A New Adventure/Campaign: Spelljammer

 The usual DM of my Sunday group has been extremely busy for several months now, and while we had started a new Spelljammer campaign after the previous one fell apart (the plot was largely centered around a PC whose player became a dad and thus was too busy to play regularly) we only got three sessions in (maybe four?) before she got busy. Then, we started doing a Kids on Bikes game, but the player who took over as GM for that one got overwhelmed with work and didn't have the energy to run things (he's a new GM too) and so, as a back-up to the back-up, I decided I could run a second (homebrew) campaign.

So I might be insane.

But we just had our first session tonight. The players wanted to start in a bit more of a space-western vibe (I'll confess I might be going a little off-tone for that by introducing a lot of "UFO conspiracy" elements) so I began the campaign with the players' ship crash-landing on a "colony world" near a tiny town in a desert region (though it's a desert with reddish-purple rock, a pale yellow sky, and floating blue cacti, to make sure you know you're on an alien world).

Their ship is a Living Ship (the players managed to beg me enough to let them get something a little fancier than the 20k ships) and so the ship itself will be able to fully repair now that the Treant built into it has been healed a little, but their Spelljamming helm has been destroyed, keeping them grounded until they can get a new one.

Thus far, they've only left the ship and headed in the direction of the town, getting attacked by an Ankheg along the route (the fight was a little tougher than it might have otherwise been because it recharged its acid spray) and then gone down a canyon where they're being attacked by Goon Balloons (and a couple of gnolls - probably going to cut down the number of gnolls given how rough the fight went and the fact that they didn't take a short rest - I don't want to TPK in the second fight).

Anyway, the party is a Giff Paladin, an Astral Elf Monk, a Autognome Cleric, and a Thri-kreen Artificer. It's pretty well balanced, and already I'm enjoying the personalities that are emerging.

Concerns for the Expert Class UA

 The feedback survey for Expert Classes doesn't go up until October 20th (during which I'll be flying to the East Coast for a friend's wedding) but I figured I'd gather some thoughts here about the various elements in the Expert Classes Unearthed Arcana playtest document - a sort of broad response as opposed to my deep-dives.

First, as a kind of general attitude I want to make clear: I'm generally in favor of change and evolution in these sorts of game systems. Given the passion that a game like D&D invokes, it can feel scary to see something that you love looking different (and while it is true that you can always just play earlier editions, I understand the anxiety people can feel that the game's community and culture will move on and that players will be forced to keep up). But I also think that the nature of this sort of long-running property is that issues do crop up, and revisions can make for a better experience. So much of what I'm seeing in these UAs is an attempt to make the game play the way it feels like it ought to play. It also seems like they're trying to make broader, more general rules to make it easier to add things to the game (also to possibly make digital gameplay easier to parse).

This post is going to focus primarily on what I am not so on board with in the UA. While I don't know if I will catch every little nitpick I have, I also want to make it clear that for the most part, I've been very happy with what I'm seeing. (I'll confess that I hate Guidance and sort of want it to stay the useless garbage they've made it into so that that cantrip never slows my games down again, but realistically it has probably been nerfed too hard. I'd prefer they just make it not a Cantrip - make it a 1st level spell that lasts for one hour on a single target). So, this may focus on the negative, but my overall impression is very positive.

I think the most shocking element here is the elimination (sort of) of class spell lists in favor of the three spell categories. I actually really like the way that the magic is divided this way for world-building. But I was initially convinced that this would be just be an additional tag on spells (or multiple tags, for those spells in multiple lists) in addition to class lists. Instead, it appears that classes will just get one of the three spell categories and then potentially have those further limited by school of magic.

    The benefits here are clear: adding new spells to the game no longer requires making new spell lists in every rules-expansion book. Likewise, adding a new class like the Artificer, you simply give them a spell list and potentially which schools of magic they can use, and you're off to the races, never having to worry about whether to include them when new spells are added.

    But the downside here is that some classes - particularly those that previously defied definition in this way - lose things, while also losing some specificity. In the first case, consider the Artificer. While very clearly an Arcane class, they also have plenty of healing spells that are not found in the Arcane list. The Bard needs a special Songs of Restoration feature to get its healing spells. Meanwhile, because the Bard's spells are simply Arcane now, there's nothing preventing a Wizard (who I will assume can take any Arcane spell) from picking up Vicious Mockery, a previously Bards-only staple. So far, the case that makes me feel worse here is the Bard, but I wonder how it's going to look when we see school limitations on Sorcerers and Warlocks (which I assume will have their selection similarly limited while Clerics, Druids, and Wizards each get their full spell lists).

    Are these dealbreakers? I don't know. The benefits here might outweigh the costs, but it'll certainly feel weird.

From that very broad concern, here I'm going to delve deep into an absolute nitpick, which is the Hunter's Multiattack feature. I'd never really looked at Conjure Barrage before, but man does that feel like an insult of a spell. A 3rd level slot for 3d8 damage in a cone? Yes, it's an enormous cone (a 60-ft cone, when you actually look at it on a map, is huge). Unless you can hit an ungodly number of targets, I just do not see this being worth the spell slot. Now, I know that Lightning Bolt and Fireball are intentionally overpowered because they're iconic spells they want the players to use. But it occurs to me that just because Conjure Barrage is a Ranger-oriented spell doesn't mean it has to be underpowered compared to other 3rd level spells - the power penalty you get as a half-caster is that you don't get this level of spell until level 9, so making it less powerful on top of that because it's not intended for a caster-first class feels like a cruel double dip (I realize that I'm talking about a spell that already exists, and for all I know One D&D might buff it,) and so, while I think the notion of "downcasting" a spell is kind of interesting and novel, the new Ranger could spend that spell slot on Call Lightning, which is probably going to do a lot more for them.

    I think I'd really consider having this feature do something closer to what it sounds like - like allowing you to, a limited number of times per day, make a single attack roll that deals normal weapon damage to everything in a cone (maybe a smaller one).

Also from the Ranger, while I really like the new Favored Enemy, the level 18 Foe Slayer feature is, still, a bit underwhelming. By switching Hunter's Mark to a d10, you only really increase the damage output of the class by about 4 per turn (assuming two non-critical hits) or 6 with the new way Light Weapons work if you're dual-wielding them.

    While technically not a capstone anymore, this does feel a bit unexciting. I was not a huge fan of the 2014 Foe Slayer, though I realized that because it could work on either attack or damage rolls, it could help you more consistently hit those tough enemies. Still, I want a little more oomph here.

One thing I failed to notice on my deep dive for the Rogue is that Sneak Attack can only happen on your turn now - which prevents you from getting a devastating opportunity attack, or the amazing synergy with a Battle Master Fighter using Commander's Strike (something the Kenrecks demonstrate very well in Heroes of the Multiverse).

    Rogues actually wind up outperforming a lot of more traditional martial classes in terms of damage if they can consistently get their sneak attack off, so I can see why WotC would want to close this loophole that grants them the potential for more than one per round. Unquestionably, this is a nerf. But is it an unfair nerf? This is the thing about this sort of game design - there's a tendency toward power creep in part because players are going to be more attracted to changes that make them more powerful. So, while I lament this change for the Rogue I one day will play (I did technically play one for two levels in the House of Lament - what started as a joke character actually wound up being one of the more compelling - and tragic - character concepts I'd come up with. Short description: he's a dhampir and his name is Xander von Zarovich. You can do the math).

Next, let's talk about the Hide Action. In some ways, the clarifications on how different ability checks should work using various actions like Study, Search, Influence (we'll get back to that one) and even Jump make these rules a little clearer and easier to adjudicate. Hiding, and thus getting to benefit from the Hidden Condition, is weird. The weirdest thing to me is that there's a universal DC, which is 15, at which point you automatically become hidden. So, does this mean that we're getting rid of passive Perception? To be fair, this will make the common Dragon legendary action "make a perception check" more useful, but it also seems weird to me that there's just one DC. It's also, I'd note, a DC that any Rogue who is merely proficient with Stealth (and doesn't have a bizarrely low Dexterity) will automatically succeed on every Hide action once they hit level 11.

    Furthermore, because the action itself is against a DC of the universe, rather than specific creatures, and grants a beneficial condition that the player must know that they either have or don't, there's another very weird consequence of the way it's worded. You only have to be behind cover or heavily obscured from anyone you can see to take the Hide action. So, cool, you hide behind a stalactite in the cave lair of the evil archdruid you're facing, and they lose track of where you are. But if that archdruid has an invisible stalker minion that is literally staring at you while you do this, you can still take that action, and once you get a success, rules as written, that invisible stalker also loses track of where you are, even if they are still staring directly at you.

    Obviously, a DM can interpret the nuances here (I'd rule that, sure, you get the benefit of being hidden from the Archdruid, but not from the Invisible Stalker, so we just treat your Hidden condition as separate conditions depending on which hostile creature we're referring to. But you can see how this sort of relies on the DM to reintroduce that nuance into the system that kind of just robs the purpose of simplifying this in the first place.

The Study action is actually very welcome, in my opinion, along with the Search action, to finally create a very clear distinction of what Perception versus Investigation do. However, as someone who tends to make high or at least decent-intelligence characters, but also just because I want that stat to mean something, I'd like to get a clearer sense of what a Study action can reveal. To me, I think that there should be actionable information that players get. 

    So often, I find that Intelligence checks (which is basically what the Study action describes) gives a bit of background information and some obscure hints to where one might go for the story, but rarely confers a mechanical benefit. I like that the major knowledge-base proficiencies (Arcana, History, Nature, Religion) each have specific creature types explicitly associated with them (I might quibble a little with Undead falling under Religion rather than Arcana, given that undead are often raised by arcane necromancers, but I also know that it's both traditional and also ties into how holy magic tends to be the most effective weapon against the undead) and I think that a successful check when studying one's knowledge about an oncoming foe should allow the players to explicitly know about things like damage resistances, immunities, and vulnerabilities, condition immunities, and things like magic resistance or legendary resistance, so that they can use that knowledge to adjust their strategy. (For example: we try to figure out what we know about Dullahans, and our Paladin gets a 21 on their Intelligence (Religion) check, and thus knows perhaps one of the following facts: that they're resistant to cold, lightning, and poison damage, or that they have 2 uses of legendary resistance, or that they have Truesight, etc. Assuming Starfinder has a similar structure to 3rd edition, Intelligence used to be great for everyone because it increased the number of skill ranks you could take each level (ultimately replaced by the broad and universal proficiency system). But now, if you're not a Wizard, Artificer, or one of the subclasses that uses Intelligence, there's very little downside to dumping the stat entirely.

One of the interesting consequences of 1st level feats not having any ability score bonuses while 4th-level feats all have one is that, while you're allowed to take a 1st level feat at higher feat levels, you're sort of disincentivized to do so, as you won't be able to upgrade any of your ability scores that way. I'm not sure this is entirely a bad thing, but it introduces a little tension (then again, current feats some have ability score bonuses and some don't, so maybe this isn't something to make a big deal about).

Finally, I want to talk about something that is perhaps more speculative. The four class groups make a decent amount of sense, but I also can see how there is a bit of shoe-horning classes to fit those categories. For example, the Priest group is Clerics, Druids, and Paladins. I think Clerics and Druids are perfect fits for such a classification, but what about paladins? I think of the Paladin as primarily a martial class - when putting together a balanced group, Fighters, Barbarians, and Paladins can play the role of the meaty tank. But are Paladins going to be missing out on some cool martial feature that all Warriors get? Granted, looking at the Ranger, we can see that the fundamental vibe of the class hasn't changed much, and they also get access to Warrior-only Fighting Styles and Epic Boons, so perhaps there's nothing to worry about much here. On the other hand, if Warriors are meant to be good front-line combatants who, according to the UA, can "deal and endure many wounds," I'm hoping that this then means the Monk will become a hardier front-line fighter, which it always should have been.

Anyway, those are the main issues I could think of while looking at the new UA. I'm very eager to see what other classes look like.

In the Dragonflight Beta, with Less Than Two Months to Go

EDIT: Well, I now wonder if this is available to everyone, because when I tried to hearth on my Dracthyr to Valdrakken, I showed up only to be booted back to Stormwind for being "out of bounds." Just as well, I'll try this out when the expansion itself comes out.

 To no fanfare or email, I realized yesterday that my Battle.net launcher happened to have the Dragonflight beta available.

Now, there are a few things that seem a little fishy here - I can't seem to access a character-copy option, and while I was able to roll up a Dracthyr Evoker, he just gets dumped in Stormwind with all his talents already assigned (not that I can't reassign them) but no, like, starting experience or prompt to accept a quest to go to the Dragon Isles.

I'm sort of ok with that - I think I'm actually pretty happy to experience the expansion with fresh eyes.

Figuring out how the Evoker players has been... challenging. It's not really easy to get all your abilities all at once and try to make sense of a rotation. I mean, having 16 years of experience with the original WoW classes, it's very easy for me to understand that, say, Cone of Cold is not a core part of the Frost Mage rotation.

Also, reading through all your abilities can make you miss certain things. For instance, I saw that there was a Bronze-themed ability that reduced cooldowns for your party or raid and assumed it was some kind of cooldown ability itself, only to notice, hey wait, this has an hour-long duration. It's a buff!

I'm eager to see the Evoker through a starting experience that gradually introduces abilities, much as the Demon Hunter did.

After ten years with the simplified Mists of Pandaria talent system, the reconstruction of the Vanilla-through-Cata-style system will take a bit of getting used to. Mainly it's about knowing what a good build looks like and how to sort through the chaff.

The Dracthyr approach to customization and armor is a unique one, and one that I'm not sure I'm totally on board with - essentially, you pick out cosmetic armor as part of character creation, and the armor you actually wear only shows up on your humanoid "visage" form. I might be tempted to go fairly minimalistic with my Dracthyr's armor in that case.

Also, the big conundrum: blue is my favorite color, and I almost always prefer to make characters that have some kind of blue theming (in D&D, two of my longest-played characters are a Blue Dragonborn and a Triton). On the other hand, the Bronze Dragonflight is by far my favorite in the Warcraft setting. So, do I make my Dracthyr blue or bronze? These are the questions that plague me.

I'm given to understand from most impressions that Dragonflight is looking like a good expansion. Obviously, we'll need to see their patch releases to really know if it goes down as one - Shadowlands' initial patch was fantastic, and honestly, I think it suffered mostly from having a weak middle patch and too-large gaps between content releases.

I'm always a little bitter toward people who balk at the heightened, out-there high fantasy of, for example, an expansion that takes place in the realm of the afterlife, though I think that in the case of Shadowlands, it might have been that the ambition of such a premise could never be fulfilled in a single expansion.

Indeed, I find a growing appreciation for the D&D approach to the afterlife, as the Outer Planes, where most mortal souls go after they die, aren't just there for the dead, but are complex worlds in their own right for whom the spirits of the dead are just one category of their many denizens.

Nevertheless, I'm hoping that Dragonflight really succeeds at giving us a cool dragon-themed expansion that Cataclysm never really lived up to being. I almost feel like in a lot of fantasy games, dragons had become kind of de rigueur, but that some recent efforts to revitalize these quintessential fantasy creatures (such as D&D's Fizban's Treasury of Dragons) are getting me to love the big flying flame-lizards once again.

An Aesthetic Critique of Elden Ring

 Elden Ring is an amazing game. As someone who was already a fan of FromSoft's "Soulsborne" games, it was a remarkable evolution of the genre. I also appreciated that the game was a bit easier (not, like, by a huge amount, mind you) than earlier titles, though that lowered difficulty may have simply sprung from the open world's openness and the ability to set aside frustrating challenges to go find something else to do (also, if you play as a rabid completionist, you'll level up more than you would otherwise).

The main plot of Elden Ring - somewhat less obscure than other games, but still vague enough to be widely open to interpretation - is that the god of the realm, Queen Marika, shattered the Elden Ring - a sort of sacred constitution that embodied the physical laws of the world - an age ago, which caused her to be imprisoned for her transgression and left her various demigod children to fight for supremacy.

The demigods, then, are largely the major bosses of the game. Each has its own faction devoted to it, which you'll encounter in various places. Indeed, in true FromSoft fashion, finding a member of one faction somewhere unexpected in the world can be a tantalizing hint that there's some secret plot going on.

But there's one problem:

Too many of the factions use red as their main color.

I'll argue that the following factions - which are either led by a demigod or some other powerful entity - are the major ones you deal with over the course of the game:

Godrick's Army - led by Godrick the Grafted

Raya Lucaria - led by Rennala (though really Ranni, as Rennala is not in her right mind)

Volcano Manor - led by Rykard

Redmane Guard - "led" by General Radahn (though he's totally lost his mind)

Leyndell - led by Omen King Morgott

Mohgwyn Dynasty - led by Mohg

Ephael - led by Miquella, with Malenia by his side

There are other factions, of course, to consider (it also seems that the Knights of the Cuckoo out of Raya Lucaria made war on Caria Manor, which I don't really understand given that both are ruled by Rennala). I'd even be tempted to toss in the Fire Cult with their "leader" as the Fire Giant, if only to show another example of red (and the red hair of the fire giant ties into the offspring of Radagon).

Anyway, Of these factions, red is the main color of Volcano Manor, the Redmane Guard, and Mohgwyn Dynasty. And that's even setting aside that the Cleanrot Knights, who serve Malenia and are similarly afflicted with/spreading the Scarlet Rot are... you know, kind of red-themed.

Where it gets especially confusing is that Mohg is associated with "bloody fingers," who invade others' worlds and basically represent the PvP system. But Volcano Manor is also basically a society of assassins who... invade others worlds and kill them.

Indeed, Rykard and Mohg both take on somewhat Satanic archetypes - I suppose the main difference being that Mohg is associated more with blood while Rykard is more associated with lava.

Now, Radagon has red hair (likely a reference to Thor - the fact that he took over as Marika's consort from Godfrey, who is clearly based on Heracles/Hercules, sort of suggests a passive of ages from Greek to Norse myth) seems to imply that he's descended from the Fire Giants, likely a source of shame given their antagonistic relationship with Marika. We do notice, though, the Radagon's children - both those with Rennala (Rykard, Ranni, and Radahn) and with Marika (Miquella and Malenia... and I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest Melina as well,) of the ones we see who still have hair, all have that red hair (while the Ranni we interact with doesn't, she's possessing a big doll. Her actual corpse, atop the Divine Tower of Liurnia, does have red hair).

There is some evidence that suggests Mohg was a late addition to the game. I believe his model's file is labeled simply as something like "Omen Demon" or the like, meaning he might have been meant to be a generic enemy. But as it stands, Mohg actually winds up being one of the oldest of the demigods, along with Margott. And the fact that both were born as Omens could potentially have been why Marika sent Godfrey off and found/became Radagon. (I think Radagon and Marika must have begun as separate people, given that Marika is said to have been a Numen while Radagon, as discussed above, was descended from Fire Giants). Incidentally, the word Monster is derived from the latin "monstrum," which means Omen, which I think is why the horned-ogre-people in Elden Ring are called that - it's the sort of quintessential "monster."

I wonder if they intend to do an Elden Ring II, or to have the game sit as a one-off like Demon's Souls and Bloodborne (though fingers crossed for a sequel to the latter). I imagine there will be some major transformation to the world and all new figures and factions within it. But let's maybe get some different colors in there, shall we?

Critting for Emotional Damage

 This is the first time I've made myself cry as a DM.

(CW: suicide, child abuse - as a note, the Cult of Rakdos on Ravnica is one that blends performance art with gory violence)

I'm running a campaign set in Ravnica, but as a very old-school Magic fan (I first played it during Fallen Empires) I wanted to make sure that the party would get to travel to other planes. Rather than just fudging it and letting them cast Plane Shift, I've instead got a system where the players undergo some emotionally powerful moment that ignites their planeswalker spark.

My best friend is one of the players in the game, and his Cult of Rakdos College of Whispers Bard has always been a tricky character to build around - the character is chaotic evil, and is straight up a cannibal serial killer. My friend, of course, is a very conscientious and sensible player, so the character's evil doesn't prevent him from cooperating with the party on their missions (part of why I chose to make the Phyrexians my big bad is that even members of the most evil guilds would be motivated to help stop them).

Anyway, I've built up little mini-adventures to set off the player characters' sparks (they're all potential planeswalkers, which there's an in-universe explanation for, though it's primarily to allow planar travel in a Post-Mending multiverse). And tonight, the Bard went to see his parents' final show within the Lower Theatre (my invention,) the most prestigious venue within Rix-Maadi, the Rakdos Guildhall.

The bard's parents were the "rival" rolled for his contacts within the Cult of Rakdos (I think he'd initially rolled Rakdos himself, and while he decided to try again for a less crazy option, I kind of worked it into the character's unknown backstory). The bard spent his childhood as the "goblin pincushion" during shows in which his parents would throw daggers at him, ending each performance by killing him, only for the boy to be revived at the curtain call.

This painful period as a "child star" in the guild coupled with his parents cutting him out of the act when he became an adult led to a deep resentment of his parents.

So, the show was already going to be emotionally charged. But then I made the big reveal: his parents' farewell show was an autobiographical musical but also a confession, showing that they had actually made a deal with Rakdos to sacrifice their son for theatrical success, and then realized that Rakdos meant the sacrifices to go on continuously. They cut him from the show when the guilt was too much for them to bear (though, you know, only after years of this).

His parents' careers went down the drain after they did this, no longer receiving Rakdos' blessing. And so, they concluded that they would give one last show and leave the theater they'd built to him. And in that last performance, his parent come on stage to sing the final number, before the actors portraying them slit their throats.

And man, as I started to describe that final number, I got choked up. I've maybe never come up with something so fucked up on so many levels - there's the manner in which this is that heightened horror that is normal for the Cult of Rakdos, but on another level, I think I managed to create an all-too-real example of abusive parents whose attempts to absolve themselves of their guilt just further traumatize and damage their child.

The culmination of this performance ultimately has the bard's spark ignite, and I think I began to realize as I was taking the players through the musical (which also involved a bunch of saving throws and ability checks to survive the performance, because, you know, Rakdos) just how infuriatingly shitty these NPCs were. Evil alignment is usually portrayed in those heightened ways, but I think I came up with a portrayal of such supreme narcissism that it couldn't be described as anything but evil - but in a disturbingly realistic manner.

So, I got choked up, and I left the table speechless. And boy do I feel drained.

I think I should note that, whatever issues I might have with my parents (one of whom died five years ago) none of this was autobiographical for me - my parents always treated my sister and me with respect and genuine care. But I think there are some universal themes and anxieties around how parents shape us, and how deeply unfair it can feel when the fallout of their issues is passed on to us, that must have resonated quite deeply with me in the moment.

But yeah, I think that's the most emotional I've gotten DMing before.

Dreams of Eldritch Blast

 I keep coming back to the Warlock. It's ironic - I don't think I was all that into the concept prior to getting into D&D - my Warlock in World of Warcraft is maybe my sixth- or seventh- priority character, and I've historically tended to prefer heavily-armored classes (my ideal would be something like the Eldritch Knight but leaning a little more toward the magic side of things. Armorer Artificer is pretty close). But something about the way the Warlock works in D&D - its story-friendly premise and unique mechanics - really speak to me.

With the spell lists introduced in the last two Unearthed Arcanas, which have been the first playtest documents for One D&D - the codename for the successor to 5th Edition (for those who think One D&D is a dumb name and worry it will be the official one, recall that before 5th Edition came out it was being called "D&D Next") - there was one extremely notable absence: Eldritch Blast.

Eldritch Blast is the cantrip that makes Warlocks (well, most Warlocks) work. Because of the way that Pact Magic works, Warlocks can't cast leveled spells on every turn in combat. Instead, they're built to use highly efficient concentration (or at least long-duration) spells while they use cantrips or weapon attacks as their bread-and-butter actions.

Eldritch Blast, then, is the cantrip that is built to go the distance for a Warlock.

On its own, Eldritch Blast works pretty much like Fire Bolt - it's a spell attack that deals 1d10 damage. However, there are two notable differences. The first is that it deals Force damage, which almost nothing resists (there are tons of monsters that resist fire damage). The next, crucial part, is that when you hit new tiers of play (levels 5, 11, and 17) rather than simply increasing the damage of a single attack, you now just make multiple attacks with it.

On average, this change shouldn't make much of a difference, though Fire Bolt is a bit swingier because of that - a crit with a Fire Bolt at level 17 means 8d10 damage, but a miss means absolutely no damage that turn, whereas Eldritch Blast can smooth that out.

But where Eldritch Blast really shines is the way that various Warlock abilities and features interact with it. Technically, these are all optional, but most Warlocks will go with them. Agonizing Blast, for example, adds your Charisma modifier to the damage of each blast - which means that more blasts means multiplying that bonus. A spell like Hex (which is functionally very similar to Hunter's Mark) lets you add a d6 each time you hit the target with an attack - and that means each blast deals an additional d6.

In a lot of ways, Eldritch Blast functions more like a Fighter's ranged weapon attacks - and like the Figher, you eventually get to make four attacks with a single action (earlier than the Fighter, too!)

And this doesn't only apply to damage. Repelling Blast, another invocation, lets you move a target you hit with Eldritch Blast 10 feet away from you - more hits means more irresistible movement.

Eldritch Blast is iconic to the Warlock, so I think the chance that they're actually getting rid of it entirely is basically zero. However, its absence on the Arcane spell list suggests to me that they're going to make it a class feature. This was actually the case when the Warlock was introduced in 3rd edition. (At a time before cantrips existed, I believe, meaning that Warlocks were unique in having an inexhaustible supply of magical damage).

Making Eldritch Blast a class feature rather than a spell accomplishes a few things. The first is that all Warlocks will have it. It also means, though, that other classes will not be able to get it through something like Magic Initiate.

But that's pretty basic.

I think Eldritch Blast could be reimagined in certain ways that could really make it feel better.

First off, I think Agonizing Blast could be rolled into it as a base feature. This is, to be certain, a bit of power creep, unless you reduce the number of eldritch invocations you can learn (at which point it becomes a nerf, given that you don't have the option to choose anything else for your "first" invocation).

Presumably, you'll get upgrades at various levels to allow you to shoot more Eldritch Blasts.

But what if we went radical with this? What if we just gave Warlocks Extra Attack? And then let Eldritch Blast be an alternative option for your Attack action?

This would, in fact, be a big benefit for Bladelocks. Currently, to get a second (and only a second) attack as a Warlock who wants to focus on weapons, you need to take the Thirsting Blade Eldritch Invocation, which requires level 5 (make sense, given that's when other classes get Extra Attack.)

It would also make Warlocks a more agile caster-blaster by explicitly allowing them to move between blasts, while also resolving issues where some DMs think you need to declare all your Eldritch Blast attacks before you make the attack and damage rolls (meaning you sometimes send a blast at a target that's already dead) - which is not, I'm pretty sure, the design intent, but is nevertheless an ambiguity that exists in the wording. Now, this simply falls under the familiar rules of the Attack action.

The question that raises, then, is whether Warlocks would get their third and fourth attacks if it's purely under the Extra Attack umbrella. That would unquestionably step on the toes of the Fighter. Indeed, a Bladelock with Thirsting Blade is still limited to two attacks (I guess what balances this is that they could get their hands on some weapon with a bunch of extra bells and whistles). But only allowing two Eldritch Blasts ever feels like it would cut down on what makes the spell so cool when you get to higher levels (I'll never forget the time I took a Glabrezu immediately out of a fight by blasting it into the River Styx where it got Feebleminded and forgot it was fighting us).

Another consequence that I've mentioned before here is that making the extra blasts of Eldritch Blast into a class feature at certain Warlock levels further incentivizes players to commit to the Warlock. One of the consequences of the Warlock's main spell being a cantrip, along with getting their subclass at level 1 (though that might be changing - I'll be curious to see how that works given that you presumably had to find a patron to get your magic in the first place, unless they reflavor levels 1 and 2 as being where your Warlock is seeking out esoteric magic from a powerful patron and 3 is when they actually forge their pact) is that Warlocks are probably the most popular "dip" class. A Sorcerer can dip in a single level or two to get those Pact Magic spell slots and Eldritch Blast/Agonizing Blast, which can fuel the "coffee lock" that doesn't have to sleep (well, if you can find a way around exhaustion). Paladins can grab a single level with the Hexblade subclass and thus only have to worry about Charisma to attack with their weapon (or three levels if they want to be able to use a two-handed weapon with Pact of the Blade).

I think the higher levels of Warlock could use some love - obviously, there are some powerful Invocations to get, but given that Pact Magic stops upgrading spell slots past 5th level, the Mystic Arcanum feature is I think strictly worse than the higher-level spellcasting that other full casters have, and beyond that there aren't a ton of other class features that Warlocks get in those levels.

Eldritch Blast's redesign could be one way to let the Warlock stand on its own as a class rather than being typically relegated to a multiclass component. I don't think it'll be enough, but it could help.

I'm just very eager to see how this turns out. Well, 1.5 to 4.5 months, roughly, and I expect we'll see.

Speculating on Spell Rules for Classes in One D&D Moving Forward

 With the Expert Class UA, we got the first revisions of the Bard, Ranger, and Rogue class. Outside of the Arcane Trickster subclass (which, along with the Eldritch Knight, pioneered the kind of spell lists that we're likely to see for all spellcasting classes moving forward) the Rogue doesn't cast spells. But the Bard and Ranger are both spellcasters - one a full caster, and the other a half-caster.

Rather than having explicit spell class lists, instead we get, essentially, rules as to which spells the class can prepare. I don't know if all classes will be preparing, rather than simply "learning" spells (though with the changes to Bards, that would leave only Sorcerers and Warlocks as classes that don't prepare spells, so I would not be shocked if everyone simply prepares them each day). The rules for a class' access to spells now has them use one of the three lists - Arcane, Divine, or Primal - and then restricts them based on spell school - the schools being Abjuration, Conjuration, Divination, Enchantment, Evocation, Illusion, Necromancy, and Transmutation.

As we saw with the Bard and Ranger, the number of schools available can vary widely. The Ranger gets to use 7/8 of the schools and uses the Primal spell list, with only Evocation spells being unavailable to them. The Bard, which has always had a somewhat idiosyncratic spell list that tends to push buffs and status effects rather than raw damage, gets Divination, Enchantment, Illusion, and Transmutation spells off the Arcane list. (The Bard also has a few features that let it get spells outside of those schools).

This is going to take some getting used to, of course, and while it's elegant, it will also mean a shuffle of what kind of spells you can cast (see this post from the other day).

I think we can assume that other classes will work similarly. So, I wanted to speculate on some of the possibilities for what we might see with those classes.

In all honesty, this really only starts to get complex when we get to the Arcane classes. But let's go in order. We'll be leaving out Barbarians, Fighters, and Monks given that these classes don't inherently get any sort of spellcasting capabilities. And we'll leave out Bards and Rangers because there's obviously not a lot to "speculate" on given that we already have these (though they are of course subject to revision - something I think is possible for the Bard). And Rogues fit in both categories. So, we'll be looking at just Clerics, Druids, Paladins, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizards.

Clerics: This, I think, is obvious: Clerics will get access to the Divine spell list, and they'll get all 8 schools of magic. As only one of two Divine spellcasters, and the only full caster, it wouldn't make sense to put any spells of 6th or higher level on the list that they couldn't cast. Now, if there were no spells of some school of that level or higher, I could imagine limiting them to allow Paladins to get some exclusive spells from the list, but there is at least one spell of each school that is 6th level or higher, so Clerics must be able to use any school of magic - making the Divine Spell List effectively their class list.

Druids: The exact same argument can be made for Druids. As the only full caster with the Primal spell list, it's got to all be there for them. The one reason to doubt it, though, is that there are actually no Enchantment spells of 6th level or higher on the Primal spell list. As such, you could imagine Enchantment being reserved only for Rangers. However, this would mean Druids couldn't cast Animal Messenger, Dominate Beast, or Animal Friendship (holy crap, there's very little Enchantment magic on the Primal list). While those three spells certainly have a very Ranger vibe to them, they also very much have a Druid vibe to them. So I'm going to assume Druids will simply get every spell on the Primal list.

Paladins: Ok, here's where things get a little more complicated. Paladins, of course, use their spells to complement their melee capabilities, and tend not to have so many straight-damage abilities. But, that being said, the normal damage-dealing schools of magic like Evocation and Necromancy also cover spells that Paladins are likely to make use of - such as Searing Smite (and most of the Smite spells) being Evocation or Revivify being Necromancy. Classic Paladin spells like Command or Compelled Duel are enchantment. Illusion, on the other hand, I could possibly imagine being verboten for Paladins, as it literally just includes Silence in the 0-5th level spell range on the Divine list. Transmutation is likewise pretty rare on the Divine list, but Purify Food and Drink is one of them, and that feels like a good Paladin option. So, except maybe for Illusion, I actually think Paladins might simply get the full Divine spell list - but they'll naturally be limited by the fact that they only ever get up to 5th level spells.

Sorcerers: Here, things get particularly complicated. Spoiler alert: I think Wizards are going to get the absolute full list of Arcane spells. But what about Sorcerers? Sorcerers and Wizards already have a pretty hefty overlap in their spell lists, the main distinction being how they use them - in the current game, Sorcerers only learn a pretty limited number of spells, but they get to use things like Metamagic to do interesting things with them. The Wizard, on the other hand, is the hoarder of spells, with an expansive toolbox (and generally more spells they can prepare than the Sorcerer knows total).

    Now, if we see every class preparing spells each day, that's going to have huge implications for what makes a Wizard special in the first place. After all, if a Sorcerer can just prepare any Arcane spell, they effectively have a fully-complete Wizard spellbook without being a Wizard.

    However, let's imagine that Sorcerers might be slightly limited in their spell selection. Obviously, they've got to have Evocation magic, as they're meant to be the best fireball-tossers in the game. Where I could imagine them getting limited is Conjuration and/or Necromancy (with Shadow Sorcerers perhaps getting an exemption to the latter). Sorcerers, historically, have not had the summoning capabilities that Wizards and Warlocks get, and we saw with the Tasha's-era summoning spells didn't go to Sorcerers at all (Summon Draconic Spirit from Fizban's did go to them, though, perhaps to fit in with the Draconic Bloodline subclass). Now, the downside is that this means that spells like Dimension Door and Misty Step would be unavailable to Sorcerers. Still, this seems like it would be thematically appropriate - assuming that Sorcerers don't just flat-out get the whole list.

Warlocks: Warlocks have an almost entirely different vibe from Sorcerers, and actually, I could imagine that the one school of magic they don't get is Evocation. First off, some classic Warlock AoE spells like Shatter are now classified as Transmutation. This would keep Fireball, Lightning Bolt, and the like out of the Warlock list - which is true of the current Warlock. Indeed, the main Evocation spell that Warlocks currently use is Eldritch Blast, which is conspicuously absent from all three spell lists, suggesting that, much as it was in earlier editions, Eldritch Blast is likely to be transformed into a class feature rather than a spell in the traditional sense. Now, they could just lose Evocation spells and call it a day. If we were to imagine a more restrictive list, I could imagine also removing Transmutation. Conjuration and Necromancy would, I think, have to be on the Warlock list because the efficiency of summoning minions is really important for them mechanically, and it's also very flavorful (calling on your patron to send aid, or even just tying into the "dark magic" vibe with the ability to summon fiends or raise undead monsters).

    I do wonder a bit how this will interact with the various Pact Boons - Pact of the Chain looks a lot less appealing (before Eldritch Invocations) when Find Familiar is already available to you, and everyone can ritual-cast.

Wizards: While they share the list with other full spellcasters, I think that the Wizard should fill the role of the Arcane Spellcaster who gets the entire spell list. Wizards are the masters of the Arcane, and this would be a clear way to reflect that.

    The bigger question is what it will mean if everyone gets to prepare new spells each day. Wizards currently sit in this odd between-place. They get to swap out spells each day, but they don't automatically get their full list the way that Clerics, Druids, Paladins, or Artificers do. Instead, you get a collection mini-game where you add spells to your spellbook - in a campaign where the wizard really dedicates a ton of resources (and the DM permits it) they can ultimately get every Wizard spell, but it's a lot of effort to do so.

    My proposal here is that, perhaps your spellbook doesn't determine what spells you can prepare, but rather what spells you have prepared. In other words, the Wizard can add spells to their spellbook and then have them prepared all the time, like a Cleric's domain spells. This would let the Wizard retain their "massive toolbox" approach to spellcasting even while everyone gets a more versatile way to prepare spells. This could be in addition to the "number of spell slots at each level" method of spell preparation that they have with the new Ranger and Bard, meaning Wizards are special in that they get more spell options than anyone else on a given day. Might that get very overwhelming for a Wizard player? Yes, that's a risk to this design. But it would also be pretty cool.

We will, of course, have to wait and see what the future holds for these classes, but this is my best guess of what we can expect.