantrips.
    Simple, the Shadowfell Warlock is meant to be the Gish class, they tend to get more then other classes. Bladesinger Wizards get Weapon and Armor proficencies, and Bladesong at level 2, despite every other Wizard subclass getting one thing. College of Valor gain Armor and Weapon proficencies, and Combat Inspiration. College of Swords gain Weapon and Armor proficencies, a Fighting Style, and Blade Flourish. Every single one of those is a GISH subclass, every single one gains armor and weapons, there's no reason for the warlock to be any different.


    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Unsurprisingly, my Warlock changes have been controversial! I'll make a blanket thesis on my decisions and then address some stuff individually.

    • I have actually played with an Archfey straight warlock that did not take EB. They were still a terrific addition to the party.
    • Additionally, by making EB a class feature, Warlock's gain an additional cantrip to spend on whatever they want to counteract immunities/resistances on their individual EB damage types.
    • I have played, played with, and run Warlocks as a DM. I am not convinced that they are suboptimal as a straight class.
    • I hate Eldritch Blast as a base ability. It allows a Warlock to beat most optimized martials in turn for turn damage and is a damage type that literally no one resists and only one monster is immune to. Just because their slots are short-rest based does not mean they are allowed a get-out-of-jail free card that triviliazes martial contribution to combat. Seriously. At level one they get a cantrip that allows them to equal a fighter that takes the Crossbow Expert feat and only attacks with a Heavy Crossbow for their entire career while also being a full caster. Sure, they're not technically a full caster, but they really are. I'm not okay with it.
    I'm surprised by this. I'm curious how well you did in combat? Or were you short resting after every encounter? As for the extra cantrip, Warlocks don't have access to enough cantrips to get around resistances. Their damaging cantrips are Chill Touch, Create Bonfire, Frostbite, Infestation, Lightning Lure, Poison Spray, Sword Burst, Thunderclap, Toll of the Dead, and the Blade Cantrips.

    Out of those, Chill Touch, Create Bonfire, Frostbite, and Toll of the Dead are your only ranged options. The others have a range of 30 feet or less. Out of all of those, Chill Touch is the only cantrip with with a 120ft range, meaning it is the only cantrip you can use at long range. At 60ft, your only real options are going to be Chill Touch, Create Bonfire, and Toll of the Dead. I don't count Frostbite because it requires a Con save, and you should never touch a cantrip that requires a con save.

    So your only real options for damage are Fire and Necrotic with ranged attacks. Melee range cantrips are a bit better. You at least have access to the Blade cantrips and Sword Burst...outside of that your options are poison damage, a con save, and Lightning Lure, which only does damage if the target is yanked within 5 feet of you.


    As for EB beating out optimized martials...that just isn't true. I mean, I'll run some numbers. Lets pit the Warlock against a Barbarian, Fighter, and Paladin in all tiers. Lets go ahead and keep things simple and say each class has a 20 in their attack stat. The Warlock will use EB with Agonizing Blast, the Paladin will have a Longsword and Shield, the Fighter will use a Greatsword, the Barbarian will use a Greataxe, and a Rogue with a Rapier. No feats, just to keep things simple.

    ---Warlock Average Damage with Agonizing Blast---

    Tier 1: 10 damage

    Tier 2: 21 damage

    Tier 3: 31-32 damage

    Tier 4: 42 damage

    ---Fighter Average Damage---

    Tier 1: 12 damage

    Tier 2: 24 damage

    Tier 3: 36 damage

    Tier 4: 48 damage


    ---Barbarian Average Damage---

    Tier 1: 11 damage without Rage, 13 with it

    Tier 2: 23 damage without Rage, 25-26 with it

    Tier 3: 23 damage without Rage, 26-27 with it

    Tier 4: 27 damage without Rage, 31 with it


    ---Paladin Average Damage---

    Tier 1: 9 damage without dueling, 11 with it

    Tier 2: 19 without dueling, 21 with it

    Tier 3: 19 damage without Dueling, 21 with it

    Tier 4: 19 damage without Dueling, 21 with it.


    ---Rogue Average Damage---

    Tier 1: between 12-14 and 16-17

    Tier 2: 20 damage at levels 5-6, 23-24 at levels 7-8, and 27 at levels 9-10

    Tier 3: 30-31 damage at levels 11-12, 34 damage at levels 13-14, 37-38 at levels 15-16

    Tier 4: 41 damage at 17-18, 44-45 damage at levels 19-20.


    You'll notice that the Warlock is actually somewhere between the martial classes. Yes, the Paladin and Barbarian fall behind on damage in Tiers 3 and 4, but there is a very good reason for that. Warlocks are supposed to be good at Damage Per Round, Paladins and Barbarians are not. Paladins are burst classes, they do a ton of damage in one or two rounds, then their damage output drops considerably. Barbarians are tanks, they're not meant to deal damage, they're meant to soak up damage.

    If you compare Warlocks to DPR classes like the Fighter and Rogue, its actually pretty balanced. It does damage on par with a Fighter, though the Fighter still does a bit more damage. Same with the Rogue class. The Warlock does a little bit more at the start of the Tier, but Rogues do more damage at the end of the tier. And keep in mind, I did not use any feats on these builds. This is a bog standard, featless Fighter going up against a Warlock with Agonizing Blast. And the Fighter manages to keep up.


    EDIT: Even a Fighter using a Longbow with the Archery Fighting style keeps up with a Warlock. Yes they do 2 points of damage less, but the Archery Fighting style allows the Fighter to hit more often thanks to that +2 to attack rolls. So it ends up evening out. The only time the Warlock definitively outdamages the Fighter is if that Fighter is using a Sword and Shield and lacks the Dueling Fighting Style, or if the Fighter is using a weapon that only deals 1d6 damage or less. At which point of course the Warlock is going to do better, that Fighter is no longer optimized for combat.

    EDIT 2: You know what, I'll even throw a Monk in for funsies. No using Flurry of Blows, just their single bonus action unarmed strike

    Tier 1: 15 damage

    Tier 2: 25-26

    Tier 3: 28-29

    Tier 4: 31-32

    Congrats, the Warlock managed to outdamage a Monk that ignores every ability they have except a single Bonus Action attack in Tier 3...and even then the Warlock only outdamages the Monk by 3 points of damage. And they massively outdamage the same Monk in Tier 4. If the Tier 4 Monk uses Flurry of Blows, they now match the Warlock.
    Last edited by sithlordnergal; 2020-05-01 at 03:34 PM.
    Never let the fluff of a class define the personality of a character. Let Clerics be Atheist, let Barbarians be cowardly or calm, let Druids hate nature, and let Wizards know nothing about the arcane

    Fun Fact: A monk in armor loses Martial Arts, Unarmored Defense, and Unarmored Movement, but keep all of their other abilities, including subclass features, and Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks. Make a Monk in Fullplate with a Greatsword >=D


  17. - Top - End - #17
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2016

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    First of all, I'm surprised to hear Crossbow Expert is low optimization- I think it's an excellent feat. That being aid, it's an overly simplistic analysis on my part, but here's why it's relevant: going by RAW, and not my houserules, a Point buy optimized Fighter vs. a EB AB spamming warlock are almost identical in DPR except the Fighter has to use a feat to get the exact same damage die for 20 less feet of range. They get to fire point blank with no penalty though, which tips the scales in their favor, but the Warlock gets their capstone extra attack three levels early and doesn't have to worry about finding a magical crossbow to deal with a whole bunch of monsters who resist his normal bow. The Warlock never has to worry about resistance or immunity in fact, except for literally one monster.

    If a Warlock uses no other resources they can outdo the Fighter all day. If they use only Hex they're really starting to pass them up. and it gets worse as they both level up considering the gets all this and a bag of chips. At level 17, not only are they getting that fourth attack earlier than the fighter, but they also get access to 9th level spells.

    Also, let's keep in mind feats are optional, but all the stuff I mentioned is PHB RAW compliant, so at certain tables the Fighter never gets to catch up.

    It's too much.
    Crossbow Expert is great. Using it so you can fire a heavy crossbow is more questionable. You've invested a feat as you can swap the longer range of the longbow for +1 damage...except until you hit Dex 20 you could also have spent that feat on +2 dex and got that +1 damage in addition to +1 to hit, +1 init, +1 AC, +1 to dex skills, +1 dex save. So taking it before level 12 is pretty questionable

    The melee range one is nice but unless you specifically have a magic heavy crossbow you could just pulled out a rapier anyway so...

    The third bullet point is really where Crossbow Expert shines but to make the most of that you need to be using a Hand Crossbow, not a heavy crossbow (and also ideally have picked up Sharpshooter so you can really take advantage of the additional attack).

    From an optimisers standpoint if you're only taking Crossbow Expert to upgrade your longbow to a heavy crossbow I would strongly argue you should just pick up a utility feat or Lucky or something instead to provide better balance to your build.

    I'm really not. People seem to ignore the fact that there is plenty of buffs to 'Locks here as well. They get to cast their invocation spell for free, Pact of the Blade is now viable without Hexblade, and they have access to some very powerful new Invocations. I only tweaked EB, the rest is nothing but buffs.
    I think its pretty clear that the general consensus here is that the gains do not outweigh the loss - some of these are buffs to things I would never previously have considered it sensible to take. They could have been buffed without any nerfs and I'd barely have considered it to change the overall power level of the class.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2020

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    I'm gonna quote a bit out of order here:

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Fine, but I think it's relevant to say the changes I made are based on actual experience. Not looking to sell you beyond that.
    Yeah. We can say it's based on your experiences. I can accept that. My own experience differs substantially but they're not my rules, and if your table is fine with them, sure, go ahead, I guess. We've had two Warlocks at my table, and neither has performed as well as my Battlemaster.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Even in you Sharpshooter example, the DPR gap really isn't that wide, and that's with heavy investment/optimization.
    I hardly think picking up a feat specifically designed for characters specializing in ranged combat is "heavy investment/optimization." VHuman, 1st level, etc etc. But I suppose if you're not trying to sell me on your perspective beyond "this isn't terrible because it's based on something," I ought to offer you the same. You still have sithlordnergal's DPR numbers to contend with, I suppose.

    And so I'll only point out information that is relevant to possible errors and not attempt to undermine anyone's personal experience because that's...kind of impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    First of all, I'm surprised to hear Crossbow Expert is low optimization- I think it's an excellent feat.
    Contrast covered this in the post above mine.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    a Point buy optimized Fighter vs. a EB AB spamming warlock are almost identical in DPR except the Fighter has to use a feat to get the exact same damage die for 20 less feet of range.
    Fighters also get more ASIs, meaning the feat isn't as big a cost for them as other characters. Though I have often thought that every class in the game should get something similar to the warlock's invocations because customization is valuable.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    Glad I'm not at your table TBH.
    It's mutual. I mean that in a polite way -- you seem to be a reasonable person but it also seems we enjoy very different types of gameplay.

    Quote Originally Posted by KOLE View Post
    For sure. This topic is not intended to sell everyone else on my idea of D&D. It's purely for the very smart folk of this forum to tear my rules apart so I can see what needs to be patched up and help me formulate all my reasonings. Which you are doing a terrific job of, so thanks for the help.
    Y'know, I came here from...another place, and I'm surprised that people here are a lot more capable of constructing arguments than over there, whether they are right or not. Which makes sense, I mean, this forum doesn't have an upvote/downvote system so if you disagree with something, most of the time you have to actually say so and why. I've seen a bit of shoddy argumentation here and there but it's been mostly neat so far.

    I do have one other question, though. Have you considered just...buffing the classes you believe are behind, instead of nerfing the ones you believe are ahead?
    Last edited by ArtIzon; 2020-05-01 at 03:39 PM.
    http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html -- I feel this is required reading for everyone on the internet. Feel free to call me out on it if I violate any principles contained herein.
    If I quote your post and highlight colors: Green = this is factually correct. Blue = this is irrelevant to the discussion. Purple = I agree but with conceits. Red = Please fact-check this, it is wrong.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    The City of Presidents
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Note: Edits have been made. Shadowfell patron loses Wrathful smite, gains Fog Cloud. Still does Necrotic damage. Undying patron now does cold damage. My homebrewed invocations have been axed, replaced by Eldritch Armor. All EB invocations now apply to any Warlock cantrip cast, including AB.

    Quote Originally Posted by sithlordnergal View Post
    There's no reason to remove Hex Warrior.
    Disagree. Most of the other subclasses you mentioned come online at level 3, whereas Shadowfell is a level 1 sub. To keep them in line with other patrons and discourage dipping, access to better armor is still gonna be locked behind Pact of the Blade, which brings it in line with the level 2-3 range all the other full casters have to wait to get their armor.

    Additionally, if the attacker rolls a 1, they must make an attack roll against the adjacent creature as if they fired at that creature.
    I have played with a DM that used this rule and to be honest I just really dislike it. It feels a bit too cruel, and nat 1's happen. That being said, this is probably a result I'd have happen on an Epic Fumble.

    This seems ok...though I'm curious as to why Huge or larger creatures can't flank or be flanked. That seems a bit odd.
    Actually, fair point. I may revise this. I'm not sure what my justification was for this?

    So, this is both good and bad. First off, the exhaustion is perfectly fine to me, that seems like a fair trade for being resurrected. It used to be that you suffered ability score penalties for being returned from the dead. That said, I think making a player have to make a random check followed by you making a d20 roll is far too much. I mean, I can see there needing to be a check to appeal to the Gods to resurrect someone, that seems fine to me, and given you allow other players to help with this check its fine, provided the check isn't absurdly high. But I would remove the random 1d20 check that you roll at the very end.
    This is all borrowed from Matthew Mercer who uses it in the campaign on Critical Role. Having seen the incredible RP moments it has lead to, I'm content to keep it as is. The random d20 roll is literally the whole point. No more guaranteed resurrections. Makes every choice matter, and going down in combat has a lot more weight now.
    So, there's a lot to unpack here,
    Honestly, should have been the title of the thread.
    in my opinion, is borderline trash as it is. And I say that after having tried warlock on three separate occasions...all three times I found the class had too few resources to effectively do anything.
    I think that's extremely harsh. Different experiences here, for sure. I've played a couple of different Warlocks and spent a significant amount of time as a Wizard. Loved both classes, did not feel that there was much of a power gap, never felt bored with the Warlocks toolkit, especially with my Imp familiar flying around helping out.

    Leave EB as Force damage
    No U Kidding, of course. Force Damage is boring and it's a leg up Warlock doesn't need. Literally everyone else has to worry about resistances at least some times, although Martials with magic weapons get to skip most of it, as they should.

    This whole thread I've come back to the same points. Warlock as a class is great and I love it, I dislike Eldritch Blast because it's without a doubt the best cantrip in the game. Nothing else is the game let's a full caster compete with martial damage, add spell mod at level two, get the equivalent of Fighter extra attack progression but faster, and deal damage that cannot be resisted, without expending resources. All those things combined is too damn much, and it's boring. So I dialed it back just a couple of notches. Is this was locked as a class feature to a half caster or something like an Artificer I might be cool with it, but it's given to a full caster and is probably the most stolen class feature in the game, other than Fighter goodies perhaps.

    I'm sure you have played a Feylock without EB before,
    Correction: played WITH a Feylock without EB. Not my character.

    and I'm equally sure you made about no contributions in combat outside of your two spell slots since your only damage options would have been Chill Touch, Blade cantrips, and Toll of the Dead.
    That's... Mostly what other casters do too? I mean Wizards shouldn't be casting EVERY turn until probably tier 3-4. Assuming most fights are three rounds, you want to save spell slots, and not every encounter is deadly, you're probably only dropping a couple of slots and skating by on cantrips. I did as a Wizard anyway.

    But also, this Feylock took the Tome Pact, loaded up on rituals for utility, and always had a good cantrip ready for various situations/resistance. Staple was Vicious Mockery. That disadvantage on the first attack was great, especially when combined with Slow from the invocation to keep baddies down to one attack. Faerie Fire also helped the rest of the party shine. They were a solid support caster.

    The change to allow you to cast spells without using a spell slot is good, Warlocks need all the spells they can get. That said, there's no reason to make Agonizing Blast third level. You already need to be 2nd level to get it, and since EB scales to your warlock level there's little reason to dip into Warlock just for that.
    Bringing it in line with other caster who don't get to add casting mod to cantrips until much later, I wanted to stall it just a little bit. Plus, it really really dominates at level 2 with squishy monsters running around. The delay is needed IMO. Besides you blink and you miss level 2. You're not missing much by having it for the one session the level should last.

    You should not nerf Agonizing Blast to add the damage to a single hit. This nerfs EB even further, and pro tip, EB doesn't need to be nerfed. At all. I get that you want to nerf EB for some odd reason, but there's really no reason to do so. Warlocks don't have many ways to contribute to the party in combat without EB.
    Bladelock gishing (which is viable now), Familiar help spamming, Free invocation slots for some awesome spells like Bane or Slow or Polymorph or Bestow curse, using the perfect cantrip for any job using the Tome perks, I've listed plenty. There's more to life than Xd10+CHA.

    In fact, screw it. I had this idea for a minute, but now that I've talked it out, I think it may be balanced after all.
    All 5 EB invocations now apply to any cantrip the Warlock casts. Though the effect is limited to once per target, they will stack with the base cantrip, meaning lance of lethargy+ray of frost reduces a target's movement by 20 feet on a hit. Eldritch Spear doubles all cantrip ranges.

    If you played a Feylock without it, I wanna know how you did any sort of damage at all with just two spell slots and Chill Touch, because you have no other options as a Warlock.
    It's not all about the damage, man.

    These are all fine except Eldritch Warrior. Don't make Medium Armor require an Invocation. Blade Pact Warlocks have too many Invocation taxes as it is. A Pact of the Blade has to spend half of their total invocations on things just to make them as good as a Fighter, and if they want to focus on being a Blade Pact entirely have to spend every invocation they have on Blade Pact buffs until level 7. I'm ok with Improved Eldritch Warrior if only because they don't need Heavy Armor, provided Medium Armor is obtainable outside of an Invocation.
    Fixed, Eldritch Armor is standard. Also, I disagree about invocation taxes. You're a full caster, if you want extra attack or any of these awesome perks, you gotta pay to play.


    As for EB beating out optimized martials...that just isn't true. I mean, I'll run some numbers. Lets pit the Warlock against a Barbarian, Fighter, and Paladin in all tiers. Lets go ahead and keep things simple and say each class has a 20 in their attack stat. The Warlock will use EB with Agonizing Blast, the Paladin will have a Longsword and Shield, the Fighter will use a Greatsword, the Barbarian will use a Greataxe, and a Rogue with a Rapier. No feats, just to keep things simple.

    SNIP
    Okay, you've proven your point, saying they trivialized martial contribution and competed with highly optimized martials was hyperbolic and silly of me. However, here's the crux of it:
    -Base PHB Warlock was not far behind in all of those comparisons.
    -In spite of that, it still gets to be competitive while standing 120 feet of way and never gets surprised by having it's damage resisted.
    -For a single bonus action it can really take off on damage with hex, but I'm currently too lazy to run the math and see how much better they do.
    -Most of the martials are putting themselves at greater risk to do the damage they do.
    -Key point: Warlock isn't missing out on anything by doing this action over and over, and they still compete with the martials, but they also get full spell progression. Martials edge them out in DPR damage but can't contribute much outside that, while the Warlock is barely behind and will still get to access 9th level spells. That doesn't feel particularly fair, especially since they also get Fighter extra attack with their equivalent of a magical-heavy-crossbow-of-beats-all-resistancesness.


    ...Any one else starting to see why I feel this is piling up so far? By the way, two more points about my changes here:
    -No change to DPR if you target a different creature with each ray. The once per Target clause is very intentional.
    -If you're worried about your EB being resisted, take Elemental Adept. Just like every other caster.


    EDIT: Jeezums, another post while I was typing up this reply! I'm certainly getting my money's worth on asking for criticism. Gonna take a beer break.
    Last edited by KOLE; 2020-05-01 at 04:24 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by heavyfuel View Post
    Even if they don't have a Reaction, they can now talk through "brief utterances", which certainly includes stuff like "Help!", "Assassin!!", or "AAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRRRGGGGG!!!!!"

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Not even going to bother quoting, bc things are long.

    One thought that I had pop up: Change the rogue sneak attack feature to explicitly say that it works if an ally is flanking, and the rogue doesn't have disadvantage. Changing flanking to being +2 instead of advantage means that rogues have a significant drop in the number of times they can sneak attack, depending on subclass.

    No flanking on huge or larger creatures does make a sort of sense, after all, can two pixies really flank an ancient brass dragon? You can argue it both ways. Still, no issue with either way you go.

    Now on to the class that you keep referring to as a full caster: The Warlock. It honestly annoys me whenever someone refers to Warlocks as full casters. They get 4 spell slots by level 20, and for the vast majority of the game can't cast more than 3 spells. They can't action surge, or do attacks on their bonus action. The calculations that everyone are showing you are for unoptimized fighters, who aren't using GWM, PAM, or TWF for bonus action attacks, despite that being easily accessible. Fighters specifically get more ASI's than everyone else for that reason.

    Optimized fighters leave even optimized hexblade sorlocks in the dust in single target dpr, and are far better than them at multi-target dpr. In response to your statement of sorlocks being cheese, and hating to be at tables that allow optimization, I hope you tell your martials that they can't optimize and take feats. Actually, I really don't, I'm more of the type to allow more power to the players. But further to the dmg comparisons, without expending resources a single classed optimized lvl 20 Warlock, the DPR on an optimized 20 fighter is about 130 ADPR better. 130. 130. Fighter is naturally much more durable, and has a variety of other features such as second wind and action surge to make it able to do even more damage. In counterbalance, Warlock gets 4 spell slots, and some invocations.

    If its not all about the damage, why is that the only change that you made? You certainly seem to indicate that it is all about the damage with these changes.

    Lets look at fiend warlocks. Unlike fey, they don't get some nice support features, and like the rest of the warlocks, they only have 2 slots for the majority of the game. Once those are gone, they're stuck being useless. FUN!

    Mystic arcanum: Really not that good. Terrible spell list, and once per day use with no versatility or option to change makes it subpar. Not going to discuss 6-8, just 9.

    So lets talk about the 9th level spells Warlocks get. 1) Astral Projection: As someone who can never change it, unless the campaign is really hinting for it, do not touch. 2) Power word: Kill: Pretty worthless. No reason to take it. 3) Imprisonment: See #1. 4) Foresight: This is a solid spell. Perma advantage is no joke. But still, its not miles above fighters. 5) True Polymorph: Yes, this is a powerful spell. Yes, it is strong against enemies. Yes, it is nice if you're going to allow a party member to be an ancient brass dragon 100% of the time. But, this isn't what you want most of the time. I'd take Foresight 8/10 times, and one person gets perma advantage.

    About the types: Keep in mind that shadowfell are still useless against many monsters, as elemental adept doesn't affect them. It also doesn't affect psychic or radiant damage, although those are less resisted than necrotic. Keep in mind as well that you are adding an ASI tax to a class that only gets 5 of them, needs 2 to charisma, and should always get warcaster. Resilient Con is their other needed one, and with that they're locked in. As far as needing to be resisted, there are two monsters that resist force damage. There are probably 10 monsters out of hundreds that resist magical piercing, slashing and bludgeoning damage. It's honestly pretty similar, if you really want, add force dmg resistance to a few.

    To the final points in your statement
    -Those martials were doing nothing to up their damage. Not using the number of feats they have, or their resources at all, and still surpassing the Warlock by a decent margin. That should say something, especially since that's before your nerf.
    -Fighters can also deal ranged damage, and you rarely sit 120 feet away from the fight. I've fought battles where I could be 120 feet away less times than I have fingers on my hand. For both martials and EB'ers, they are rarely resisted. Not never, but rarely.
    -Yes, most martials don't cast spells, but they deal 3-4x as much ADPR as a Warlock. Seriously, Warlock was the last class that needed a nerf. Warlock is not barely behind, its leagues behind.
    -No change other than the fact that you can't use hex or any like thing to boost dmg, instead, while the rest of the party fights the BBEG, you have to blast the minions.


    Edit: I'm reading this afterwards, and its a bit rambling bc I'm tired, but I think the points still stand.
    Last edited by WaroftheCrans; 2020-05-01 at 10:22 PM.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingPirate

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    The City of Presidents
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Rate my house rules!

    Quote Originally Posted by WaroftheCrans View Post
    One thought that I had pop up: Change the rogue sneak attack feature to explicitly say that it works if an ally is flanking, and the rogue doesn't have disadvantage. Changing flanking to being +2 instead of advantage means that rogues have a significant drop in the number of times they can sneak attack, depending on subclass.
    I'm not sure I follow you. The rules already work that way. If a creature is flanked, you have an ally within five feet of it.
    No flanking on huge or larger creatures does make a sort of sense, after all, can two pixies really flank an ancient brass dragon? You can argue it both ways. Still, no issue with either way you go.
    I think I'll drop the restriction, it's a bit fiddly, and smart movement should be rewarded in big encounters too.

    Now on to the class that you keep referring to as a full caster: The Warlock. It honestly annoys me whenever someone refers to Warlocks as full casters. They get 4 spell slots by level 20, and for the vast majority of the game can't cast more than 3 spells.
    My definition of full caster is simply getting 9th level spells at level 17.

    I'm going to snip the bit about Fighter feats and optimization, and come back to it in a minute here.

    If its not all about the damage, why is that the only change that you made?
    It's not the only changes I made. I also made spell invocations much better, granting Warlock a once per long rest free spell slot, added strong Invocations from UA, Buffed all Warlock cantrips, and gave an extra cantrip to all Patorns for damage or fluff.

    Lets look at fiend warlocks. Unlike fey, they don't get some nice support features, and like the rest of the warlocks, they only have 2 slots for the majority of the game. Once those are gone, they're stuck being useless. FUN!
    I've spent a significant amount of this thread defending the Warlock as versatile and fun, and I'll point out that Fiendlocks are strong, they have some of the best subclass features of ANY caster. Strong, scaling THP makes them tough, and their capstone is insane, 10d10 insta damage no save.

    Mystic arcanum: Really not that good. Terrible spell list, and once per day use with no versatility or option to change makes it subpar
    Haven't actually played with/as a warlock late enough to get Mystic Arcanum to have much of an opinion on this. I can see myself buffing this down the road.

    About the types: Keep in mind that shadowfell are still useless against many monsters, as elemental adept doesn't affect them. It also doesn't affect psychic or radiant damage, although those are less resisted than necrotic.
    Honestly forgot that elemental adept doesn't apply to those.
    Keep in mind as well that you are adding an ASI tax to a class that only gets 5 of them, needs 2 to charisma, and should always get warcaster. Resilient Con is their other needed one, and with that they're locked in.
    The Warlock is not special here, all the other casters want the same thing.

    Those martials were doing nothing to up their damage. Not using the number of feats they have, or their resources at all, and still surpassing the Warlock by a decent margin. That should say something, especially since that's before your nerf.
    My analysis is always a base assessment of balance without feats or multiclassing. The fact that you have to mention an alphabet soup of feats to start really outpacing EB is a big part of the problem to me. Optional rules shouldn't be required for a martial to be the best at DPR.

    -Fighters can also deal ranged damage, and you rarely sit 120 feet away from the fight. I've fought battles where I could be 120 feet away less times than I have fingers on my hand. For both martials and EB'ers, they are rarely resisted. Not never, but rarely.
    -No change other than the fact that you can't use hex or any like thing to boost dmg, instead, while the rest of the party fights the BBEG, you have to blast the minions.
    Hex is still absolutely a valid strategy, and I'm not sure why crowd control is something to be looked down on for a role, nor why Warlocks are held to the standard of single target DPS.

    Edit: I'm reading this afterwards, and its a bit rambling bc I'm tired, but I think the points still stand.
    I didn't feel that way at all, I enjoyed reading it.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArtIzon View Post
    It's mutual. I mean that in a polite way -- you seem to be a reasonable person but it also seems we enjoy very different types of gameplay.
    I appreciate your polite candor. I don't know why tweaking one class feature and offering a load of buffs is making me a particularly different style of D&D DM.

    I do have one other question, though. Have you considered just...buffing the classes you believe are behind, instead of nerfing the ones you believe are ahead?
    Definitely! I have a Sorcerer overhaul in the works, utilize Revised Ranger for players who want it, and am currently working on a Fighter overhaul that would take Maneuvers from Battlemaster and make it part of the base class. It takes a lot of time to work on these things, however.

    I appreciate everyone's concerns and the passion in the discussion here. At this point, we may have to agree to disagree, and I'll be more cautious while implementing these rules. I'd also like to note I'm pretty generous with short rests as a DM, so my Warlock doesn't fall victim to the 5 minute adventure day. I'm going to keep a careful eye on my party's Celestial Warlock, and if they start to suffer more than I expected, I'll pull the plug. For now, I'm keeping it in play testing stage.
    Quote Originally Posted by heavyfuel View Post
    Even if they don't have a Reaction, they can now talk through "brief utterances", which certainly includes stuff like "Help!", "Assassin!!", or "AAAAAAHHHHHHHHRRRRRRGGGGG!!!!!"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •