Playtest 7 Warlock

[GeneralVryth]

My gut feeling is that it would be too much, unless perhaps if it was under half-caster progression, so getting free castings at Levels 3,5,9,13,17.

I also feel that it is too much tracking. Maybe instead make only one free casting, now at normal caster progression. You can choose any Patron spell of a level you can cast or lower, and, like Pact Magic, it automatically upcasts to the highest level.

I would second 1 of each level maybe being too much (it depends a lot on the spell list in question). 1 upcast to current pact magic level and maybe recharging on a short rest is more interesting, with presumably fewer tracking issues. Could also be an interesting replacement of the Tome Pact Boon slot.

[animewatcha]

so '9' level 5s per short rest is too much for warlock? To use playtest warlock with celestial subclass. 4 level 5 of 'any spell known' with a free casting of 1 of (Cure Wounds, Flaming Sphere,
Guiding Bolt, Lesser Restoration, Light, or Sacred Flame ) + 1 of (Daylight or Revivify) + 1 of (Guardian of Faith or Wall of Fire) + 1 of (Flame Strike or Greater Restoration).

[Skrum]

What if Pact Magic was 1 slot of each level you're high enough to have. 1 1st at levels 1 and 2, 1 1st and 1 2nd at 3, 1 1st 1 2nd and 1 3rd at 5th, etc. Up to 1 each of spell levels 1-5 at character level 9. All on a short rest.

(and then something like Mystic Arcanum at higher than that....I forget what UA7 gives here)

[starwolf]

Short rests already are character specific, but with them being an hour long there's no way it doesn't have an affect on the entire party even if only one person is using it.
The 10m SR fix not only helps Warlocks but anyone who has SR resources. (And IMO better reflects IRL resting during heavy activity)
The BG3 method would work as well other than instant rests not feeling right.

[GeneralVryth]

What if Pact Magic was 1 slot of each level you're high enough to have. 1 1st at levels 1 and 2, 1 1st and 1 2nd at 3, 1 1st 1 2nd and 1 3rd at 5th, etc. Up to 1 each of spell levels 1-5 at character level 9. All on a short rest.

(and then something like Mystic Arcanum at higher than that....I forget what UA7 gives here)

That's basically what I have in my notes as alternative short rest option for traditional full casters (and more importantly monsters based off therm). It defeats the having fewer, higher level slot aspect of Pact Magic.

[Theodoxus]

The BG3 method would work as well other than instant rests not feeling right.

I think it's done for two reasons; 1: time isn't tracked. In game, it always appears to be either around 4 in the afternoon, or like 8 in the morning - long shadows, etc. Outside of camp, of course. 2: it reflects the fact that at the table, short rests boil down to "Ok, you take a short rest, regain your short recharge abilities and burn HD if need be." So, like 3 seconds of DM time and however long it takes the players to update their character sheets. Far far shorter than 1 hour of real time... a bit longer than instant though.

Really, in game, a short rest should take however long it takes to dig a peanut butter sandwich out of your backpack and munch it down... so what, 5 minutes, tops? I always felt a short rest should accompany a meal... wake up to breakfast, so lunch and mid-day snack, then settle down in camp for dinner.

Unless you're a party of hobbits halfings, then you have second breakfast, elevensies, lunch, low tea, high tea, supper, dinner, and night cap... this is why Warlocks should be halflings.

[pothocboots]

Unless you're a party of hobbits halfings, then you have second breakfast, elevensies, lunch, low tea, high tea, supper, dinner, and night cap... this is why Warlocks should be halflings.

If we do go to SR being a 2/LR near instant feature. I think it'd be a fun race feature if Halflings got extra SRs per LR.
Call it "Yes we've had one breakfast, but what about second breakfast"

[Kane0]

If we do go to SR being a 2/LR near instant feature. I think it'd be a fun race feature if Halflings got extra SRs per LR.
Call it "Yes we've had one breakfast, but what about second breakfast"

And then a halfling bard can sing for elevensies!

[Syjyl4488]

Why didn't they just change pact magic to spell slots = proficiency bonus? Seems like it would solve a lot of problems, more spell slots at higher lvls, short rest to recharge them. what's so hard to do?

[Arkhios]

Why didn't they just change pact magic to spell slots = proficiency bonus? Seems like it would solve a lot of problems, more spell slots at higher lvls, short rest to recharge them. what's so hard to do?

Balance is the hard part. 6 × 5th level spell slots per short rest is not balanced by any measure. It's just too much. Assuming there's at least two short rests in a given adventuring day, that's 18 × 5th level spell slots. A normal spell caster has at most 3 × 5th level spell slots between long rests, at level 18+, and at most, 13 spell slots in total of lower level spell slots which just aren't equal to 5th level spell slots by any measure.


Even if we just summed the spell levels together up to 5th level, they'd have 6 extra spell slots of approximate value of a 5th level slot, and in short still only "8" × 5th level slots, in a long rest.

If it even worked like that, but it isn't that simple.

Do you see what I mean?

[Snowbluff]

I think it's done for two reasons; 1: time isn't tracked. In game, it always appears to be either around 4 in the afternoon, or like 8 in the morning - long shadows, etc. Outside of camp, of course. 2: it reflects the fact that at the table, short rests boil down to "Ok, you take a short rest, regain your short recharge abilities and burn HD if need be." So, like 3 seconds of DM time and however long it takes the players to update their character sheets. Far far shorter than 1 hour of real time... a bit longer than instant though.

Really, in game, a short rest should take however long it takes to dig a peanut butter sandwich out of your backpack and munch it down... so what, 5 minutes, tops? I always felt a short rest should accompany a meal... wake up to breakfast, so lunch and mid-day snack, then settle down in camp for dinner.

Unless you're a party of hobbits halfings, then you have second breakfast, elevensies, lunch, low tea, high tea, supper, dinner, and night cap... this is why Warlocks should be halflings.

I think this is an important point. An hour long short rest is only a problem in game if your DM thinks an hour long is too long. Of course, they are in complete control for how time elapses at all times and they are always empowered to use a variant of resting to get a more correct feeling rest for their game. A short rest takes a minute of table time, and how long it ends up taking in game only can matter if the DM says it does.

To borrow more Tolkien, a party is never late. They arrive precisely when the DM wants them too.

Balance is the hard part. 6 × 5th level spell slots per short rest is not balanced by any measure. It's just too much. Assuming there's at least two short rests in a given adventuring day, that's 18 × 5th level spell slots. A normal spell caster has at most 3 × 5th level spell slots between long rests, at level 18+, and at most, 13 spell slots in total of lower level spell slots which just aren't equal to 5th level spell slots by any measure.

Do you see what I mean?

Indeed. I also think this is why an arbitrary 2/lr feature being the primary method of getting slots back would also be pretty messed up. A two encounter day would end up with warlock dumping a large number of high level spell slots. Warlock goes from pretty middling in some one shots to exceedingly ridiculous very quickly.

Also, I don't think I like the resource schedule not primarily being the purview of the DM in general. Like conspicuous health packs in shooters or resource drones in Armored Core, timing the resources and healing from a short rest can be a good way to make sure a big fight won't be a one sided curb stomp.

[Skrum]

Indeed. I also think this is why an arbitrary 2/lr feature being the primary method of getting slots back would also be pretty messed up. A two encounter day would end up with warlock dumping a large number of high level spell slots. Warlock goes from pretty middling in some one shots to exceedingly ridiculous very quickly.

Also, I don't think I like the resource schedule not primarily being the purview of the DM in general. Like conspicuous health packs in shooters or resource drones in Armored Core, timing the resources and healing from a short rest can be a good way to make sure a big fight won't be a one sided curb stomp.

Well, no, they wouldn't. Presumably, even if this restore feature existed, it wouldn't be useable in combat. Meaning a warlock is still limited to (generally 2 spells) per combat at most. If there was 2 total combats and then a long rest, how is the warlock getting 2 spells in each of those combats any different than an 8th level wizard going through....12 spell slots in 2 combats?

Very limited slots that come back on a short rest are inferior to full, long rest casting in *every game style* except one that has many medium to hard encounters per long rest, that give a short rest between each one. Several encounters without a rest? Warlock is bad. Very difficult, lasting combat? Warlock is bad. Randomly drop concentration, or get countered? Better luck next time kid, there's always another encounter.

[Aimeryan]

Well, no, they wouldn't. Presumably, even if this restore feature existed, it wouldn't be useable in combat. Meaning a warlock is still limited to (generally 2 spells) per combat at most. If there was 2 total combats and then a long rest, how is the warlock getting 2 spells in each of those combats any different than an 8th level wizard going through....12 spell slots in 2 combats?

Very limited slots that come back on a short rest are inferior to full, long rest casting in *every game style* except one that has many medium to hard encounters per long rest, that give a short rest between each one. Several encounters without a rest? Warlock is bad. Very difficult, lasting combat? Warlock is bad. Randomly drop concentration, or get countered? Better luck next time kid, there's always another encounter.

Yup; 2/LR (not usable in combat) is just an easier way of doing the exact same thing as 2 SR/LR, except its hard-limited just like spellcasters so always balances.

So, if the DM decides there are going to be 12 encounters of mixed easy/medium/hard difficulty before a LR but you get a SR after each combat (consider an arena type situation), Warlock is OP compared to spellcasters if its SR based - while a 2/LR one is just as balanced as the spellcasters.

On the other hand, if the DM wants a rolling set of encounters without any SR, the the SR based Warlock is crying - while a 2/LR one is in the same situation as the spellcasters.

The only case it fails is the 5MWD single encounter per LR - in which case both the SR and 2/LR Warlock are sadly sobbing in the corner.

[Snowbluff]

Well, no, they wouldn't. Presumably, even if this restore feature existed, it wouldn't be useable in combat. Meaning a warlock is still limited to (generally 2 spells) per combat at most. If there was 2 total combats and then a long rest, how is the warlock getting 2 spells in each of those combats any different than an 8th level wizard going through....12 spell slots in 2 combats?

Very limited slots that come back on a short rest are inferior to full, long rest casting in *every game style* except one that has many medium to hard encounters per long rest, that give a short rest between each one. Several encounters without a rest? Warlock is bad. Very difficult, lasting combat? Warlock is bad. Randomly drop concentration, or get countered? Better luck next time kid, there's always another encounter.

For the same Arkhios said. A warlock would be getting back max level slots. A level 5 warlock would have the same level of max level slots a wizard would, and then again for the second and third fight, and this is hoping the warlock knows how many fights there will be. Wizard has more lower level slots, but the first ones mostly end up in defensive spells and seconds aren't nearly as good as thirds.

Warlock works fine when you follow the guildelines. Which is to say, warlock isn't really bad in those situations. A wizard would be out their top slot if they were countered or broken concentration, too.

If the DM is denying the party their guideline mandated Short Rest after several encounters (and this applies to all classes, since every uses HD to heal and only 3 classes have no short rest resource), they should bear the consequences and responsibility of doing so. The game really does run better if the rest schedule is paid some mind, and writing rules for people who aren't reading the rules is going to have a cost at the detriment of the people who do read the rules.

[Aimeryan]

For the same Arkhios said.

This is just an extended 5MWD argument on your part: "The spell/pactcaster could use all their resources in the first encounter or two so its imbalanced." I mean, yeah, if there are no more encounters before the LR it definitely IS - however, the problem should be obvious there. Arkhios was specifically talking about a Warlock who could have all their Slots in one combat, which is not the case anyone has made - thusly, Arkhios corrected. You therefore can not use this as an argument, because it doesn't apply.

Now, if you are stating this argument for a Warlock with 2/LR having exactly 3 encounters per LR and knowing this, with no SR between those 3 encounters - this is super specific. Furthermore, its doesn't help the case against other spellcasters who can do the same or better. The Warlock may have more higher Slots, however, other Spellcasters havea significant number of Slots of just a lower level (and more), usually with a more powerful list. The Warlock level 5 Spells for example aren't particularly amazing in rapid fire and are largely comparable to rapid fire Level 3 Spells (which the other spellcasters would be able to use a lot of). The whole thing really doesn't matter because the core issue is the (slightly extended) 5MWD in that situation.

I'm with others who have mentioned previously that they would rather move away from LR recovery to SR recovery for exactly this sort of reason. However, WotC aren't doing that, so its pointless to pick out the Warlock as potentially having all their resources be LR based, with the additional restriction of only a third in any one encounter max. On the other hand, having exactly 2 SRs per LR is a very real issue for SR Warlocks that is completely departed from the 5MWD. It is far too easy to have too little or too much. A hard 2/LR (outside combat) solves this, and doesn't in practice make the 5MWD any more problematic than it already is.

[ZRN]

This is just an extended 5MWD argument on your part: "The spell/pactcaster could use all their resources in the first encounter or two so its imbalanced." I mean, yeah, if there are no more encounters before the LR it definitely IS - however, the problem should be obvious there. Arkhios was specifically talking about a Warlock who could have all their Slots in one combat, which is not the case anyone has made - thusly, Arkhios corrected. You therefore can not use this as an argument, because it doesn't apply.

Now, if you are stating this argument for a Warlock with 2/LR having exactly 3 encounters per LR and knowing this, with no SR between those 3 encounters - this is super specific. Furthermore, its doesn't help the case against other spellcasters who can do the same or better. The Warlock may have more higher Slots, however, other Spellcasters havea significant number of Slots of just a lower level (and more), usually with a more powerful list. The Warlock level 5 Spells for example aren't particularly amazing in rapid fire and are largely comparable to rapid fire Level 3 Spells (which the other spellcasters would be able to use a lot of). The whole thing really doesn't matter because the core issue is the (slightly extended) 5MWD in that situation.

I'm with others who have mentioned previously that they would rather move away from LR recovery to SR recovery for exactly this sort of reason. However, WotC aren't doing that, so its pointless to pick out the Warlock as potentially having all their resources be LR based, with the additional restriction of only a third in any one encounter max. On the other hand, having exactly 2 SRs per LR is a very real issue for SR Warlocks that is completely departed from the 5MWD. It is far too easy to have too little or too much. A hard 2/LR (outside combat) solves this, and doesn't in practice make the 5MWD any more problematic than it already is.

Maybe I'm not fully tracking the debate here, but why would we want them to give warlocks a special 2/LR recharge ability rather than just having them change the SR rules so that a short rest is like 5-10min long and is hard limited to 2 per LR?

[Mongobear]

Maybe I'm not fully tracking the debate here, but why would we want them to give warlocks a special 2/LR recharge ability rather than just having them change the SR rules so that a short rest is like 5-10min long and is hard limited to 2 per LR?

Because one only effects Warlocks while the other effects the entire game system.

[MinimanMidget]

Maybe I'm not fully tracking the debate here, but why would we want them to give warlocks a special 2/LR recharge ability rather than just having them change the SR rules so that a short rest is like 5-10min long and is hard limited to 2 per LR?

Because, like WotC, we hate Monks and want to punish people for playing them.

[Aimeryan]

Maybe I'm not fully tracking the debate here, but why would we want them to give warlocks a special 2/LR recharge ability rather than just having them change the SR rules so that a short rest is like 5-10min long and is hard limited to 2 per LR?

I'm not against this. However, it doesn't solve the issue of a gauntlet of encounters coming in at a fast pace - which is likely not all that rare. Even a 5 minute rest would detract from the intensity of the situation.

I would be perfectly happy to change Monks too, for the record.

[Kane0]

Ten mins is the casting time of your average ritual, so i can see that working for at least one short rest. To avoid spamming them at every opportunity perhaps scale the length up so the first is ten mins, the second an hour, and the third or more 8 hours with a long rest resetting the count. That way the heroic/gritty variants only need to worry about the duration of long rests, and as a bonus individual characters can take that first short rest without necessarily needing to halt the entire party.

[Arkhios]

Why didn't they just change pact magic to spell slots = proficiency bonus? Seems like it would solve a lot of problems, more spell slots at higher lvls, short rest to recharge them. what's so hard to do?

Balance is the hard part. 6 × 5th level spell slots per short rest is not balanced by any measure. It's just too much. Assuming there's at least two short rests in a given adventuring day, that's 18 × 5th level spell slots. A normal spell caster has at most 3 × 5th level spell slots between long rests, at level 18+, and at most, 13 spell slots in total of lower level spell slots which just aren't equal to 5th level spell slots by any measure.


Even if we just summed the spell levels together up to 5th level, they'd have 6 extra spell slots of approximate value of a 5th level slot, and in short still only "8" × 5th level slots, in a long rest.

If it even worked like that, but it isn't that simple.

Do you see what I mean?

For the same Arkhios said.

Arkhios was specifically talking about a Warlock who could have all their Slots in one combat, which is not the case anyone has made - thusly, Arkhios corrected.

I don't follow. When did I "specifically talk about a Warlock who could have all their Slots in one combat"? I answered to Syjyl's question specifically, and they did not specify one situation or another. They merely spoke of changing "pact magic to spell slots equal to proficiency bonus", which I understood (and admittedly, I may have misunderstood something) to mean that warlocks could use their spell slots a number of times equal to their proficiency bonus, and (here is what I probably misunderstood) since they were talking about pact magic rather than spellcasting, I continued to assume they intended between rests as normal; thus, they could have at most six 5th level spell slots between rests. Not in one combat. Rests (whether they are short or long).

Again, I may have misunderstood something myself (as well). But I sure as hell didn't talk about a Warlock who could have all their Slots in one combat. I talked about a Warlock who could have all their Slots between rests. In other words, I didn't propose a case no one made. Thusly, Aimeryan corrected. (do note that that was meant as light-heartedly as possible; don't take an offense, for none intended).

[Aimeryan]

I don't follow. When did I "specifically talk about a Warlock who could have all their Slots in one combat"? I answered to Syjyl's question specifically, and they did not specify one situation or another. They merely spoke of changing "pact magic to spell slots equal to proficiency bonus", which I understood (and admittedly, I may have misunderstood something) to mean that warlocks could use their spell slots a number of times equal to their proficiency bonus, and (here is what I probably misunderstood) since they were talking about pact magic rather than spellcasting, I continued to assume they intended between rests as normal; thus, they could have at most six 5th level spell slots between rests. Not in one combat. Rests (whether they are short or long).

Again, I may have misunderstood something myself (as well). But I sure as hell didn't talk about a Warlock who could have all their Slots in one combat. I talked about a Warlock who could have all their Slots between rests. In other words, I didn't propose a case no one made. Thusly, Aimeryan corrected. (do note that that was meant as light-heartedly as possible; don't take an offense, for none intended).

I am corrected! Yeah, sorry, this is on me - I was writing during a work break and was in a hurry!

Snowbluff's argument involved a single encounter, followed by the recharge, followed by a single enounter, followed by a recharge, and so on. They reported the problem they had with that was the issue you mentioned in your post, which at a glance appeared to be on getting the entire LR's worth at once (I now see its proficiency bonus), followed by a recharge, followed by the entire amount of Spell Slots, followed by a recharge, and so on. Hence, at a glance the two arguments appeared similar, except your post would involve three times the number of Spell Slots in one encounter - therefore, the problem you had (which I agree with, by the way) wasn't applicable to Snowbluff's post.

At a second look, I note your post has nothing to do with the discussion about 2/LR, so I can only give Snowbluff the benefit of the doubt and presume they also only glanced at your post or would have realised this.

[Theodoxus]

Why didn't they just change pact magic to spell slots = proficiency bonus? Seems like it would solve a lot of problems, more spell slots at higher lvls, short rest to recharge them. what's so hard to do?

Balance is the hard part. 6 × 5th level spell slots per short rest is not balanced by any measure. It's just too much. Assuming there's at least two short rests in a given adventuring day, that's 18 × 5th level spell slots. A normal spell caster has at most 3 × 5th level spell slots between long rests, at level 18+, and at most, 13 spell slots in total of lower level spell slots which just aren't equal to 5th level spell slots by any measure.


Even if we just summed the spell levels together up to 5th level, they'd have 6 extra spell slots of approximate value of a 5th level slot, and in short still only "8" × 5th level slots, in a long rest.

If it even worked like that, but it isn't that simple.

Do you see what I mean?

This explains well why the 2014 Warlock being upgraded to slots = PB wouldn't work. But if we're going to explore the concept, I would suggest looking a bit deeper into the possibilities instead of just assuming the only take is what was on the box.

For instance, If instead of using the 2014 version that auto boosts like a full caster, what if instead, the slot level increases only when the PB goes up? So, 1st -4th level, you have two 1st level slots. 5th - 9th level, you have three 2nd level slots, etc. Yes, this turns the Warlock into a half caster. If we also take the idea from UA5 and marry the Mystic Arcanum Invocations onto this half-caster form, it would provide sufficient variability while also allowing those who so cared to be able to cast (a) spell(s) on a faster, full caster tract.

Personally, I don't have any issue with six 5th level slots at 17th level. A full caster would have 3-5th, 2-6th, 2-7th, 1-8th, and 1-9th, with a lot more options. If 18 5th level slots a day feels problematic, would removing Warlocks 6th+ MA alleviate it? A Warlock never getting better than 5th level spells feels very much like the short cut to power, where the fiend or chaos fey/GOO just shrugs and says 'oops.'

Note, the spell slots would be enumerated on the class table - just in case someone is thinking that taking 1 level in Warlock and 19 levels of Monk is going to grant them six 5th level slots down the line.

[Snowbluff]

At a second look, I note your post has nothing to do with the discussion about 2/LR, so I can only give Snowbluff the benefit of the doubt and presume they also only glanced at your post or would have realised this.

Oh, for clarity, I was referring to a prior argument about prof slots causing an unwanted glut high level slots, and was saying 2/LR could cause the same problem in some situations. My bad for being unclear, I was rushing the post between things.