Unearthed Arcana - PH Playtest 5 - One D&D

[Segev]

The specific text "When the book appears select" 2 Cantrips and 2 Ritual Spells you don't already have prepared. The book goes away when you recast. Everytime you Cast that Cantrip you select 2 Cantrips and 2 Ritual spells. You don't "start" with two, you have access to every 1st level Ritual in the game so long as you can find an hour of down time.

Count me in as seeing the ability to add higher-level rituals as better than "all 1st level rituals, with an hour lead time," as being superior, both in terms of desirability and in terms of thematics. Once again, it feels like they're emphasizing how the PC is just a game token being controlled by a being (the player) who is not part of the world. This is less serious than the use of generic stat blobs, but it still feels more like a video game button than it does a thing where the tome is really a thing in its own right. Sure, you could always refluff the tome to be anything you wanted, but now it seriously doesn't need to be a book at all. After all, it's just...a magic wand that lets you cast four spells of your choosing.

There are things to like in this warlock rework. The half-caster thing and the way they're doing the Tome are not amongst them.

I like merging all the "spend a warlock spell slot" invocations into one general one. I suspect I would've had less issue with Mystic Arcanum in the first place if it'd been presented as this invocation in the past, so I also suspect I will warm up to this version of it with time and thought.


I severely dislike the "everything locked to class level" theme that's going on throughout. I acknowledge that this largely was a thing that eased multiclassing for casters, and had little impact on martials (who had the class level restriction built in in a lot of ways...except those which used proficiency bonus as a resource quantifier), but making multiclassing more unfriendly is just...not good, in my opinion. In 5.0, there is rarely a problem where multiclassing leaves you with all of your class features too weak to participate in the game. This is because the level-based scaling of cantrips and the combining scaling of multiclass spell slots made the cost of multiclassing casters being the highest level spells known, and martials really only felt a problem if they got more than one Extra Attack level (which I think is an issue that could have been addressed in OneD&D, but they seem to be going the opposite direction). For example, the Font of Magic sorcerer feature was already self-limited by the number of sorcery points the sorcerer had available; there is no need to keep the sorcerer from combining his sorcery points to make a spell slot higher level than his sorcerer class would allow. Even in the few circumstances where this allowed a single-classed sorcerer to make a spell slot that exceeded the character level limit for spell slots, this just made for more potent upcasting, which is generally not a problem, especially on the class whose entire theme was supposed to be "doing things with magic that nobody else could!"

[Aimeryan]

I think nerfing Twinned Spell was the right call, but I think they changed it to the point that they should call it something else. I do wonder if the original Twinned Spell metamagic is powerful enough to make people choose the 2014 Sorcerer over the new one.

I didn't really find Twinned that powerful on a Sorcerer in 5e; most of the spells that might be good with it were ruled out (often arbritrarily), others had ways of going from single target to multi-target anyway, or the spells that would be particularly good were not on the Sorcerer list. This is because the best spells to Twin are usually buffs since single target damage spells are rare and single target debuffs are usually weaker than aoe versions due to reliability. Haste is an often cited example, but I find Haste to be a poor spell and often debilitating. The Sorcery Point cost really hurts high level spell Twinning too, which is usually what you want if you are going for 'impact now'. Really, I only particularly like it for Greater Invisibility in a party that really takes 'Advantage' of that.

Don't take me wrong, its not awful; its one of the better ones. However, I do not agree with WotC's assessment on it.

[Oramac]

snip
Don't take me wrong, its not awful; its one of the better ones. However, I do not agree with WotC's assessment on it.

100% agreed. I like the majority of this UA, but on Twinned Spell, I think WOTC just flat out got it wrong. The 2014 Twinned was not broken and does not need to be changed.

[Segev]

I didn't really find Twinned that powerful on a Sorcerer in 5e; most of the spells that might be good with it were ruled out (often arbritrarily), others had ways of going from single target to multi-target anyway, or the spells that would be particularly good were not on the Sorcerer list. This is because the best spells to Twin are usually buffs since single target damage spells are rare and single target debuffs are usually weaker than aoe versions due to reliability. Haste is an often cited example, but I find Haste to be a poor spell and often debilitating. The Sorcery Point cost really hurts high level spell Twinning too, which is usually what you want if you are going for 'impact now'. Really, I only particularly like it for Greater Invisibility in a party that really takes 'Advantage' of that.

Don't take me wrong, its not awful; its one of the better ones. However, I do not agree with WotC's assessment on it.

I agree with this assessment. Twin Spell is one of the few metamagics worth taking in the 5.0 version, and even then it was really limited. Metamagic is an area WotC is way, way too timid with, and I think it is part of the big overarching problem they have with not really knowing what they want the sorcerer to be.

The new version... it's bad because the real power of Twin Spell had little to do with "Casting two spells in a round." Seriously, the way 5.0 Twin Spell is crippled, all it really was was "+1 target." That's it. The real power of Twin Spell is that it let you affect two creatures with the same CONCENTRATION. The OneD&D version in this playtest is next to worthless, because the sp discount is just not worth the metamagic slot. Sure, if you got Twin Spell for free, it'd be worth using, possibly regularly, but it is not worth spending a resource to KNOW at this point. The discount is all it is giving you, and it isn't a big enough discount to be worth not taking any of the other competitively-useful metamagics (e.g. subtle, quicken, seeking, transmuted, or heighten) instead. And this is still without taking into account that you have to have a spell you want to spam at least two rounds in a row. This is not so unlikely as to never come up, but it is one more restriction that devalues this metamagic.

[Hurrashane]

I can see some use for new twinned spell. Used your last 3rd level slot on a fireball and want to do it again? Go nuts. Enemy succeeded on your spell by rolling high? Try again!

It'd be nice if they gave the re-cast a bit of a buff though, like a + caster level on it, that way it'll be more likely to land the second time.

Edit: I mean casting mod bonus, not sure why I said caster level

[Segev]

I can see some use for new twinned spell. Used your last 3rd level slot on a fireball and want to do it again? Go nuts. Enemy succeeded on your spell by rolling high? Try again!

It'd be nice if they gave the re-cast a bit of a buff though, like a + caster level on it, that way it'll be more likely to land the second time.

Edit: I mean casting mod bonus, not sure why I said caster level

Oh, I agree, those are use cases. But the use case is not sufficient, to me, to justify spending a metamagic-known slot on it. You can already do this without the metamagic. It doesn't give you anything new you can do. IT doesn't make you better at the few spells you know than anybody from any other class. It just lets you cast it at a slight discount.

About the only thing it really does is make your odd-character-level highest-level spell slot get a second shot, under those very specific circumstances. And Font of Magic did that, already. So, again, this is just a discount. So, again, you're spending a very precious build resource for something that does...little.

[Aimeryan]

I can see some use for new twinned spell. Used your last 3rd level slot on a fireball and want to do it again? Go nuts. Enemy succeeded on your spell by rolling high? Try again!

It'd be nice if they gave the re-cast a bit of a buff though, like a + caster level on it, that way it'll be more likely to land the second time.

Edit: I mean casting mod bonus, not sure why I said caster level

Usually, if you are blowing your high level slots you really want them to be impactful. If you are having to cast the spell again then it kind of failed. This is why single-target non-buff spells in general are not great - you don't want to blow your load for no or little effect.

If you cast Fireball at level 5 and there are still some things alive, is it worth casting again or just mopping up with some cantrips? If you are casting this at level 11, either the fight wasn't impactful enough to warrant a higher level spell or you are running low on resources... so probably don't want to cast it again.

The lower level spells relative to your character level tend to be situationally good, which this Metamagic doesn't favour. The higher level spells relative to your character level tend to demand being impactful, which if so don't require casting again. Maybe there are some mid level spells relative to your character level that you may want to cast and then cast the exact same spell again next round, maybe.

Now if Twinned let you cast a spell you had cast since the last Long Rest for a discount, sure. However, the limitations here are stifling it - once again.

[Rukelnikov]

Oh, I agree, those are use cases. But the use case is not sufficient, to me, to justify spending a metamagic-known slot on it. You can already do this without the metamagic. It doesn't give you anything new you can do. IT doesn't make you better at the few spells you know than anybody from any other class. It just lets you cast it at a slight discount.

About the only thing it really does is make your odd-character-level highest-level spell slot get a second shot, under those very specific circumstances. And Font of Magic did that, already. So, again, this is just a discount. So, again, you're spending a very precious build resource for something that does...little.

I don't think a discount is something to disregard, at lvl 5 melting all your 1st and 2nd lvl slots for SP gives you a total of 15 SP (including the daily base of 5), if you spent it all to make 3rd lvl slots you'd have 5 of them. Using new!Twin you could make 1 slot for a total of 3, and recast the 3 of them, for a total of 6 castings. A 20% extra highest level slots ain't bad. A different way of seeing this is it allows the second casting to be done a slot level lower, since you usually pay 3 SP for a 2nd lvl slot, and this allows you to use 3 sp for a 3rd level one.

The thing is that the conditions for this discount make it difficult to justify those 6 castings, the only kind of spells you'll likely want to be casting one round after the other are no concentration combat spells, which are mostly damage, but maybe after the first Fireball by the time your next turn comes the combat doesn't seem threatening enough to warrant a second Fireball, so you didn't really get those discounts.

It'd probably be better if the MMs you applied to the previous casting carried over to the repeated one, so an Empowered Quickened Fireball can be recasted for "only 2 SP"

Now if Twinned let you cast a spell you had cast since the last Long Rest for a discount, sure. However, the limitations here are stifling it - once again.

I thought about this possibility, but I think it would have to be done the other way round, when you cast a spell you can "twin ir" by spending the SP cost at cast time, and it is you MM for that spell, whenever you want before your next long rest you can cast that spell again for free. That way at least it feels like you are modifying the spell, the other way it just feels like you recalled the spell.

[Rafaelfras]

Another thing that I would like to point out about wizards is that modify/create spell will help a lot with elemental builds and elemental themed wizards, a big problem with elemental spells was that fire was by far the best element to focus in with elemental adept focusing on fire the only good choice as fire resistance is the most prevalent resistance too. Now you can at 9 change all your elemental spells to your prefered damage type. This is also good for the developers as they dont need now to create spells that do the same thing but have other type of damage trying to balance everything so all damage types are equal to fire. Now i can create comet swarm and have 40d6 frost damage spell

[Segev]

I don't think a discount is something to disregard, at lvl 5 melting all your 1st and 2nd lvl slots for SP gives you a total of 15 SP (including the daily base of 5), if you spent it all to make 3rd lvl slots you'd have 5 of them. Using new!Twin you could make 1 slot for a total of 3, and recast the 3 of them, for a total of 6 castings. A 20% extra highest level slots ain't bad. A different way of seeing this is it allows the second casting to be done a slot level lower, since you usually pay 3 SP for a 2nd lvl slot, and this allows you to use 3 sp for a 3rd level one.

The thing is that the conditions for this discount make it difficult to justify those 6 castings, the only kind of spells you'll likely want to be casting one round after the other are no concentration combat spells, which are mostly damage, but maybe after the first Fireball by the time your next turn comes the combat doesn't seem threatening enough to warrant a second Fireball, so you didn't really get those discounts.

It isn't that I am saying the effect is worthless. I am saying it is not worth the cost in build resources compared to other options.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Another thing that I would like to point out about wizards is that modify/create spell will help a lot with elemental builds and elemental themed wizards, a big problem with elemental spells was that fire was by far the best element to focus in with elemental adept focusing on fire the only good choice as fire resistance is the most prevalent resistance too. Now you can at 9 change all your elemental spells to your prefered damage type. This is also good for the developers as they dont need now to create spells that do the same thing but have other type of damage trying to balance everything so all damage types are equal to fire. Now i can create comet swarm and have 40d6 frost damage spell

I agree with the sentiment, just two things to note:
- It's extremely expensive and requires a specific material component to create a spell. Good for balance, really bad for usability, especially at a table where the DM isn't prone to handing out wealth.

It's not something you'll likely be able to do right away, even for low level spells.

-The element change only changes one damage type on spells that deal multiple types, so the best you can hope for is a fire/cold or cold/bludgeoning combo for meteor swarm.

[Intregus182]

Am I missing something?

Experts get expertise
Priests get channel divinity
Warriors get weapon mastery
Mages get ???? I don't see anything that all mages share aside from spells but that's not unique to them when clerics, druids, bards, paladins and rangers also get them.

Am I blind?

[Hurrashane]

Am I missing something?

Experts get expertise
Priests get channel divinity
Warriors get weapon mastery
Mages get ???? I don't see anything that all mages share aside from spells but that's not unique to them when clerics, druids, bards, paladins and rangers also get them.

Am I blind?

2/3 of them get ways to change spells... I guess? But I don't immediately see any kind of unifying ability outside arcane spellcasting.

[Joe the Rat]

I'm still a bit salty you net two fewer invocations if you decide to replicate the full 5e Arcanum options (one less for pact tax, one more given, four used for Arcanum).

[Theodoxus]

I'm still a bit salty you net two fewer invocations if you decide to replicate the full 5e Arcanum options (one less for pact tax, one more given, four used for Arcanum).

I, on the other hand, am quite pleased I can choose how many, if any, arcanum I want to take. I was ok with it being a free class ability, but swapping them out for Invocations means I can completely ignore those levels I don't really care about (6 and 7 were always kinda meh to me) and have more build-useful Invocations available.

[ProsecutorGodot]

2/3 of them get ways to change spells... I guess? But I don't immediately see any kind of unifying ability outside arcane spellcasting.

Unlike the other spellcasting classes, their prepared list is not tied to spell slots. Which is exactly what I thought they'd do.

[Joe the Rat]

Unlike the other spellcasting classes, their prepared list is not tied to spell slots. Which is exactly what I thought they'd do.

I think this may be a change in prep lists. You have the same number of spells prepped as spell slots. It's just not tied to level.
At least I hope that's the plan here.

[Oramac]

Unlike the other spellcasting classes, their prepared list is not tied to spell slots. Which is exactly what I thought they'd do.

If that is the "unifying feature", WOTC needs to have their heads checked. Tying spells prepared to spell slots is without a doubt one of the stupidest things in the entire OneD&D playtest. I can't speak for anyone else, but I can guarantee if that gets printed in the 2024 PHB, my table will not be following that rule.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I think this may be a change in prep lists. You have the same number of spells prepped as spell slots. It's just not tied to level.
At least I hope that's the plan here.

You don't always, each of these classes can prepare more spells than they have slots for starting at 2 and at a few more levels. The big difference is that it's on any combination, they can prepare zero 3rd level spells and more 1st if they want, other groups can't.

I don't think they're changing the other spellcasters, this is the only unifying feature between the three mage classes.

[Rafaelfras]

I agree with the sentiment, just two things to note:
- It's extremely expensive and requires a specific material component to create a spell. Good for balance, really bad for usability, especially at a table where the DM isn't prone to handing out wealth.

It's not something you'll likely be able to do right away, even for low level spells.

-The element change only changes one damage type on spells that deal multiple types, so the best you can hope for is a fire/cold or cold/bludgeoning combo for meteor swarm.

Yeah it can be something so easy neither too hard. It also consume valuable spell slots so its kind of expensive in that regard too so you will not use that in the middle of an adventure where those slots are needed. Even modify spell is too expensive resource wise to use it when you get it. A 4th level spell is way more powerfull than a 3rd level spell with more range/different element/ without its somatic component. Of course there is allways niche situations where its worth to cast it, but as an example is way cheaper to prepare both fireball and lightning bolt to use against immune enemies and still have access to polymorph than use your strongest spell to change fire ball to electric ball because the enemies are immune to fire.

And yes cold/bludgeoning would be the way to go for a "frost mage"

[Aimeryan]

I don't think a discount is something to disregard, at lvl 5 melting all your 1st and 2nd lvl slots for SP gives you a total of 15 SP (including the daily base of 5), if you spent it all to make 3rd lvl slots you'd have 5 of them. Using new!Twin you could make 1 slot for a total of 3, and recast the 3 of them, for a total of 6 castings. A 20% extra highest level slots ain't bad. A different way of seeing this is it allows the second casting to be done a slot level lower, since you usually pay 3 SP for a 2nd lvl slot, and this allows you to use 3 sp for a 3rd level one.

The thing is that the conditions for this discount make it difficult to justify those 6 castings, the only kind of spells you'll likely want to be casting one round after the other are no concentration combat spells, which are mostly damage, but maybe after the first Fireball by the time your next turn comes the combat doesn't seem threatening enough to warrant a second Fireball, so you didn't really get those discounts.

It'd probably be better if the MMs you applied to the previous casting carried over to the repeated one, so an Empowered Quickened Fireball can be recasted for "only 2 SP"

I'm not sure I'm following you 100%, so I'll reword what I think you're saying and you can correct me if not!

UA Twinned costs the same for a Spell Slot as you get from a Spell Slot. So, if you convert a Level 5 Spell Slot (the highest you can Twin) you get 5 SP. If you Twin a 5th Level Spell, it costs 5 SP. So, converting the Spell Slot and then Twinning the same Spell Slot does not get you a discount here.

However, if you want to create a 5th Level Spell from SP it costs 7 SP vs Twin's 5 SP. So, if you want to convert lower Spell Slots into higher ones it is more efficient to Twin the higher level Spell Slot than it is to create - however, there are limitations: 1. You must cast using a Spell Slot for each Twin. ; 2. You must have done this the round before.

If we take the Level 5 Sorcerer as the example provided, you have two Level 3 Spell Slots. If you convert your four Level 1 and three Level 2 Slots into SP (for 10 SP), you have a total of 15 SP with the base included. You cast a Level 3 Spell. Next round you use Twinned for 3 SP, so 12 SP left. Some other combat you do the same; 9 SP left. You are now out of Spell Slots. Creating a new Level 3 Spell Slot costs 5 SP; 4 SP left. You cast the Level 3 Spell, then the next round Twinned; 1 SP left, no Spell Slots left (so, you could have a Level 1 Spell Slot left instead of converting, if you like). So, a total of six Level 3 Spells and one Level 1 Spell per Long Rest.

If we just created the Slots we would have five Level 3 Spell Slots. So, by Twinning we have one extra Level 3 Spell and one Level 1 Spell over just having converted normally IF every opportunity was taken to use Twinned. A single opportunity lost tanks this, and there is no guarantee that the three Twinned uses were anywhere near as effective as having spread them out over other combats even if you do get and use every opportunity to Twin. I'm not convinced this is a good idea.

----

I thought about this possibility, but I think it would have to be done the other way round, when you cast a spell you can "twin ir" by spending the SP cost at cast time, and it is you MM for that spell, whenever you want before your next long rest you can cast that spell again for free. That way at least it feels like you are modifying the spell, the other way it just feels like you recalled the spell.

Yeah, that does sound preferable from a book-keeping perspective - although it is mechanically weaker than being to able to choose at point of use which spell you Twin. Your version is also closer to the current version in mechanics than either mine or the UA version. You still lose being able to get past action economy and Concentration, but you gain being able to Twin AoE spells. That sounds like more of a sidegrade than this nerfed UA version, while still fulfilling WotC's concerns. If the non-aoe spells the Sorcerer had access to were better for Twinning and had Concentration it would still be a substantial nerf, but as it is I think Twinning an AoE spell does make up for the current selection IF you can choose when the Twinned spell is cast.

[Rukelnikov]

I'm not sure I'm following you 100%, so I'll reword what I think you're saying and you can correct me if not!

UA Twinned costs the same for a Spell Slot as you get from a Spell Slot. So, if you convert a Level 5 Spell Slot (the highest you can Twin) you get 5 SP. If you Twin a 5th Level Spell, it costs 5 SP. So, converting the Spell Slot and then Twinning the same Spell Slot does not get you a discount here.

However, if you want to create a 5th Level Spell from SP it costs 7 SP vs Twin's 5 SP. So, if you want to convert lower Spell Slots into higher ones it is more efficient to Twin the higher level Spell Slot than it is to create - however, there are limitations: 1. You must cast using a Spell Slot for each Twin. ; 2. You must have done this the round before.

If we take the Level 5 Sorcerer as the example provided, you have two Level 3 Spell Slots. If you convert your four Level 1 and three Level 2 Slots into SP (for 10 SP), you have a total of 15 SP with the base included. You cast a Level 3 Spell. Next round you use Twinned for 3 SP, so 12 SP left. Some other combat you do the same; 9 SP left. You are now out of Spell Slots. Creating a new Level 3 Spell Slot costs 5 SP; 4 SP left. You cast the Level 3 Spell, then the next round Twinned; 1 SP left, no Spell Slots left (so, you could have a Level 1 Spell Slot left instead of converting, if you like). So, a total of six Level 3 Spells and one Level 1 Spell per Long Rest.

If we just created the Slots we would have five Level 3 Spell Slots. So, by Twinning we have one extra Level 3 Spell and one Level 1 Spell over just having converted normally IF every opportunity was taken to use Twinned. A single opportunity lost tanks this, and there is no guarantee that the three Twinned uses were anywhere near as effective as having spread them out over other combats even if you do get and use every opportunity to Twin. I'm not convinced this is a good idea.

Yeah, that's basically what I meant, and with the same conclusion, at that level, unless you can make use of it every time it not worth it. If you could make use of it every time though, I think its fine, its "an extra 3rd and 1st level slots".

Reading your quote I realised the example of the fireball should have read so an Empowered Quickened Fireball can be recasted for "0 SP"

Yeah, that does sound preferable from a book-keeping perspective - although it is mechanically weaker than being to able to choose at point of use which spell you Twin. Your version is also closer to the current version in mechanics than either mine or the UA version. You still lose being able to get past action economy and Concentration, but you gain being able to Twin AoE spells. That sounds like more of a sidegrade than this nerfed UA version, while still fulfilling WotC's concerns. If the non-aoe spells the Sorcerer had access to were better for Twinning and had Concentration it would still be a substantial nerf, but as it is I think Twinning an AoE spell does make up for the current selection IF you can choose when the Twinned spell is cast.

Thanks!

[Psyren]

I'm still a bit salty you net two fewer invocations if you decide to replicate the full 5e Arcanum options (one less for pact tax, one more given, four used for Arcanum).

Well, Tome has two (BoAS + Agonizing Blast) and arguably the others do as well because the Returning ability with Blade and Chain being able to attack with your Reaction instead of your Bonus Action like before could frankly be invocations themselves.

[Daphne]

Yup, killing pact magic is the final nail on the coffin for me. No way I'm switching editions.

[BerzerkerUnit]

Well, Tome has two (BoAS + Agonizing Blast) and arguably the others do as well because the Returning ability with Blade and Chain being able to attack with your Reaction instead of your Action like before could frankly be invocations themselves.

I don't think the Agonizing Blast invocation and Tome enhancement work the same way. AB adds it to every blast, Tome adds it to one roll IIRC.

Chain eating your reaction is arguably an upgrade, but considering Favor of the Chain master doesn't come on line till 9th, the familiar will have long since lost viability in melee for it and can't seem to take actions other than attack/invis/or dodge, means chain is still deep in the nerf zone.

I will say Bladepact does seem to have come away with a variety of gains. This is, IMO, the root of the problem. The push to half caster and the emphasis on melee viability means they're trying to change Warlock into the "spellblade" archetype. But its not. 33% of warlocks want to spellblades. Paladins do it better. Paladins that dip warlock will still do it even better.

I'm still a bit salty you net two fewer invocations if you decide to replicate the full 5e Arcanum options (one less for pact tax, one more given, four used for Arcanum).

Based on my own experience at conventions and game store AL games, home games, my own preferences, actual plays I've read, youtube campaigns I've watched, etc. Most Warlock players want to be Mages, they want darker, creepier powers from questionable sources, but they still want to be about magic and spells, and half casting while sinking your primary flex resource into a failing effort to keep up with wizard and sorc on potency is not fulfilling that fantasy.

Yup, killing pact magic is the final nail on the coffin for me. No way I'm switching editions.

If they're desperate to drop Pact Magic (one of the best elements of the class, instead of just giving us another spell slot at 5th and 14th and a capstone that recovers a pact slot each time we roll initiative), letting the half progression advance as full progression and then stop at 10th would be a better fit. Then give us 3 more Invocations and drop mystic arcanum.


Pls forgive me if I'm repeating points that have already been made. I imagine I'll be complaining about this for some time, but my sass purse runneth over because 'locks are my most favoritest class and they're butchering them.

[animewatcha]

On an oddball side upgrade. Monks get up to 4-5 attacks with 2-3 dagger attacks and flurry of blows. And you use the martial arts die

[Theodoxus]

I don't think the Agonizing Blast invocation and Tome enhancement work the same way. AB adds it to every blast, Tome adds it to one roll IIRC.

"When you reach 5th level as a Warlock, this spell also enhances other cantrips while the book is on your person; you can add your Warlock spellcasting ability modifier to the damage rolls of any cantrip you cast that doesn’t already have that modifier added to its damage roll."

Nope, they're identical.

[ProsecutorGodot]

On an oddball side upgrade. Monks get up to 4-5 attacks with 2-3 dagger attacks and flurry of blows. And you use the martial arts die

We don't have Monk yet, so we don't know that yet.

[animorte]

Pls forgive me if I'm repeating points that have already been made. I imagine I'll be complaining about this for some time, but my sass purse runneth over because 'locks are my most favoritest class and they're butchering them.

I mean, they're easily my favorite class as well, but I don't feel this way. I've begun putting in some playtime and I really don't feel it's nearly as bad as the initial thoughts of many seem to imply.

Spoiler: people

Show

[Zevox]

Based on my own experience at conventions and game store AL games, home games, my own preferences, actual plays I've read, youtube campaigns I've watched, etc. Most Warlock players want to be Mages, they want darker, creepier powers from questionable sources, but they still want to be about magic and spells, and half casting while sinking your primary flex resource into a failing effort to keep up with wizard and sorc on potency is not fulfilling that fantasy.

This is very much my single biggest problem with the UA Warlock. Hell, this is the single thing I've most disliked about any of the One D&D UAs, with the only other thing that even comes close being the change to Wild Shape. Where most other criticisms I'd level against them come down to feeling like the changes are for the worse in some small way, this is a fundamental failure to capture the flavor of the class, the fantasy it's going for. That's the biggest kind of problem they could have, IMO.