i wonder if youre just trying to wind me up now
>warlock is a 4th edition class with 4th edition problems
For one thing, Warlock is not a 4th edition class and i dont know how youd come to that conclusion.
Warlock very much was a thing in 3.5, maybe you got confused because Pathfinder doesnt have Warlocks, but they were introduced with 3.5.
Secondly i DM a year long 4e campaign with a warlock in the party right now and there are none of these issues. Thats due to 4e not beeing poorly designed and making sure that this doesnt happen.
AEDU has this entire system baked into the core of the rules and as such the entire "issue" with short rests is resolved by applying it to everyone.
The only "4e" like class in 5e is the battlemaster, and by which i mean its a butchering of a system that 4e applied to all classes.
Battlemasters existance is the reason other fighter archetypes in 5e will always be lackluster.
See, you might not be aware of this but when 5e originally came around, the Battlemasters maneuvers and superiority die were simply a system for the fighter.
And for some reaosn that nobody now understands it got removed again and shoved into its own subclass, making all of these systems unavailable to other martial classes.
The reason for this primarily beeing grognards crying about not all of the special attention going to wizards.
And this just marks the entire problem with 5e. It doesnt know wha tit wants to do, it waters down all the good thigns from previous editions, tries to implement them at the same time and, this is the part where our two analysis are gonna diverge, fails miserably at it.
The quasi short rest focused playstyle of Warlock completley falls apart next to other characters in 5e, especialy if you then abuse the system when multiclassing a paladin.
Instead of a functional system, you got several butchered system that dotn work with one another
I see that you are a person of culture. +1
