Bladelock vs Blastlock (Slight buff to Bladelock?)

[Kryx]

The Bladelock seems to be worse than the Blastlock. Both Warlock guides state so and this block outlines the damage potential of each:


The damage doesn't appreciably exceed that dealt by an eldritch blast wielding warlock. At level 12, the height of a bladelock's DPR potential, they'll deal 2d6+9 damage (x2) assuming they put all their ability increases into strength and charisma, and are wielding a greatsword. average DPR is 32. In contrast, a warlock with Eldritch blast deals d10+5 (x3) at level 12, for an average DPR of 31.5. Magic weapons skew this total by a few points, but the damage is only nominally greater for a bladelock than a blastlock. In addition, the blastlock has an additional ability increase or feat to throw around, and doesn't have to stand right next to the enemy to deal damage. At level 17, a blastlock gets ANOTHER d10+5 damage, for an average of 44 DPR-even if the bladelock has 20 strength and charisma at that point, and a +3 weapon, they're still only dealing 40 DPR.

The Bladelock is more MAD (Str & Cha) and requires an additional invocation to keep up with the blast lock.

Now there are some balancing elements to this in the form of Fire Shield, Hellish Rebuke, and Armor of Agathys. Great Weapon Master is quite nice as well.

Overall I think bladelock is comparable to blast lock with all things added in. My slight concern is the higher cost to get there.

Buff options that I thought of:

Give extra attack by default to bladelocks at 5 (instead of the current cost of 1 invocation)
Give Bladelocks medium armor prof


Is the math above correct? Does the Bladelock need a slight buff in comparison to the Blastlock, or is the Blastlock the outlier? Should the Bladelock be expected to take Paly 1 and then Warlock?

[Giant2005]

I'm not sure what Pally 1 would bring to the table... But I think your idea of giving the Bladelock extra attack for free is a good one.
Bladelocks do inflict superior DPS and by quite a margin but only after a significant investment in feats, invocations and possibly ASIs depending on how well the player rolls.
Essentially, I think taking steps to remove the taxes which the Bladelock have to endure in order to be competitive isn't a bad idea. I'd even be tempted to give them the ability to use their Charisma as their attack stat.

[Kryx]

I'm not sure what Pally 1 would bring to the table...
Heavy or Medium Armor. The spells are great as well.


Bladelocks do inflict superior DPS
Do you have a source or math for that? I have seen them below or competitive, not above. See the math I quoted above.

[Giant2005]

Heavy or Medium Armor. The spells are great as well.
They don't get spells until level 2 but the armor is a far point (Although you would be better off using Fighter for both the armor as well as a Fighting Style).



Do you have a source or math for that? I have seen them below or competitive, not above. See the math I quoted above.
It is doable, it just takes a fair amount of munchkinning/luck. For example that example you gave above didn't give the character 20s in both Cha and Str, nor did it give it Polearm Master. With those optimizations its targetless, average damage would be 1D10+10 (x2) +1D4+10 for an average of 44.5 which is significantly ahead of the 31.5 you cited the Eldritch Blasting Warlock to be at that same level.
Still... If we are talking about optimization, I don't think there is much of anything a Bladelock could do to keep up with the damage of an Eldritch Blasting Warlock/Sorc multiclass.

[Mandragola]

I think that it makes sense to compare a bladelock with other melee combat options, rather than with ranged warlocks. Elemental blasting does suffer with accuracy relative to melee, due to cover and the difficulty (though not impossibility, thanks to the rod) of acquiring pluses to hit and damage. You mitigate that by taking spell sniper, but that does require taking a feat - and make variant human almost a must have for bladelocks.

AC and MADness is still a real problem though. As I see it there are two main ways you can go as a bladelock. You can make a dex-based guy who sometimes has a go at bashing things but retains eldritch blast as his main attack, or you can make a strength-based guy who bashes things as his main tactic and keeps eldritch blast for occasional use when required. I think dex bladelocks are fine and easy to make, because they essentially treat their blades as a nice bonus option while being just as good at eldritch blast as anyone else - so no real problem there.

Strength is trickier though. It's particularly difficult to play through levels 1-2 without actually having your pact weapon, if that's your whole plan. You're not proficient with good weapons but you're statted out to use them.

It's also quite a big problem that you need to put a bunch of points into dex to have even a half-decent AC in medium armour, which you probably aren't proficient with.

As I see it there are a couple of ways around these issues. Method 1 is to play a mountain dwarf. You start out proficient with medium armour and can use a warhammer two-handed while you wait for your pact weapon. It's pretty MAD and you won't have a great charisma, though you might be able to start with 17str and 15cha at level 1, putting a point into both at level 4. But then you've got very few points for your dex and con, and you can forget about wisdom and int.

So really, a strength-based warlock wants heavy armour proficiency so he can dump dex, he wants shield proficiency, and he wants a fighting style. He gets these things from taking a level in fighter... or possibly from two levels in paladin. Fighter is generally easier to manage though, and makes a very nice level 1 pick as you get proficiency in constitution saves, which is a really big deal for a caster.

Overall then I'm afraid I don't think the OP's suggestion would be enough. A medium armour-wearing warlock is just way too MAD. You need heavy armour and that means you need to multiclass.

My suggestion would be to play a variant human fighter with polearm mastery at level 1. Switch to warlock at level 2 and level up as that thereafter. Starting stats 16, 8, 14, 10, 8, 16... or you could potentially lower your cha to boost some other stuff.

To maximise damage you should move about a bit. Get hex on something and then hit it from reach, or just blast it, and move away again. Then it can run after you if it wants to take an AOO, or trade whatever ranged attacks it might have.

[Zariel]

I'm just playing the bladelock and this is quite funny :D
Well mostly because i got my hands on very nice mithril giant axe(that minotaurs are using). Swinging those 2d12(srsly those dice just hope for possibilty to be thrown) give me greeeat dps. And as for opting i would go for 1 lvl of fighter at the begining at you're golden. Of course if you have a big team you can be a blastlock but when you have 2 persons in party going bananas with bladelock is quite fun :3

[aceynn88]

So I just got done a campaign recently where I played a bladelock and multiclassed a Barbarian. It was a mtn. Dwarf so it took care of my armor needs, however due to the spell Armor of Agathys, you kinda want to be hit. The only thing you need to talk to your DM about is making sure they are cool with your pact weapon being usable while in rage. Mine didn't have a problem, but I can see others taking issue with it.

So I had my dwarf with pact of the blade, and took the fiend as my patron. I maxed out str and started pumping up con as best I could, leaving cha at 14 for the +2 when I needed it (rarely). First I went into warlock 6, with the key points being Armor of Agathys as a 3rd level spell, temp HP on kill from Fiend, and the extra attack invocation. Next you want to take 3 levels into Barbarian to get rage and the totem of my choice, in this case it was wolf as I had a melee heavy party, but bear is a good choice to go if there's not.

Once I had all that lined up things ran pretty well for me. Start combat by casting Armor of Agathys and then going into rage. Because Agathys does not require concentration, the spell stays for its full duration. Now above I mentioned wanting to be hit and that spell is the reason why. 5 cold damage per spell level dealt to a melee attacker is a fantastic source of damage, that has no action cost other then 1 action to cast (no reaction to use). As you know, rage gives resistance to common forms of damage as well as the bonus damage to str based attacks. Well I was using a maul so that worked out great for me. With rage up, you increase the value of temp HP, meaning the Temp HP from agathys lasts longer. By the time monsters are starting to dig into your real HP, most of them are ready to be killed, letting you gain more temp HP.

By the end, I became this obnoxious pain in the ass for my DM. Does he throw everything at me, letting my group run over the enemies in the process, or does he ignore me because of agathys and let me run unchecked through the battle and take out high priority targets. The flavor for this character is very fun as well. Imagine a dark power fueled dwarf running at you, screaming in tongues you cannot understand, summoning a maul out of thin air and bashing you over the head.

You can definitely take the great weapon feat allowing for more damage, but I don't think it's necessary until later on.

[Kryx]

Overall then I'm afraid I don't think the OP's suggestion would be enough. A medium armour-wearing warlock is just way too MAD. You need heavy armour and that means you need to multiclass.
What would you suggest? I'm the DM and potentially looking to houserule remove some hurdles for the Bladelock.


mithril giant axe(that minotaurs are using). Swinging those 2d12
This isn't RAW at all and isn't applicable to the balance of the class.

[Mandragola]

Well I suppose that my point is you don't need to do anything. It's fairly tricky to make a bladelock, but I don't think it should be easy to have a character like this. You should not make a bladelock that's as hitty in melee as a GW fighter and as shooty at range as an archer ranger. Players should have to compromise something for versatility.

As Aceynn88 points out, it's totally possible to play a bladelock right now. Rules changes aren't warranted. Build advice might be.

But overall the headline is that bladelocks are fine. They are no worse at blasting than any other warlock unless the player chooses to make them be, and they can chop people up as well. They can choose which of these abilities to focus on and leave the other as a back up, which is fair enough. Just handing out heavy armour proficiency would not be warranted, in my opinion, and letting them use cha to hit in melee would be silly.

[Chronos]

Of course, it should be said that you're not literally forced to take Eldritch Blast. If you're relying on your pact weapon for delivering most of your damage anyway, you could free up that slot for a different cantrip. Yeah, Eldritch Blast is the best damage cantrip, but that's mostly due to all of the various things which can improve it, most of which you'll be passing up.

[Kryx]

You should not make a bladelock that's as hitty in melee as a GW fighter and as shooty at range as an archer ranger.
The problem I see is that the bladelock might as well focus on EB as well at high tiers as it's generally better than melee. At no investment.

[CrusaderJoe]

Bladelock versus Blastlock, the blastlock wins.

However when it comes to Multiclassing... The bladelock is the better choice. I know MC is optional but the bladock gets more love for MC then the blast lock.

The Blastlock pretty much doesn't change when you MC. You are still a Blastlock. Sorcerer makes it a bit more extreme but for the most part you are still a Blastlock.

The Bladelock however changes to fit the new class. Barbarian, Fighter, Rogue, or Monk (unarmed strike is on the weapon list...). You change up your style to match the new class.

Bladelock 12/Other Class 8 is a great level 20 build. Going fighter 8 free up an invocation, barbarian gives you sick damage, rogue gives you sneak attack and great defensive support, paladins give you smite and some cool other features.

Plus you can duel wield without falling behind in damage. Take the feat and the fighter option and barbarian levels for rage... 3d8+ (3*str) + (3*cha) + 6 rage bonus = 1 turn you are dealing 3d8+36 damage (Average 49). This is if you attack, attack with extra attack (from barbarian), then BA attack with duel wield. You have advantage so hitting isn't an issue... Oh and this is without Action Surge... Which would be another 2d8+2*str + 2*cha + 4 rage= 2d8 + 24 = (average 33)

So if you want to deal weapon damage 82 damage isn't bad.

Assuming maxed out strength and Cha, maybe a half elf?
Hell if you dropped a level of barbarian (second totem feature is meh) and picked up battle master your damage increases by 3d8 (one for each attack) in your nova. 82 + 13.5 = 95

But then you still have some spells to help you out of jams and small issues that refresh on a short rest. You still have invocations that will help you out. Polymorph is a nice spell, as is levitate, I personally love Silent Image (invocation) on my warlocks.

[Kryx]

However when it comes to Multiclassing... The bladelock is the better choice. I know MC is optional but the bladock gets more love for MC then the blast lock.
It's a bit poor design that a class should MC to compete, but I guess that's true for many classes.

Looking at cleric though they get heavy prof on Tempest and War domain. Bladelock would surely benefit from getting it as well and it wouldn't increase their power if they MC.

Though maybe it doesn't need to be touched as seems to be the general consensus..

[CrusaderJoe]

It's a bit poor design that a class should MC to compete, but I guess that's true for many classes.

Looking at cleric though they get heavy prof on Tempest and War domain. Bladelock would surely benefit from getting it as well and it wouldn't increase their power if they MC.

Though maybe it doesn't need to be touched as seems to be the general consensus..

Totally agree, but that doesn't change that a strength of the bladelock is how well it plays with others.

Multiclassing is very popular so I would give it a point in its favor. Warlock 12 is just that nice to a lot of people.

[Giant2005]

Totally agree, but that doesn't change that a strength of the bladelock is how well it plays with others.

Multiclassing is very popular so I would give it a point in its favor. Warlock 12 is just that nice to a lot of people.

Why would you give it a point in its favour?
The Bladelock is pretty competetive without it but with multiclassing included, there isn't really any combination that could compete with a Warlock/Sorc multi for Eldritch Blasting goodness. Multiclassing should be a point against the Bladelock imo.

[xyianth]

In my games, I made lots of changes to warlock in general, but most of them were made to invocations. I won't detail them all here, but this is the change I made to the life drinker invocation:


Life drinker
Prerequisite: 12th level, Pact of the Blade feature.
Each hit with your pact weapon deals extra necrotic damage equal to your Charisma modifier(minimum 1). Each time you drop a creature with your pact weapon, the extra damage from this invocation increases by 1. The extra damage from this invocation resets to your Charisma modifier(minimum 1) after a short or long rest.

This gives a blade pact warlock extra damage that an eldritch blast focused warlock will never get. It does however strengthen the multiclass builds that take 12 levels of warlock as well.

[Snowbluff]

Why would you give it a point in its favour?
The Bladelock is pretty competetive without it but with multiclassing included, there isn't really any combination that could compete with a Warlock/Sorc multi for Eldritch Blasting goodness. Multiclassing should be a point against the Bladelock imo.

I agree. Sorclock is pretty much the strongest ranged attacker.

[Mandragola]

Well my point is that blasting is still there as a perfectly valid option for a bladelock. There's really no need to make a bladelock who is worse at blasting than any other type of warlock. If you see your pact blade as a boon, rather than as a central feature, then all really is well. "Hey, my sniper character is kind of badass in melee too. That's cool".

Ingredients for being a blastlock seem to be: two levels of warlock, and taking agonising blast as one of your invocations. There's no other invocation that you need to take later, which would necessitate ever taking another warlock level if you just want to blast - you just basically want to level up as anything. So a bladelock gains a lot by MCing for a dip for proficiencies, but arguably blastlock benefits more from being a dip for a sorceror or bard.

I think it's still perfectly possible to be a bladelock without MCing. Just be dex-based. Your AC won't be amazing but it will be ok and you'll have a good melee attack too. Or take a high strength and polearm mastery and a quarterstaff (which you hardly ever use - actually you'll mostly fire a crossbow) at level 1. Forget about having a high AC but move into 10' range, hit and move away again. Deter enemies from coming after you by having armour of agathys up and your PM AOO if they close.

Note that you'll often have to use your bonus action to cast hex or move it to a new target. As soon as you're doing that you can't use a bonus action to attack, with PM or a second weapon, so you're often going to be better off blasting anyway. PM with hex already up offers some pretty respectable damage though, especially once you're adding your charisma bonus to all your hits as well as strength.

[CrusaderJoe]

Why would you give it a point in its favour?
The Bladelock is pretty competetive without it but with multiclassing included, there isn't really any combination that could compete with a Warlock/Sorc multi for Eldritch Blasting goodness. Multiclassing should be a point against the Bladelock imo.

Because with Multiclassing you can change how you use your blade, but as a MC blaster you are still a blaster. The multiclassing expands what you normally could do AND makes it just as good of an option as if you was a blaster.

A Fighter/Warlock Bladelock with Polearm/Sentinel feats will be quite awesome. I saw a build once that was just fantastic. It was a high level build but it worked wonders.

I want to add the dancing sword to a bladelock so bad...

However i do prefer a caster warlock, but I think options open up the bladelock better more so than it does the blaster. EB can be modified/changed/increased in potential (sorcerer) but to to the extent of the blade (barb/fighter/rogue/etc...).

[Chronos]

But if you're only using your pact weapon sporadically instead of focusing on it, is it really worth giving up three extra cantrips and the opportunity to cast all rituals?

[Giant2005]

There is a possible exploit that your DM may or may not let you get away with which would increase the utility of the Bladelock immensely.
Pact of the Blade + Tavern Brawler. Pact of the Blade lets you summon any weapon you choose and with Tavern Brawler, everything is a weapon to you. So theoretically you could summon anything you want. Need some lockpicks? Summon them. A crowbar? Summon that too. A ladder" Go ahead and summon it. Having access to the perfect item needed to solve any given issue makes it more than worth it.

[jkat718]

There is a possible exploit that your DM may or may not let you get away with which would increase the utility of the Bladelock immensely.
Pact of the Blade + Tavern Brawler. Pact of the Blade lets you summon any weapon you choose and with Tavern Brawler, everything is a weapon to you. So theoretically you could summon anything you want. Need some lockpicks? Summon them. A crowbar? Summon that too. A ladder" Go ahead and summon it. Having access to the perfect item needed to solve any given issue makes it more than worth it.

O.o That's...ridiculous. Ridiculously awesome, but still ridiculous. Also, very few DMs would let you do that, because the Pact of the Blade wording specifically calls out chapter 5 for weapon options (which does, technically include the Adventuring Equipment section, yes, but still...), and the Tavern Brawler feature never mentions anything about "everything is a weapon to you," merely that you are proficient with improvised weapons and "using whatever weapons happen to be at hand."

[CrusaderJoe]

O.o That's...ridiculous. Ridiculously awesome, but still ridiculous. Also, very few DMs would let you do that, because the Pact of the Blade wording specifically calls out chapter 5 for weapon options (which does, technically include the Adventuring Equipment section, yes, but still...), and the Tavern Brawler feature never mentions anything about "everything is a weapon to you," merely that you are proficient with improvised weapons and "using whatever weapons happen to be at hand."

Pretty much this, however depending on the game or group I could see a DM allowing it.

For the most part having any item isn't that broken, as long as you leave it to items that don't deal new types of damage like Acids/Alchemical Fire you should be OK.

Ha, inspector gadget.

[Chronos]

For comparison, conjurer wizards can also do something like that.

Another exploit, if you're in a party, is to be the loot-transformer. Suppose, for instance, your party fighter just found a very nice magical greatsword... but he's a Dex-based fighter. You take the greatsword, bind it as your pact weapon, and summon it as a rapier. Then, you unbind it, and give it back to the fighter.

[Kryx]

Another exploit, if you're in a party, is to be the loot-transformer. Suppose, for instance, your party fighter just found a very nice magical greatsword... but he's a Dex-based fighter. You take the greatsword, bind it as your pact weapon, and summon it as a rapier. Then, you unbind it, and give it back to the fighter.
This is RAW, but allowing it would be quite silly I think.

[CrusaderJoe]

This is RAW, but allowing it would be quite silly I think.

By RAW it doesn't say you change the weapon into another weapon, it says you transform one magic item into your pact weapon.

This just means that magic item is your pact weapon and you can summon it and such. You also get proficiency with it.

Saying that you can transform the magic item into another magic item is not in the text block and it is just abuse.

[Chronos]

End of page 107, "You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it". It'd be perfectly reasonable to houserule this exploit away (that's why I called it an exploit in the first place, instead of just a trick), but it is there in the rules.

[CrusaderJoe]

End of page 107, "You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it". It'd be perfectly reasonable to houserule this exploit away (that's why I called it an exploit in the first place, instead of just a trick), but it is there in the rules.

And then on the next page it talks about, in a separate paragraph, that you can also make a magic item your pact weapon. It says what you get out of it, it does not say you can change the magic item into a new item.

Pact of the blade says you can create a pact blade with an action. That is when you can determine the shape. You don't use an action to create the magic item, the most you do is summon it.

So no, you can not change the magic item shape.

[xyianth]

And then on the next page it talks about, in a separate paragraph, that you can also make a magic item your pact weapon. It says what you get out of it, it does not say you can change the magic item into a new item.

Pact of the blade says you can create a pact blade with an action. That is when you can determine the shape. You don't use an action to create the magic item, the most you do is summon it.

So no, you can not change the magic item shape.

It is a fairly common houserule/interpretation that warlocks can change the form of magic items for their own use. I hadn't considered (ab)using this for other party members though.

[CrusaderJoe]

It is a fairly common houserule/interpretation that warlocks can change the form of magic items for their own use. I hadn't considered (ab)using this for other party members though.

Yeah and I get that. But people should know that it is just that, a house rule.

Which, whatever you want to do, but taking that assumption to a table can cause issues.

[Garimeth]

Gotta agree with Joe on that reading of the Pact Weapon rules.

It would be nice if the Blade pact at least gave the Warlock better armor prof.

[Kryx]

To turn the question around: Would it be unbalanced to give the bladelock a higher armor proficiency (Medium or Heavy)? How about Extra Attack?

From the math outlined earlier it seems Extra Attack not stacking with other classes wouldn't increase that power level.

Armor I'm a bit iffy between Medium and Heavy, but Tempest Clerics get Heavy..

[Garimeth]

So in an upcoming game I am getting to PC instead of DM finally, and I am playing a bladelock (using a glaive with PM), no multiclassing allowed.

It seems to me that the biggest thing the Bladelock needs is haste or an extra attack, and medium armor. I am using a homebrewed lightning themed pact and have haste, and my guy is gonna be pretty good. I like haste because it costs the warlock something to use it and requires concentration, but really ups his DPR (extra 1d10+10). I feel like that is a better fit thematically than another attack. I feel like medium armor prof was a no brainer and I'm amazed that it wasn't RAW.

[Person_Man]

Magic weapons often have awesome effects completely unrelated to damage, you can use Feats to improve weapon damage/effects, and sometimes players roll to determine their ability scores and get lucky.

So while Blastlock is probably superior to Bladelock in most circumstances, I would strongly consider playing a Bladelock if its a mid-high level game that used Feats and I was lucky enough to roll 3-4 high ability scores.

[CrusaderJoe]

To turn the question around: Would it be unbalanced to give the bladelock a higher armor proficiency (Medium or Heavy)? How about Extra Attack?

From the math outlined earlier it seems Extra Attack not stacking with other classes wouldn't increase that power level.

Armor I'm a bit iffy between Medium and Heavy, but Tempest Clerics get Heavy..

I would say...

Bladelock can make a suite of armor in the same way as the blade.

The medium armor gives them a base AC of 14 + Dex.

The heavy armor gives them a base AC of 16. May form a shield with this.

Or however the math works out?

[Garimeth]

I think Blade Pact should just give medium armor proficiency. Rogues get it, bards get it, seems like bladelocks should too.

[Kryx]

I think Blade Pact should just give medium armor proficiency. Rogues get it, bards get it, seems like bladelocks should too.
Rogues have light armor prof and no shields. College of valor gives both.

[Garimeth]

Rogues have light armor prof and no shields. College of valor gives both.

You're right. I guess I feel like Bladelock should be comparable to skald.

[CrusaderJoe]

You're right. I guess I feel like Bladelock should be comparable to skald.

Of course with medium and heavy armor (+ shield) people will cry that you have a better EK than the EK.

[Garimeth]

Of course with medium and heavy armor (+ shield) people will cry that you have a better EK than the EK.

I'd be cool with just medium armor, no shields.

[CrusaderJoe]

I'd be cool with just medium armor, no shields.

I would rather see a good class chassis (warlock) be the EK than the current fighter chassis.

Depending on your extra spells you don't even lose out on blasting with iconic spells like fireball.

[Mandragola]

I would rather see a good class chassis (warlock) be the EK than the current fighter chassis.

Depending on your extra spells you don't even lose out on blasting with iconic spells like fireball.

...which is why it's not ok. You shouldn't be as good in melee as a fighter, be as good at sniping as an archer ranger and be able to cast fireball at level 5 as well. There should be some kind of downside.

That downside is AC, unless you take a fighter level... so you take fighter at level 1. You get con saves, start with heavy armour and a glaive, and as a variant human (because devil's sight, so why not?) you get polearm mastery if you like. Then level as warlock after that. That is a properly badass character.

Pact of the blade warlocks are totally fine. They do not need buffs. 5e actually does a really good job of balancing the classes, and warlocks are a great example of that working as it should.

[xyianth]

Of course with medium and heavy armor (+ shield) people will cry that you have a better EK than the EK.

Which isn't hard to do. EK as written is just bad. If you remove the school restrictions it gets much better. I'm not saying blade pact warlocks should get better armor proficiencies, but valor bards and blade pact warlocks are already better EKs than the EK. And the best EK style fighter is a fighter that multiclasses wizard.


Pact of the blade warlocks are totally fine. They do not need buffs.

As long as feats and multiclassing are allowed, I agree. Without those two optional rules, blade pact is significantly weaker and less versatile than any other warlock pact.

[Chronos]

Or, for that matter, you could keep the school restriction and lose the class restriction, so the eldritch knight can pick up evocation and abjuration spells from any class. That way, they could at least get the smite spells off of the paladin list, for instance.

[Garimeth]

As long as feats and multiclassing are allowed, I agree. Without those two optional rules, blade pact is significantly weaker and less versatile than any other warlock pact.

This. I play in a game without multiclassing. Having to burn a feat to get the armor prof hurts alot more than spending a level.

[Oscredwin]

This. I play in a game without multiclassing. Having to burn a feat to get the armor prof hurts alot more than spending a level.

What about burning your race choice by going Mountain Dwarf?

[Garimeth]

What about burning your race choice by going Mountain Dwarf?

Mechanically, that's what I would prefer to do, but for this guy's RP stuff he needs to be a human, so the feat helps a bit. I can't really complain much I asked the DM if I could have medium armor prof and he said no, but he let me homebrew a patron in the form of bahamut/ancient dragon and i got some cool lightning spells, dragon wings at level 14, and haste on my spell list. Over all I'm more than satisfied. If he had said no, I'd probably have went with a mountain dwarf valor college bard.