D&D 5E Warlock, Pact of the Boon Specific Wording Question

[TarionzCousin]

So I'm playing a Warlock in a 5E homebrewed campaign. We had our first session last weekend.

The DM and one other player both agreed that the wording for Pact of the Tome Warlock indicated that the additional cantrips could only be taken from one other class's spell list. For example, my warlock could only learn/cast these three cantrips from the Bard's spell list--not one cantrip from the Bard's list, one from the Wizard's, and one from the Cleric's.

Is this correct? If not, please direct me to some WotC person's Twitter message (or post elsewhere) where they state otherwise.

The exact wording, from page 108 of the PHB:

When you gain this feature, choose three cantrips from any class's spell list.

 

[Thyrwyn]

I can't point to any tweets or anything, but that is not how I would rule it. I would ask why the need for such a narrow ruling: what will it break? Note that you could also take more Warlock Cantrips: Warlocks are "any class". Ultimately the DM's call, but there is nothing in the way the rules are written in this edition that would lend itself to such a narrow reading - good luck.

PS - Be prepared - since there is nothing in the wording of the pact that says that the Cantrips so gained count as Warlock spells for you, your DM may also rule that the Cantrips use the Spellcasting Attribute for the original class. Again, I would not, but yours sounds like he may.

 

[green_destiny]

In order to justify the reasoning behind the phrase, let's first take a look of how the PHB specifies an additional cantrip of the SAME class.

Let's look at Magic Initiate Feat:

Choose a class: bard, cleric...etc. You learn two cantrips from THAT class's spell list.

It cleary states that you choose two cantrips from a choosen class' spell list. Unlike with the wording of Pact of Tome.

When you gain this feature, choose three cantrips from ANY class's spell list.

See their difference? So it makes more sense to interpret it as choosing three cantrips from different or same class' spell list. Else it would have been very specific.

 

[Ravenheart87]

I can't point to any tweets or anything, but that is not how I would rule it. I would ask why the need for such a narrow ruling: what will it break?

This. Why not let it be really any class, if it won't break anything?

 

[green_destiny]

Speaking of Warlock Pacts.

Wording of Pact of Chain:

When you cast the spell you can choose one of the normal forms or one of the following special forms: imp, psuedodragons, quasit or sprite.

So we are interpreting this as whenever you call a familiar (by ritual), you can choose any form you wish that time. Not choose one form and stick with it forever. You can even choose depending on your need that time or adventure.

Flexible choices like:

* On dense forest, do I need a familiar that grants me additional passive perception?
* On a cave, do I need a familiar with dark vision?
* Do I need a familiar that can speak infernal?
* Or do I need a familiar that can be invisible and can spy on the mayor of the town?

And don't forget that most of the special familiars grants passive MAGIC RESISTANCE to its master!

 

[fuindordm]

I understand it as any three cantrips, period. You can have a bard cantrip, a cleric cantrip and a druid cantrip in your book if you want.

 

[Perun]

Speaking of Warlock Pacts.

And don't forget that most of the special familiars grants passive MAGIC RESISTANCE to its master!

Is this stated anywhere apart from the sidebars of the monster entries in the MM? I skimmed my PH, but couldn't find it anywhere. In any case, I would rule (and would fully expect my DM to rule it that way as well) that magic resistance from special familiars doesn't apply to the warlock with pact of the chain boon.

The way I see it, imp, quasit, and pseudodragon (and sprite, too, but they don't get MR anyways) serving as familiars according to the MM rules are special cases. The spellcaster doesn't need to cast find familiar to obtain one of those as a familiar, instead the creature agrees to serve the spellcaster as a familiar, and can break the bond at any time, regardless of the "master's" wishes. In such cases would the rules in the sidebars apply.

Considering that find familiar is described in the PH, that special familiars are all described in the PH Appendix D, and that rules from the MM sidebars are not reproduced anywhere in the PH, I'd say it was not intended for warlocks to get magic resistance from familiars.

Of course, if the sidebar text can be found somewhere in the PH, I'm very obviously wrong here

Oh, and also for the OP: I'd read it as cantrips from any and all class lists.

Regards,

 

[green_destiny]

Considering that find familiar is described in the PH, that special familiars are all described in the PH Appendix D, and that rules from the MM sidebars are not reproduced anywhere in the PH, I'd say it was not intended for warlocks to get magic resistance from familiars.

Not to argue on this, but pact of chain grants the warlock ability to immediately have access to these special familiars and as simply stated in MM these familiars grants Magic Resistance (within 10ft).

Ever wondered why such creatures in MM that have these familiar option are all in the Warlock's special familiar list? coincidence? i dont think so.

And this option is from DnD official monster manual. Its was not from a canon source. As a player I dont question a DM if his monsters and its traits are not in PHB. Players can have access to monster manual too and use it as their resource.

Besides this is just magic resistance, it doesnt make chain warlocks invincible or breaks the game. A smart DM will just hurt them thru physical attacks or kill the familiar.

 

[TarionzCousin]

In order to justify the reasoning behind the phrase, let's first take a look of how the PHB specifies an additional cantrip of the SAME class.

Let's look at Magic Initiate Feat:

It cleary states that you choose two cantrips from a choosen class' spell list. Unlike with the wording of Pact of Tome.

See their difference? So it makes more sense to interpret it as choosing three cantrips from different or same class' spell list. Else it would have been very specific.

I'll throw this at the DM and see how he reacts. Thanks.

Thanks, everyone. Hopefully the weight of popular opinion will help sway opinions in my favor. Right now my warlock is only first level, and this ability kicks in at level three. So I've got a couple more sessions before it's relevant.

 

[Perun]

Not to argue on this, but pact of chain grants the warlock ability to immediately have access to these special familiars and as simply stated in MM these familiars grants Magic Resistance (within 10ft).

Ever wondered why such creatures in MM that have these familiar option are all in the Warlock's special familiar list? coincidence? i dont think so.

As there are no hard and fast rules regarding this, it's open to DM's interpretation. Note that not all of the four special familars available to the pact of the chain warlock get MM sidebars, just three (imp, pseudodragon and quasit). The wordings are similar (imp states that it "can enter a contract to serve another creature as a familiar", while pseudodragon and quasit entries state they "can serve another creature as a familiar"). Benefits are the same for all three (improved telepathic link (1 mile instead of regular familiar's 100 ft.), and magic resistance if within 10 ft. of the master).

Sprites don't get the sidebar. They also don't have the magic resistance. And, if you choose to use the MM sidebars for chain pact warlocks, don't get the improved telepathic link.

Find familiar spell gets you an animal familiar from a specified list, the familiar retains its animal Intelligence score (generally 1 or 2, IIRC); the familiar can act independently, but cannot attack; has a 100 ft. telepathic link with master; can be dismissed in a pocket dimension; can assume other forms by repeated castings of the spell; can deliver touch spell attacks; and generally have only a few hit points.

The main benefit of the chain pact (IMO, of course) is to let you have a more intelligent, tougher (more hp) and generally more capable familiar. The fact that all improved familiars are included in the PH and that the sidebar is not included anywhere in the PH clearly implies that the chain pact warlock is not meant to get MR resistance (or improved telepathy, but that's just gravy compared to the MR).

MM sidebar (again, IMO) is there to let the DM use it for NPCs, or as a special reward for a spellcaster PC (including clerics, druids, eldritch knights, arcane tricksters, etc.)

And this option is from DnD official monster manual. Its was not from a canon source. As a player I dont question a DM if his monsters and its traits are not in PHB. Players can have access to monster manual too and use it as their resource.

Again, I'm not saying your interpretation is wrong. However, the creatures in the Appendix D in the PH are there so the player's wouldn't have the need to consult the MM. You get animal companions, familiars, animal forms to wild shape into and skeletons and zombies that you can create with animate dead. It looks like (although I'm not 100% certain) you get the majority of permanent companions (as opposed to stats of creatures you can summon via spells)

Besides this is just magic resistance, it doesnt make chain warlocks invincible or breaks the game. A smart DM will just hurt them thru physical attacks or kill the familiar.

While magic resistance in 5e is not as good as it was in older editions, it still represents a very nice boon (advantage to saves vs. spells and other magical effects). The only other class that gets a similar ability is a 14th level abjurer, but they get only spell resistance (advantage to saves vs. spells, not including "other magical effects").

Try to compare it to other pact boons. Blade pact gives you a melee weapon, which is considered magical, and you get proficiency in it. Tome pact gets you three cantrips. Both of those benefits are nice, but nowhere close to magic resistance. Chain pact basically gets you a slightly improved 1st-level spell (find familiar). That (IMO) is exactly in line with other boons.

In short, magic resistance won't break the game, but it far outweighs other benefits gained at lower levels.

Regards.