5th edition Warlock & changes in new PHB

[Blood axe]

I have my new Players Handbook now and gave it a once over, quick read. We are back to every race can be every class now, no level restrictions. Halfling Paladins, Dwarf Wizards, etc. Dwarves lost their anti-magic, but still resist poison. Not a Tiefling or Dragonborn fan.

The Warlock seems the newest, most interesting to me. I think they borrowed the idea from DCC RPG. Its a spell caster that has a patron that gives him his powers. He does not have the spell power that the Wizard or Sorcerer does though. The Warlock does gain more HP, better armor /weapons, and some bonus powers he can choose from , along with a choice of gift of a tome of cantrips, familiar, or special weapon.
Your patron can be a ancient fey Lord/Lady, a Demon Prince or even Cthulhu!

I wish the Wizard spells were also divided up by school. Necromancy, Evocation, etc. That would be much easier to use.

What have you noticed in 5th? Most liked/hated changes?

[tumblingdice]

While I'm also not a big fan of tieflings and dragonborn--and kind of wish they'd been reserved for a second PHB, so as not to taint the primary PHB --I do appreciate that WOTC put everything in one book. Because, let's face it, having to buy a second PHB is dumb. That's one of the things I hated about 4E: no half-orcs or gnomes in the first PHB. Having all race and class combinations is strange for old-timers like us, but I guess it makes sense for people who don't want to be limited, or who want to play against type. Of course, with no restrictions, there's no real type to play against!

I like the advantage/disadvantage mechanic, and the emphasis on story-telling versus minis and battle maps. While I do like the idea of character backgrounds, with ideals and flaws and the like, I can see many experienced players ditching the formality that goes with them, not wanting to pick a flaw from a list, for example. It's a little too close to rolling for personality traits in the original DMG, which Mr. Gygax explicitly told players NOT to do.

Anybody get the starter set? Mine arrived in the mail yesterday. It looks pretty good. One thing that's kind of funny, though: while the basic rules PDF available for free is a subset of the rules in the PHB, the Player's Guide in the starter set is a subset of the basic rules, or a sub-subset of the PHB. I printed out the basic rules when they first came out, but of course they've been revised since then. It seems wasteful to print out the rules all over again just for a new background and a few spells. While I'm tempted to see how far I can go with just the free basic rules and the starter set, I'm also tempted to just say, "Screw this," throw out the basic rules and just buy the PHB. Hmmm...maybe that was the master plan all along...

The Lost Mine of Phandelver looks decent. I like how it's a real mini-campaign, whereas prior starter sets, because they've included battle maps and minis, had very short adventures. Here's 3 or 4 rooms with goblins and kobolds. Go nuts! Phandelver is much better in that regard. Also, the wilderness map is printed on hex paper, which bodes well for more old-school awesomeness to come.

The only thing wrong with the intro adventure so far is that it doesn't start with one of the following two sentences:

1. Your party is now approaching the Village of Hommlet, having ridden up from lands of the Wild Coast.
2. The Realm of mankind is narrow and constricted.

There's really just no topping T1 and B2 for introductory modules.

[Blood axe]

I got the Starter Set. I thought it was just alright. I was disappointed with a "starter set" without any character generation rules. To me, it would have been smarter to have a 64 page rulebook/32 page adventure instead of 32 page rulebook/64 page adventure. I know about the Basic PDF for free, but a starter set should be for new D&D players.

[Dyson Logos]

The Warlock seems the newest, most interesting to me. I think they borrowed the idea from DCC RPG.

Actually, the warlock as a class predates DCC - it was added to D&D3.5 (and made the transition to 4e) in Complete Arcane - it's why I use Complete Arcane in my campaigns.

[Blood axe]

The Warlock seems the newest, most interesting to me. I think they borrowed the idea from DCC RPG.

Actually, the warlock as a class predates DCC - it was added to D&D3.5 (and made the transition to 4e) in Complete Arcane - it's why I use Complete Arcane in my campaigns.

Yes, thanks. Someone else told me that too. I didn't see all the extra classes/prestige classes in 3.5, and I didn't play 4th at all. Warlock still is the newest thing for me. Also the whole patron angle is a great for adventuring hooks.

[ArcherSix]

I've had the PHB for a few weeks now and still haven't read all of it. Every time I start, I get discouraged and go to something else. I have played 5th at a con (the module from the starter set). It was fun, and easier to play (better?) than 4th. My preference is still Lab Lord. Heck, I still might even prefer 3rd ed to 5th, but that's probably because I've played quite a bit of 3rd...