D&D (2024) Warlock cantrips

[doctorbadwolf]

be careful this is what got me being called a lier or dumb... saying I could see an argument both ways.

Yeah that’s just crummy behavior.

It calls out have multi deals is all I am saying... and what are deals, pacts, and if you can take your pactboon (that also picks your casting stat not just the cantrip) and still pick 2 cantrips it is a easy way to read "oh, so I can make a second pact but only pick the cantrip"

Yeah I don’t really see the reasoning here, I’ll be real. They said that your class features don’t all have to come from the same entity, not that you can take multiple options in a class feature that says “choose one”.

Like this part really is just a “you can take what the rules text says you can take” situation.

Yeah. I think it’s also getting used to new ways of reading things that have changed from the way we read spell lists for last 10 years.

However this is far from the worst the DM is going through as one player is arguing he should be able to mix in non playtest feats race and backgrounds that have not been updated yet.

To be fair…that is the intention. You should be able to use the 2014 options on the same character using a UA class, and use 2014 subclasses even.

It’s just…a playtest…so the player should be able to see why the DM would want to be careful about what exactly gets mixed.

But in 2024, the 2014 stuff will still be legal, especially anything that doesn’t get updated.

 

[Stalker0]

I don't know why we need a 4 page thread to decide whether something is unclear or not. Its a damn playtest, if a group believes that the text allows them to do something that a lot of people disagree with....well that is GREAT feedback to give to WOTC. Clarity of language is just as important as other types of feedback.

But getting into a debate on how crystal clear some language is is downright silly. If a group finds a rule unclear, they should report it. If enough people report the same thing....well that tells WOTC there's an issue in the language there and it needs to get fixed. Its that simple.

 

[Shardstone]

I don't know why we need a 4 page thread to decide whether something is unclear or not. Its a damn playtest, if a group believes that the text allows them to do something that a lot of people disagree with....well that is GREAT feedback to give to WOTC. Clarity of language is just as important as other types of feedback.

But getting into a debate on how crystal clear some language is is downright silly. If a group finds a rule unclear, they should report it. If enough people report the same thing....well that tells WOTC there's an issue in the language there and it needs to get fixed. Its that simple.

Agreed!

 

[Charlaquin]

Th

IT also says that those other cantrips are warlock cantrips

so far in 5e specific beats generic, and a cantrip beinng a cantrip for warlocks seems to trump the 'from arcane list"

Now the issue is you can argue the reverse, that in this case the specific is "arcane list" but a good faith argument can be made either way.

also since they only scale with warlock levels they already break cantrip rules, but since they only scale to 5th a 5/15 warlock/X will still have full power of a 20 warlock with that cantrip

Sppecific beats general only applies in cases where rules are in conflict. These rules are not. One class feature allows you to choose spells off the arcane spell list. Another feature gives you some spells that are not on the arcane spell list.

 

[Charlaquin]

they are just listed in spells so far so what makes you think they wont be in the PHB? and as the OP said

if they were listed under class feature instead of spells it would dispel this issue 100%

What makes you think they’ll be listed with the other spells rather than with the class feature?

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

What makes you think they’ll be listed with the other spells rather than with the class feature?

they are currently listed under spells not class features, and the class feature references them.

 

[DnD Warlord]

My group didn't read it as you could take them, until this thread and I brought up that if we use the 2014 book then warlock cantrips are cantrips warlocks can take, so I am going to playtest a john Constintine like character that has sold his soul to 3 demons.
If/When he dies all three will want to collect and it will send hell into a civil war.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

they are currently listed under spells not class features, and the class feature references them.

That section contains the description of spells in the UA that are new or changed from the 2014 default.
They are not the Arcane spells.
The Arcane list is the big list of spells above them.

MODIFY SPELL
4th-Level Transmutation Spell (Ritual; Wizard)

In the example above the underlined bit, that is the list the spell belongs to. None of them are Arcane.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

In the example above the underlined bit, that is the list the spell belongs to. None of them are Arcane.

yet they are warlock cantrips so as a warlock I can easily read that as a cantrip I can take.

 

[OldSchoolGamerGirl]

If/When he dies all three will want to collect and it will send hell into a civil war.

spoiler alert I don't think that worked out so well for the character you are basing this one