Unearthed Arcana - PH Playtest 5 - One D&D

[Psyren]

Sure, but you can't just assume averages. Besides, rolling dice for damage is part of the fun of the game. Sure, you might come up shorter, but when you hit for 36 extra points of damage, that feels so much better than a flat value every time.

You can also roll 1s, which feels terrible compared to a flat value. That's why averages are the best thing to consider.

Regardless, it's still a terrible ability that only happens 5% of the time.

*shrug*

[Hurrashane]

Didn't scribing a scroll used to use a spell as well? Pretty sure in like, 3.5 you needed to cast the spell as part of making a scroll, same as with a wand you needed to cast it 50 times or something.

Like, all that's changed is which spell you're casting in that sense. And I for one am perfectly fine with a magical ritual needed to scribe a scroll. Like, you're trapping magic in ink and parchment it should be more magical than just writing it down.

[GooeyChewie]

PS, you pick your Patron at level 1. Per the actual document "You determine the identity of the entity and choose its plane of existence, such as the Feywild, the Shadowfell, or an Outer Plane" It's at level 3 that you are beginning to learn things unique to your path with your patron. Just like a Cleric of Corellon gets to level 3 and chooses Magic, Forge, etc for their focus, a Warlock of Uk'otoa gets to level 3 and chooses if they're a hexblade or fathomless or great old one.

The "entity" in that quote is the lesser one with whom you make your level 1 Pact. You don't pick the more powerful Patron until level 3. It can be that the level 3 Patron was pulling the strings all along, or it could be a completely unrelated Patron.

[Hurrashane]

The "entity" in that quote is the lesser one with whom you make your level 1 Pact. You don't pick the more powerful Patron until level 3. It can be that the level 3 Patron was pulling the strings all along, or it could be a completely unrelated Patron.

So like your first level pact could be with an imp, or lesser fiend, who was scouring the material plane for likely candidates. Found one, then they get moved up to the boss's notice now that they're stronger. Or some other patron notices this go down so they interfere.

Lot of good narrative to be told with this stuff

[Psyren]

So like your first level pact could be with an imp, or lesser fiend, who was scouring the material plane for likely candidates. Found one, then they get moved up to the boss's notice now that they're stronger. Or some other patron notices this go down so they interfere.

Lot of good narrative to be told with this stuff

Exactly, I'm excited. Both can be the same patron or different ones. They might be opposed or working together through you. They may not even be completely aware of each other. Hooks hooks hooks!

[Sparky McDibben]

That's typically been the exact opposite of me (preferring Sorcerer over Wizard), but you may be delighted to know that I've got myself a wizard prepared to run soon!

Also, welcome back friend!

Oh, sweet! Kudos, friend!

[Boverk]

So like your first level pact could be with an imp, or lesser fiend, who was scouring the material plane for likely candidates. Found one, then they get moved up to the boss's notice now that they're stronger. Or some other patron notices this go down so they interfere.

Lot of good narrative to be told with this stuff

It can even be with your familiar if you took pact of the chain.

You could have your imp do a 1930s gangster accent and introduce you to the boss at level 3.

[GooeyChewie]

So like your first level pact could be with an imp, or lesser fiend, who was scouring the material plane for likely candidates. Found one, then they get moved up to the boss's notice now that they're stronger. Or some other patron notices this go down so they interfere.

Lot of good narrative to be told with this stuff

An imp, you say? Leading up to the boss (or bosses?), you say? Agreed, definitely some good narrative possibilities.

[Dr.Samurai]

Right. I don't think you and I are going to get the warrior classes we want from this game. I just don't anymore.

I feel the same. This is like opening up your Christmas gift to find a stick with a bow on it lol.

For the record, Crawford has said in the last two or three videos that:

1) Playing with these Masteries has been the most fun he's ever had playing a martial class. More than Tome of Battle. More than 4e. More than Superiority Dice in the final form and in the a bit more interesting Next Playtest where they refreshed every turn.

There is no way to convince me that Crawford is not 1000% lying if he said that. It's unfathomable that these masteries are more enjoyable than ToB or 4E. Either one could do a ton more than these masteries.

Anyways, my thoughts (all on weapons or barbarian):

Barbarian Class

Rage - I'm generally okay with this. I like the extended duration, and I like that this appears to be more suited to out of combat use than before. But the uses per day are still way too limited for that. I would keep taking damage as extending the rage as that is thematic and makes sense. I do like that rage bonus damage works on any strength attack.

Unarmored Defense - No change. Too bad, would have liked it to work more like the monks, where it's based on their primary and dex.

Weapon Mastery - These are... okay. Nothing to write home about. I do really like Cleave, and the rage bonus damage can be added to that attack, so that's nice. To be clear, I like adding riders to attacks; combat is all about this type of stuff. But I don't think they should be gated behind weapon types, and it certainly isn't enough (in my opinion) to boost martials.

Primal Knowledge - The extra skill is good. I like the idea of using Strength for those skills, but I don't know why you need to be Raging. This is the sort of design that always has me scratching my head. The barbarian is mostly going to be locked out of using spells, which is the strongest system in the game. The Fey Wanderer Ranger just straight up adds their Wisdom mod to their Charisma skills. No strings attacked. Why not do something similar here? Having to expend a Rage use when you only have 2 is bonkers. I'd add more Rage uses or have them refresh on a Short Rest.

Reckless Attack - No change.

Feral Instinct - Not sure why this got nerfed. So Danger Sense moves to level 7, which is probably okay because Reckless is so strong at level 2 we probably don't need another feature. But losing immunity to Surprise and the Pounce from Tasha's sucks. Not sure why these needed to be removed. This makes the barbarian so clutch in dire situations and I feel it loses a lot of identity without these features.

Indomitable Might - Nice to see it moved to level 9. Combined with Primal Knowledge, the barbarian will make a good scout/navigator/intimidator.

Brutal Critical - Meh. I would have liked to see something a bit more inspired. The flat damage is probably better than risking low rolls on those d12s (always supremely disappointing to deal normal weapon damage when you "crit").

Persistent Rage is fine but doesn't seem needed. If you can use a bonus action to extend rage, why would you not?

Relentless Rage is fine.

Rage Resurgence - I mean... it's nice, but how are you supposed to be interacting with Primal Knowledge up until this point? I guess the idea is that 10 minutes is enough time to get multiple encounters or scout/navigate and also get an encounter? This seems like way too late at level 17.

Primal Champion - Why nerf this? The fighter is getting a 4th attack and the barbarian can only get +2 Str/Con? Needs more.

Berserker (Dr. Samurai prepares to defend this hill alone)

Frenzy - This needs to return to being a bonus action attack. Removing the exhaustion is great. Reverting this to bonus damage on 1 attack is EXTREMELY boring AND ALSO removes a tremendous amount of versatility from the Berserker. Making an attack as a bonus action is awesome, and it would also work well with Primal Knowledge, in that you can spot hidden foes as your action and still attack (and possible Cleave or other weapon masteries), or imagine a bugbear barbarian stealthing in combat while raging and still attacking with the bonus action. This change is so boring and limited; it's awful. Revert it back. Add in language that you can make the attack as part of the same bonus action to activate Rage, and then you're all set. If it's too strong at level 3, remove the ability score modifier from damage, then add it back at level 6. But this was a dynamic ability, and now it's just boring flat damage. I really hate this design. (I'm also not crazy about it requiring to use Reckless Attack, which seems like forcing the narrative. You're already Raging. It's not a deal breaker, but seems needless.)

Mindless Rage - This is fine.

Retaliation - I am okay with this at level 10. I think it should be changed to your reach, instead of just 5ft. I'm glad it still does not require you to be raging.

Intimidating Presence - Look how they massacred my boy. Not a fan. I get that it's all just one big giant buff, but it sucks. Once a day vs at-will is really bad, and having to use a Rage to do it again is awful. Capturing enemies within 30ft is great, but they get to save at the end of each of their turns, which sucks. Currently, you actually have an Intimidating Presence at-will, so long as you use the Action to activate it. That means in social encounters, the barbarian can be standing behind the party face, looking like someone you don't want to bump into in a dark alley, and if he imposes the Frightened condition on the target, they now have Disadvantage on any skills checks, the most relevant ones being Deception (for lying to the party), Insight (for catching the party's lies), and Perception (for noticing any Stealth or Sleight of Hand occurring). I just love the image of the barbarian not saying a word, but still assisting the bard or paladin, and after the conversation is over with, the barbarian musses the target's hair and says "Good talk" and walks away lol. Now the barbarian is better with Intimidation through Primal Knowledge, which is great, but I really liked this way of indirectly assisting with social encounters. Even in combat the current version is better at locking an enemy down since you can use your Action to extend it, which is in line with how Rage now works. This new version is just a straight combat application, and sure, the DC is higher, but they get to save each turn. I don't know, this feels like losing a cool out of combat feature for a once/day aoe control effect which is fine, I guess, but leaves me feeling meh about it. Maybe it could have an in combat and out of combat use like the Swashbuckler's Panache?

All in all, I don't see anything that really makes me want to play through levels 10+, and some cool features were removed from the lower levels. Primal Knowledge is really interesting, but not sure how it will play out with the number of rages. Given that, again, the barbarian can't cast spells while raging, they seem awful shy of giving it more abilities at higher levels.

Also... what in the world happened to Fighting Styles? I thought Warriors were supposed to get that? I guess that got supplanted by Weapon Mastery? So now Barbarians can't get a fighting style? I'd love to see a GWF style that adds your ability mod to Cleave. Surely barbarians have fighting styles right?

Anyways, some other stuff I like:

1. Thrown Weapons allowing you to draw them as you attack is a great QoL improvement.
2. Cleave is a strong, thematic ability.
3. The trident getting boosted is great.

[Damon_Tor]

Wow, warlock really got hit hard with that HOMOGENY stick. I dunno if it's worse or better mechanically because frankly I checked TF out while reading it. How f***ing boring.

I do not accept that people wanted this for the warlock. If they wanted a normal-ass spellcaster there are plenty. Classes SHOULD be different from one another. Or what's the goddamn point of having different classes?

[Dr.Samurai]

Isn't Vex stupidly strong? Shouldn't we set it on fire?

[Theodoxus]

While I think the wording is odd, I think the 'class features as spells' aspect is the correct approach. If you made them abilities, how frequent would you let them work? Unlimited? Modified spell, with it's free cost, would allow you to completely rework every spell you had in ways that would allow the Wizard to truly be a Swiss army knife. Scry the enemy, know they're Cold vulnerable and within 10 minutes, you've modified every damaging spell of consequence to deal Cold damage. As a spell, even cast as a ritual, it would be less practical to do.

Create Spell, with it's 1000 gp cost per spell level, would be VERY costly to make Control Weather a ritual. I mean, sure, by 15th level, you might have the gold to blow on something like that, but is Control Weather really all that amazing? I'd also suspect in the final version, WotC might remember that Rituals have traditionally been limited to 6th level, so that will be noted in the spell.

The only ones that I personally think weird are the cantrips. Those seem better as unlimited class abilities, but it's mostly nomenclature at that point.

Regarding making Warlock a half caster, I too mourn the loss of a unique casting mechanic. I also agree that simply adding a 3rd slot at 5th level would be sufficient. Though it would allow throwing 9+ fireballs a day... something the Fiend can almost do in 5E... and I've never seen Fiend be particularly popular for it, so...

However, if instead of getting the half-caster slot progression, they received the full caster slot progression but just never got 6+ spells outside of Arcanum (Mystic or Invocation doesn't really matter to me), I think that would be a lot better. Being able to cast fly at 5th level (or Hypnotic Pattern, Fear, etc.) is pretty iconic to the class. Having to wait for 9th level is very much less so.

I am thinking of granting players the option to choose between pact magic and half-classing it.

Other things I'm definitely incorporating into my 5E games: The update to the Barbarian, though I'm keeping 'taking damage' as one thing that will keep Rage going. I've already made Rage recover on a short rest, a long time ago, and don't see any reason that would need to change. The updated Frenzy makes me very happy.

I am not overly enthusiastic about weapon mastery, but it's a decent start and should be pretty easy to expand upon from various OSR and other homebrew concepts, so I can see adding that in too, should my players be interested.

Sorcerers getting free Wish... lul broak sayz wut?

[Psyren]

Isn't Vex stupidly strong? Shouldn't we set it on fire?

I'm not so sure. I think Topple might be stronger overall. Vex also seems to be on weaker weapons.

[Kaviyd]

One thing that should be pointed out about Mystic Arcanum is that it enables the maximum spell level available to a warlock to keep up starting at 5th level (so making this invocation available at 3rd and 4th level with a maximum spell level of 2nd level would eliminate that low level hiccup in spell level availability). You can only cast that spell once per day, but we already knew that regaining spells on a short rest was going away.

[Psyren]

Hilarious interaction, probably not intended - if the Wizard doesn't have Scribe Spell prepared and their spellbook is lost or destroyed, they're screwed - they can't make a new spellbook and therefore they're stuck with whatever they have prepared.

*cue all the Wizards taking Magic Initiate as their starting feat*

One thing that should be pointed out about Mystic Arcanum is that it enables the maximum spell level available to a warlock to keep up starting at 5th level (so making this invocation available at 3rd and 4th level with a maximum spell level of 2nd level would eliminate that low level hiccup in spell level availability). You can only cast that spell once per day, but we already knew that regaining spells on a short rest was going away.

It does let you keep up, which is nice... but getting each spell level as soon as a full caster can with it will cost 7 invocations!

[Zevox]

Wow, warlock really got hit hard with that HOMOGENY stick. I dunno if it's worse or better mechanically because frankly I checked TF out while reading it. How f***ing boring.

I do not accept that people wanted this for the warlock. If they wanted a normal-ass spellcaster there are plenty. Classes SHOULD be different from one another. Or what's the goddamn point of having different classes?

Speaking for myself, part of it is what I'd want, part of it is not. I definitely want Warlocks to:
1) Have more spell slots.
2) Move away from being short rest dependant.

The former for obvious reasons, the latter because playing a class that wants to short rest much more often than most of the rest of the party feels bad, and short rests are long enough that it's not always easy to do one. This does achieve those two goals.

What I definitely don't want is for it to become a half-caster as a result. They are not a martial class, nor a gish class except when taking a specific pact option, they're a caster class, and should be focused on that. And something that they ditched that I don't think they needed to is them always casting spells at their highest possible level (max 5), but having fewer spell slots than other casters as a trade-off for that. That concept I'm okay with, the existing one just went way too low on the number of slots due to letting them recharge on a short rest.

Though, pie-in-the-sky, if I could have any changes I wanted to them, I'd actually most like them to go back to what they were in 3.5E. Meaning having very few spells known and never getting truly high-level spells, but having unlimited uses of the spells they do get. That would be more unique and interesting while still keeping them as focused casters. But I have no expectation that they'll do that, so I'd take just reworking them away from the short rest recharge/very few spell slots dynamic.

[Rukelnikov]

Hilarious interaction, probably not intended - if the Wizard doesn't have Scribe Spell prepared and their spellbook is lost or destroyed, they're screwed - they can't make a new spellbook and therefore they're stuck with whatever they have prepared.

*cue all the Wizards taking Magic Initiate as their starting feat*



It does let you keep up, which is nice... but getting each spell level as soon as a full caster can with it will cost 7 invocations!

Scribe spell is fulfilling a pretty similar role to 3e's Read Magic, in that edition that spell was the only one you could prepare without a spellbook by default. I'd have to reread the entry on scribe spell in the UA, because I think it doesn't count for the preparation limit, so it's likely always prepared.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

My group warlock did not like those changes too. I do think they should keep pact magic a it was. As you pointed out it brings variety and thats a good thing. A spell slot or two more would be enough.
Also mystic arcanun as a invocation make it almost mandatory, there is nothing there that can compete with 9th level spells, so that should stay as it was

I'm going to play test before I stress. Because the only real reason I'm flinching at the Half Caster is because it delays access to spell levels... But the Boons are more powerful across the board and once you hit level 5 Mystic Arcanum can let you fix the gap some. So it's a case of we'll see.

For the other, I don't think people are really taking into account what they gave us by making Mystic Arcanum an invocation.

First, as many have pointed out, we now have 9 invocations instead of 7. Now before anyone insists that we lose 4 old Arcanums making us be down by 2, keep in mind certain invocations that are no longer there, ones that were essentially taxes.

If you are a Tomelock, you don't need Book of Ancient Secrets anymore. What's better, at level 5 you no longer need Agonizing Blast. Book of Shadows at level 5 lets your add your Caster Stat to any Cantrip you don't already add it to.

If you're a Bladelock you no longer need to take Thirsting Blade or Improved Pact Weapon.

If you're a Chainlock Investment and Voice of the Chainmaster are both gone.

So ultimately you can have 4 Mystic Arcanums and the same essential Invocations without issue. Meanwhile Lessons of the First Ones is amazing at low levels for overall customization. Additionally you can start picking up Arcanums at level 5, helping close that gap we now have for 3rd-5th level spells, changing them out as we level up to the original.

[Damon_Tor]

My thoughts on the fighter and barbarian I guess:

Barbarian changes look like two-weapon barbs will be the dpr meta. Brutal critical being decoupled from weapon size means you just want to maximize the number of attacks you get. Barbs don't need a novel source of advantage, so that means scimitars so they can leave their bonus action free I guess.

Once a fighter can freely mix and match mastery properties, the trident is strictly superior to other options. It's just as good as a longsword or battle-axe, but you can also throw it. Are tridents the default 1h weapon now? Is that intended? Weird.

Shenanigans with the light property: you don't have to actually be dual-wielding, you can have a shield in your off hand, throw a light weapon with your main hand, then draw a second light weapon with the main hand and toss it as your light-weapon attack. Intended?

Where is the monk?

And I got mad and stopped reading when I saw the warlock. So I'll have to revisit when I'm in a more tolerant mood.

[Rafaelfras]

Scribe spell is fulfilling a pretty similar role to 3e's Read Magic, in that edition that spell was the only one you could prepare without a spellbook by default. I'd have to reread the entry on scribe spell in the UA, because I think it doesn't count for the preparation limit, so it's likely always prepared.

All wizard spells gained as a feature are always prepared.
Scribe, memorize, change and create spell don't count for the preparation limit and are always prepared

I'm going to play test before I stress. Because the only real reason I'm flinching at the Half Caster is because it delays access to spell levels... But the Boons are more powerful across the board and once you hit level 5 Mystic Arcanum can let you fix the gap some. So it's a case of we'll see.

For the other, I don't think people are really taking into account what they gave us by making Mystic Arcanum an invocation.

First, as many have pointed out, we now have 9 invocations instead of 7. Now before anyone insists that we lose 4 old Arcanums making us be down by 2, keep in mind certain invocations that are no longer there, ones that were essentially taxes.

If you are a Tomelock, you don't need Book of Ancient Secrets anymore. What's better, at level 5 you no longer need Agonizing Blast. Book of Shadows at level 5 lets your add your Caster Stat to any Cantrip you don't already add it to.

If you're a Bladelock you no longer need to take Thirsting Blade or Improved Pact Weapon.

If you're a Chainlock Investment and Voice of the Chainmaster are both gone.

So ultimately you can have 4 Mystic Arcanums and the same essential Invocations without issue. Meanwhile Lessons of the First Ones is amazing at low levels for overall customization. Additionally you can start picking up Arcanums at level 5, helping close that gap we now have for 3rd-5th level spells, changing them out as we level up to the original.

I went back and forth with my warlock player a lot and got to some of the same conclusions.
But I think his biggest grief was about the melee path, as you don't have any reason to take a warlock over a ranger or a paladin (he is also a spoiled hexblade so there is that too haha)

[Pixel_Kitsune]

It does let you keep up, which is nice... but getting each spell level as soon as a full caster can with it will cost 7 invocations!

It won't. You can change out an invocation every level. At level 5 I get my 3rd Level Once a Day, at 7 get your 4th. At 9th level you get your regular level 3 spells and trade you level 3 for your level 5, so on and so forth. You end up using 4 in total replicating the original Mystic Arcanum. Meanwhile You needing 2 less Invocations as a Pact Boon Tax means you're still on par if you wanted to just play it like a regular 5e warlock.

[Psyren]

Scribe spell is fulfilling a pretty similar role to 3e's Read Magic, in that edition that spell was the only one you could prepare without a spellbook by default. I'd have to reread the entry on scribe spell in the UA, because I think it doesn't count for the preparation limit, so it's likely always prepared.

As written it's not - but I agree it should be, for exactly this reason.

My thoughts on the fighter and barbarian I guess:

Barbarian changes look like two-weapon barbs will be the dpr meta. Brutal critical being decoupled from weapon size means you just want to maximize the number of attacks you get. Barbs don't need a novel source of advantage, so that means scimitars so they can leave their bonus action free I guess.

Scimitarbarian looks to be pretty good now that you mention it.

Once a fighter can freely mix and match mastery properties, the trident is strictly superior to other options. It's just as good as a longsword or battle-axe, but you can also throw it. Are tridents the default 1h weapon now? Is that intended? Weird.

I dunno about strictly superior, you can't put Vex on it.

Where is the monk?

Later.

It won't. You can change out an invocation every level. At level 5 I get my 3rd Level Once a Day, at 7 get your 4th. At 9th level you get your regular level 3 spells and trade you level 3 for your level 5, so on and so forth. You end up using 4 in total replicating the original Mystic Arcanum. Meanwhile You needing 2 less Invocations as a Pact Boon Tax means you're still on par if you wanted to just play it like a regular 5e warlock.

Thanks for the breakdown. And I'm definitely in favor of the tax reductions.

[Damon_Tor]

Oh, right, I almost forgot:

The berserker now gets to do some bonus damage once per turn. How f***ing interesting. Bonus damage once per turn. How did they think of that wholly original idea? Did it come to them in a dream? We're they doing some serious mind-opening hallucinogens and go on a vision quest? Perhaps it was revealed to them by some deity, an act of divine inspiration. Only this could explain such a marvel of unique and creative game design mastery.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I went back and forth with my warlock player a lot and got to some of the same conclusions.
But I think his biggest grief was about the melee path, as you don't have any reason to take a warlock over a ranger or a paladin (he is also a spoiled hexblade so there is that too haha)

It's an amazing dip for all Wis or Cha based characters. Also, as mentioned above, the more I'm looking at it the more I'm realizing I can keep up on spells via Mystic Arcanum. Heck, it's not a great dip for a Ranger, Suddenly Ranger is SAD and only need a 14 Dex for AC.

[Rukelnikov]

As written it's not - but I agree it should be, for exactly this reason.

You're right, currently you'd be left stuck with finding 2 scrolls of Scribe Spell* and use one of those to scribe the other on a blank book. Tbh... its not that bad, and makes losing the spellbook a problem, it may be ok th let the Wizard keep one of its weaknesses.

*likely the most readily available scroll though as its the cornerstone of every wizards repertoire.

Oh, right, I almost forgot:

The berserker now gets to do some bonus damage once per turn. How f***ing interesting. Bonus damage once per turn. How did they think of that wholly original idea? Did it come to them in a dream? We're they doing some serious mind-opening hallucinogens and go on a vision quest? Perhaps it was revealed to them by some deity, an act of divine inspiration. Only this could explain such a marvel of unique and creative game design mastery.

I have kinda the same feaaling with the playtest as a whole, for all they say "Don't call it 5.5, its not 5.5", it very much feels like the same edition with a couple adjustments, I'd have loved for them to move a little more outside of their comfort zone, if not in the playtest then when?

[Kane0]

I'd have loved for them to move a little more outside of their comfort zone, if not in the playtest then when?

When we can't tell them how stupid their ideas are :P

Edit: Although honestly I think they should absolutely be trying to do the crazy stuff, and the best way to do that would be to split their playtest stuff into the 'polishing' stuff and the 'ideas against the wall' stuff. But hey, too much effort.

[Rukelnikov]

When we can't tell them how stupid their ideas are :P

Edit: Although honestly I think they should absolutely be trying to do the crazy stuff, and the best way to do that would be to split their playtest stuff into the 'polishing' stuff and the 'ideas against the wall' stuff. But hey, too much effort.

I'm not sure its lazyness, they decided to put the sidebars explaining their reasonings behind their choices which is very welcome, I think they just don't want to stray far from 5e, or were told not to stry too far from it, idk how the chain of command goes.

[BerzerkerUnit]

I'll toss in the pile here that I don't think they really solved some of the issues with moving subclasses to level 3. Specifically, what does a level 1 celestial warlock or a level 1 aberrant mind sorcerer look like? In their current non-playtest iterations they strongly define the character from level 1; now, you don't even have to decide where your power comes from until level 3. Seems like a step back.

I've seen this sentiment repeated elsewhere and I understand where it comes from, but I'd like it if you imagine the following options:

1. A youth finds a magic blade in a half buried temple. It gives them purpose and the power to be a hero. After a few adventures with companions they are drawn to another temple, a darker place with a fiend waiting in the darkness "Welcome, my champion! Get ready, hee hee, there's much work for you to do..."

2. A princess is visited by a sprite that leads her out of the castle on what should be a quick jaunt, a brief diversion to escape the claustrophobia of her impending nuptials and dull responsibilities. She ends up discovering a knack for magic and finds herself friends to travel with. After a few weeks or months of drinking and gambling and adventuring, her fairy companions says "would you like to meet my boss? She can offer you true freedom..."

3. A failed wizard toils away in the college's library knowing he was meant for more, knowing that magic should be his birthright. Then by chance he finds a tome. Cover the color of ash, pages stained with ruddy fingerprints as if the one that wrote it were endlessly bleeding... this magic, eldritch and esoteric he could do. He sets off on a journey to learn the source of this old and aberrant magic, which leads him to a city just off the coast. Deep in the bowels of that fell metropolis sleeps a god that does not participate in the economy of faith. It is the power, and those that read the records of its dreams in journals kept by undead scribes and write their own names among the pages can call on ever more of that power...
____________________
This is, I believe, more of the classic fantasy of the Warlock. Classic warlock puts the making of the pact in the character's backstory, the new format allows the making of the pact to be a key element. In story 1 the hero finds out they've been lured in by a fiend, but what if they refuse to serve the fiend and turn away only to find a Celestial behind them that has waited 1000 years for someone that had the virtue necessary to refuse the fiend's offer and the Celestial offers to become the their patron instead, or they seek out eldritch lore that can get them out of the faustian bargain and by tattooing the cerulean sign on themselves they become a conduit to some alien thing instead.

I think the new subclass format offers better story telling. And there's no reason you couldn't just be a Asmodeus Cultist 138 and you get a promotion at 3rd level either.

Now all that said, the half-casting is garbage, the nerfs run rampant all over the newlock like a herd of buffalo stricken with diarrhea. I hate the loss of all 4 mystic arcanum for 1 more Invocation (technically 2 since your Pact Boon gets a free one baked in), but the versatility and power are both gone.

What's that you say? More spells known should mean more versatility? Not when you're a half caster baybeeee! You're just literally worse all the time, and none of your class features are as good as say a Paladin's so your loss of spellcasting potency is just a real kick in the junk.

Newlock is bad. If you're on the fence, take my word, it's bad. Loss of mechanical identity, mechanically weaker, more confusing, more bookkeeping. I dislike it greatly, it feels wildly out of line with the other types of changes we've seen. The decision to change pact magic for spell casting so you cast weaker spells more often is antithetical to what players were asking for when they said they wanted to be able to cast more spells. At levels 14+ 5th level slots and a few higher level 1/days are not so impactful that you need to nerf them to 4ths and a bunch of long rest recovered inconveniences.

At 9th level my warlock can currently make 3 pcs fly with a cast of a Fly spell, twice per short rest. Now I have to wait until 17th level to do it once unless I use a 1/day Mystic Arcanum (a thing I had to trade Repelling Blast or Investment of the Chain Master for). It's an all around downgrade across the entire spectrum of possible play.

This was such a disappointment.

[Kane0]

I'm not sure its lazyness, they decided to put the sidebars explaining their reasonings behind their choices which is very welcome, I think they just don't want to stray far from 5e, or were told not to stry too far from it, idk how the chain of command goes.

Yes for 5.5 at least its almost entirely polish and grinding rough edges, I don't think UA has ever really pushed the boundaries that much compared to previous editions and 3rd party material. 5e just isn't a super adventurous edition in general.

[Rukelnikov]

At 9th level my warlock can currently make 3 pcs fly with a cast of a Fly spell, twice per short rest. Now I have to wait until 17th level to do it once unless I use a 1/day Mystic Arcanum (a thing I had to trade Repelling Blast or Investment of the Chain Master for). It's an all around downgrade across the entire spectrum of possible play.

This was such a disappointment.

But on the other hand you can burn 1st level slots on shield, which hurt like hell to a 9th level Warlock. They are much closer to a full caster progression than to a half caster one, the problem is that their uniqueness got taken away, so it's not really about it being a nerf or a buff* in my case, but about Warlock losing uniqueness.

*Now it doesn't feel like you need to dip some other caster for a few 1st level slots to burn on Shield or AE instead of paying a 4th or 5th slot for it, and your levels count towards spell slot progression, whether its better or worse will depend on the build in question.

Yes for 5.5 at least its almost entirely polish and grinding rough edges, I don't think UA has ever really pushed the boundaries that much compared to previous editions and 3rd party material. 5e just isn't a super adventurous edition in general.

Yeah, its a bit dissapointing, shame on me for giving them the benefit of the doubt :P

On a related note, I don't know if the announcement of CR's own system will impact the design decisions of WotC in regards to the new edition going forward, maybe feeling like they have "competition" can make them feel like they need to bring something new to the table.