Hex spell rules clarification

[KnotKnormal]

The hex spell sais "until the spell ends, you deal an extra 1D6 necrotic damage to the target whenever you hit it with an attack." Does this include other magical attacks, such as fire bolt and witch bolt? Also can this stack with multiple castings of hex?

[edge2054]

Hex is concentration, so not sure how you would stack it.

If it requires an attack roll, Hex works with it. So yes, it will work with other spells but not all other spells. If the damage is automatic or requires a saving throw hex doesn't work.

[MaxWilson]

The hex spell sais "until the spell ends, you deal an extra 1D6 necrotic damage to the target whenever you hit it with an attack." Does this include other magical attacks, such as fire bolt and witch bolt? Also can this stack with multiple castings of hex?

Fire bolt yes, witch bolt no IIRC (there's no attack roll, it's a save).

You can't have multiple castings of hex because it takes concentration to maintain, but in theory it would stack with the extra 1d8 from Bestow Curse, as long as you cast Bestow Curse with a 5th level slot so it doesn't take concentration.

Edit: ninja'ed!

[KnotKnormal]

Awesome... Thanks a bunch guys. Warlock just a whole lot more useful.

[edge2054]

Awesome... Thanks a bunch guys. Warlock just a whole lot more useful.

Yeah, Hex is fairly pivotal when it comes to Warlock damage. If you ever want to make a ranger make sure you don't pass up Hunter's Mark. Very similar spell.

Paladins get Divine Favor but it's sorta meh imo (only 1d4, VSM so hard to cast for a Paladin without the Warcaster feat plus the paladin just has better options).

[MaxWilson]

Awesome... Thanks a bunch guys. Warlock just a whole lot more useful.

Note two things: 1.) it only works on your own damage (doesn't help the fighter), and 2.) Eldritch Blast has multiple attacks at high level, so it applies Hex damage more than once.

I find a Warlock 2 dip really tempting (for Agonizing Eldritch Spear and telepathy) for any bard, sorcerer, or necromancer. Force is an amazing damage type and the total damage is quite solid, though not as good as a fighter. From an RP standpoint, I also like bailing on Cthulhu after learning some hidden secrets (Agonizing Blast) and before I'm actually starting to rely on him for anything important (Pact abilities, for example, are fluffed as something you get from the patron for good service). I'll just be a necromancer who once flirted briefly with Cthulhu in order to rip off his best secrets before going renegade. :) (And when I say "I", what I really probably mean is "an NPC villain", because I would have trouble playing that guy as a PC.)

[Person_Man]

I find a Warlock 2 dip really tempting (for Agonizing Eldritch Spear and telepathy) for any bard, sorcerer, or necromancer.

At low-mid levels, I agree. But remember that Dragon Bloodline Sorcerer 6 also adds Cha to his chosen energy damage, and Lore Bard can cherry pick buff spells from anybody. So a Warlock dip gives you somewhat better at-will damage and a nifty utility ability or two, but its that profound of a difference, and you're delaying your access to superior high level spells to do it.

[Easy_Lee]

At low-mid levels, I agree. But remember that Dragon Bloodline Sorcerer 6 also adds Cha to his chosen energy damage, and Lore Bard can cherry pick buff spells from anybody. So a Warlock dip gives you somewhat better at-will damage and a nifty utility ability or two, but its that profound of a difference, and you're delaying your access to superior high level spells to do it.

Trouble with that is no other cantrip really stacks up to EB. The only cantrips with comparable damage have bad damage types (fire, poison, etc). Half the MM is resistant or immune to those types. So a sorcerer who focuses on thunder for instance, which has pretty good coverage, has very few spepls (none of them at will) that deal thunder damage.

But force damage is always there, all the time. And the CHA bonus comes online at 2, not 6. Soon as you pick up metamagic, casting two EB's per round with agonizing and repelling becomes such a ludicrously powerful option that you barely need anything else.

If more cantrips come out that fix this, then maybe the other damage types will be competitive. But as-is, a warlock sorcerer brings the damage with unmatched consistency.

[edge2054]

Can't a Warlock/Sorcerer also do something ridiculous like Hex + EB, then Quickened EB + EB?

At level 5 with Agonizing Blast that's like...

2d10 + 2*Cha + 2d6 on the first turn. 4d10 + 4 * Cha + 4d6 on turn two.

Assuming all attacks hit.

[Easy_Lee]

Can't a Warlock/Sorcerer also do something ridiculous like Hex + EB, then Quickened EB + EB?

At level 5 with Agonizing Blast that's like...

2d10 + 2*Cha + 2d6 on the first turn. 4d10 + 4 * Cha + 4d6 on turn two.

Assuming all attacks hit.

Arguably yes, if each hit counts as an attack. The build is popular for a reason; so far as I know, nothing beats its at-will damage yet.

[edge2054]

Arguably yes, if each hit counts as an attack. The build is popular for a reason; so far as I know, nothing beats its at-will damage yet.

What's the argument against it?

Each hit from EB requires an attack roll so each hit should proc Hex.

Agonizing Blast says you add your Charisma modifier to the damage it deals on a hit. Again a hit is defined as a successful attack roll. As EB makes multiple attack rolls each separate one should get the charisma modifier.

[MaxWilson]

At low-mid levels, I agree. But remember that Dragon Bloodline Sorcerer 6 also adds Cha to his chosen energy damage, and Lore Bard can cherry pick buff spells from anybody. So a Warlock dip gives you somewhat better at-will damage and a nifty utility ability or two, but its that profound of a difference, and you're delaying your access to superior high level spells to do it.

I named three classes: bard, sorcerer, necromancer. Necromancer has lots of damage from meat shields but needs something to do besides cackling madly while his skeletons beat on things. Bard has lots of cool utility buffs but struggles to do damage in combat without going MAD. Sorcerer has okay-ish damage if draconic fire-based, but it's only about half the at-will damage of a warlock with hex. And as Easy Lee mentioned, you can spike to double damage. Besides, force is a better damage type, and it's also useful to be able to push people into webs/etc. In all three cases you are improving your contribution to the action economy.

That is some serious utility, and it's a high bar for the opportunity cost (higher level spells sooner and an extra feat) to compete with. It's hard to think of a high-level spell good enough that I want it more than I want EB and telepathy. For one thing, if you have a good at-will option there is less fear of blowing your high-level spell slots, since your backup plan is still quite solid.

In all

yes

[odigity]

Fire bolt yes, witch bolt no IIRC (there's no attack roll, it's a save).

With Bolt requires an attack roll to land it when you cast it, so it would trigger Hex the first round. After that, no attack roll, so no HEx.


Each hit from EB requires an attack roll so each hit should proc Hex.

I've seen multiple people on this forum use the term "proc" in this context, but I can't figure out what it's short for. I tend to use the word "trigger" for the same meaning, but maybe it's because I also play MTG, and that's the term used there.

[edge2054]

Well I used it badly actually. It's short for programmed random occurrence, process, or procedure and generally refers to things that only have a chance of happening.

Trigger would have been better but I do some coding for a roguelike so tend to use proc out of habit.

[Easy_Lee]

What's the argument against it?

Each hit from EB requires an attack roll so each hit should proc Hex.

Agonizing Blast says you add your Charisma modifier to the damage it deals on a hit. Again a hit is defined as a successful attack roll. As EB makes multiple attack rolls each separate one should get the charisma modifier.

Gotcha. I've seen people roll all hits under the same die, and count it as one attack. I agree that rolling them separately makes more sense, though it does make the spell more powerful.

If force dragon ancestry ever becomes a thing, that character could be downright disgusting with EB + magic missile

[squashmaster]

Obviously it cannot be used in tandem with another concentration spell. It works like Hunter's Mark, though, in that for the hour it is active, you can hex any monster you want.

Here's how you use it. Hex > EB > EB > EB > Hex on another enemy > EB > EB > EB > Hex on another enemy > etc, etc.

[Eslin]

Can't a Warlock/Sorcerer also do something ridiculous like Hex + EB, then Quickened EB + EB?

At level 5 with Agonizing Blast that's like...

2d10 + 2*Cha + 2d6 on the first turn. 4d10 + 4 * Cha + 4d6 on turn two.

Assuming all attacks hit.

Which is why it's so fun. The best thing is you can even convert spells to sorcery points if you start running out, warlock/sorcerer effectively has unlimited (in that in play you'll end up with as many quickened actions as there are relevant turns to use them) double-blasting.


Fire bolt yes, witch bolt no IIRC (there's no attack roll, it's a save).

You can't have multiple castings of hex because it takes concentration to maintain, but in theory it would stack with the extra 1d8 from Bestow Curse, as long as you cast Bestow Curse with a 5th level slot so it doesn't take concentration.

Edit: ninja'ed!

You can use glyph to make it not require concentration, but it'll cost you 200g and a couple third level slots per day.

[wilhelmdubdub]

Arguably yes, if each hit counts as an attack. The build is popular for a reason; so far as I know, nothing beats its at-will damage yet.

Add fighter 2, action surge, repeat.

[RSP]

Just to cover the theoretical bases, you can never stack Hex, even were you to get around the concentration restraint; effects from the same source, i.e. Spell, do not stack, per RAW. Same reason why you couldn't receive a +4 AC from two characters casting Shield of Faith on the same PC.

[Sir cryosin]

Yeah, Hex is fairly pivotal when it comes to Warlock damage. If you ever want to make a ranger make sure you don't pass up Hunter's Mark. Very similar spell.

Paladins get Divine Favor but it's sorta meh imo (only 1d4, VSM so hard to cast for a Paladin without the Warcaster feat plus the paladin just has better options).

Paladins and clerics don't need warcaster feat they just need to have there holy symbol on there shield. If they are using a great sword or what not they can get hold that weapon in one hand so they can cast a spell with there other hand. So long post short paladin and clerics can cast there spell with the there hands full.

[Mandragola]

Paladins get Divine Favor but it's sorta meh imo (only 1d4, VSM so hard to cast for a Paladin without the Warcaster feat plus the paladin just has better options).

Don't knock divine favour. The big advantage it has is not having to use bonus actions all the time to move it around.

Vengeance paladin's get hunter's mark but divine favour is arguably better, as they have plenty of other uses for bonus actions. Channel divinity, misty step and GWM attacks all compete with hunter's Mark.

Most of the time though I do neither spell, and just smite away my spell slots.

[BiPolar]

Don't knock divine favour. The big advantage it has is not having to use bonus actions all the time to move it around.

Vengeance paladin's get hunter's mark but divine favour is arguably better, as they have plenty of other uses for bonus actions. Channel divinity, misty step and GWM attacks all compete with hunter's Mark.

Most of the time though I do neither spell, and just smite away my spell slots.

Ha! I was just about to say that :) I'm a GWM vengeance paladin and realized that while hunter's mark is awesome, the bonus action to move it after a kill is NOT better than another attack. I keep Divine Favor on hand if I want a bit of a bonus to all my hits. Generally only competes with Shield of Faith or Haste.

And for paladins, never forget about the awesomeness of Command.

[CursedRhubarb]

Fire bolt yes, witch bolt no IIRC (there's no attack roll, it's a save).

Witchbolt normally will not work, it does have an attack roll when you cast it, but it requires concentration as well and then auto hits each round after if you hit with it and maintain concentration. You'd have to do the Sorcerer dip to use the thing that lets you concentrate on two spells for it to possibly work with hex. Would be something to check if your DM will be cool with but a lot of work for something that can miss and use a precious slot.

[NNescio]

Witchbolt normally will not work, it does have an attack roll when you cast it, but it requires concentration as well and then auto hits each round after if you hit with it and maintain concentration. You'd have to do the Sorcerer dip to use the thing that lets you concentrate on two spells for it to possibly work with hex. Would be something to check if your DM will be cool with but a lot of work for something that can miss and use a precious slot.

Sorcs can't concentrate on two spells either. Twin Spell lets them target two creatures instead of one (if and only if the spell can only target one creature normally). It's still the same spell, and breaking the Sorc's concentration ends the ongoing effect (if any) on both creatures.

A Twin Hold Person is basically the same as a Hold Person cast from a 3rd level spell slot, except that it counts as a 2nd level spell instead of a 3rd (and uses a 2nd level spell slot + 2 sorc points instead of a 3rd level spell slot).

So, you could Twin Hex two different creatures, or Twin Witch Bolt two targets simultaneously. You can't apply both Hex and Witch Bolt on the same target. And even if you could, via, say, a homebrewed magic item/class feature or the UA Technomage's Chained Device class feature (snagging Hex via a Warlock dip or Magic Initiate: Warlock), it will still be utterly pointless, because Hex damage triggers when you hit the target with an attack, and only the initial hit from Witch Bolt qualifies. Repeating actions on subsequent turns automatically deal damage and do not count as attacks, and hence will not trigger Hex.

Likewise, Magic Missile doesn't trigger Hex damage either.

(And in any case, Witch Bolt is an absolutely awful spell.)

[CursedRhubarb]

Ah. I misunderstood the twin spell then. In that case, yeah witchbolt is null.

But for hex, It's a lot of fun. Makes EB very scary and if you need to get in close, I've found it to make double dagger fighting quite effective. Been on par with the barbarian for damage with it at low levels. (I've terrible STR but great Dex and daggers are the only finesse simple weapon sadly)

[Pex]

A Sorcerer/Warlock can also twin* Hex for those occasions he wants to split his Eldritch Blast attacks among two opponents.


*There is some debate whether Hex counts as just one target since the target can change when the first one is dead, though I favor it does since unlike Scorching Ray for example only one target is possible at the moment of casting. Further debate as to whether if both targets are dropped does it take one bonus action or two bonus actions over two rounds to move both targets. Either works in its own sense, though I favor one bonus action for both since it's one casting of the spell. Nifty, yes, but not overpowering. This is not meant to derail the thread, just talking about the elephant in the room since I brought him in.

[Demonslayer666]

With Bolt requires an attack roll to land it when you cast it, so it would trigger Hex the first round. After that, no attack roll, so no HEx.

I've seen multiple people on this forum use the term "proc" in this context, but I can't figure out what it's short for. I tend to use the word "trigger" for the same meaning, but maybe it's because I also play MTG, and that's the term used there.

When something "procs" it means it runs a process, coding lingo for running a subroutine (or function). Proc is very similar to the MTG trigger, but unlike a trigger, it does not always happen. There's only a chance it will on each trigger (usually a small chance).

This was common in Everquest's magic weapons and added a slight chance for various effects such as fire damage, a fear effect, or some other spell like effect each time you swung the weapon.

[BurgerBeast]

When something "procs" it means it runs a process, coding lingo for running a subroutine (or function). Proc is very similar to the MTG trigger, but unlike a trigger, it does not always happen. There's only a chance it will on each trigger (usually a small chance).

This was common in Everquest's magic weapons and added a slight chance for various effects such as fire damage, a fear effect, or some other spell like effect each time you swung the weapon.

I think it's short for "procedure." Some sources say it stands for "Programmed Random Occurrence." In any case, your explanation seems correct, regardless.