Eldritch Knight vs Blade Warlock

[The Shadowdove]

Hey peeps,

So, our DM team killed our group last session. Sometime to do with a brothel filled with werewolves and not catching any of the hints of out impending doom....

Well, we decided to come back evil instead of the neutral/good approach again.

That being said, my adventuring companion wants to be a terrifying gish-type character.

She wants to smash things to death with weapons as she displays the powers of the arcane as well as she uses her magical abilities and physical prowess to get her out of tricky roleplay situations.

Our DM doesn't want us to multiclass, as a personal rule and because he wants us to wait until he learns the game better. We all talked about it beforehand and agreed we thought it was a good idea for our novice group to keep things as straightforward as possible.

Which, between the EK and bladelock, make more of a fearsome and noticeable presence in combat and out of combat?


What are their strengths?

How do they differ?

What does the class do to change the 'feel' of play?

Any other input or advice you have to contribute is much appreciated!


Thanks so much people!

Your responses are always so useful and speedy. I ask some pretty silly questions, but the answers you come up with always blow my mind!


-Dove

[squab]

Well I haven't played with them yet, but the Warlock with the blade pact (which will henceforth be known as bladelock) offers about a 50/50 split between magic and melee. Makes a great evil character (make a pact with a demon, a fae creature that could have blue and orange morality, or an eldritch abomination.)


The Eldritch Knight is primarily a fighter who has a few damaging spells as well. Think of it as a character who majored in Fighter and minored in wizard. It's like 75% fighter and 25% wizard. Personally I only like the Eldritch Knight in low-magic settings or when you multiclass it with a wizard.

[DivisibleByZero]

It really depends on how much she wants on the caster side of the gish.
As he said above, EK is more of a fighter with a dash of caster.
Bladelock or Valor Bard is about as close to a traditional gish as you're going to get without multiclassing if more spellcasting is desired.
One thing that people seem to not realize is that the Paladin is a pretty good middle ground. While traditionally a gish is an arcane fighter, the arcane/divine lines in 5e are really only differentiated by fluff. If Bladelock or Valor Bard aren't exactly filling the style she wants, Paladin is really a great alternative.

So, depending on what she wants, from most caster oriented non-multiclassed gish to least:
- Valor Bard: more caster and skill monkey, gish stuff comes on really late
- Bladelock: Like Bard, but more damage focused, and gish stuff kind of begins at lvl5
- Paladin: a great mix of caster and melee, gish essentially online at lvl2
- Eldritch Knight: much more weapon focused, never true gish because of such limited casting
- Arcane Trickster: sneakier EK

[Flashy]

Well I haven't played with them yet, but the Warlock with the blade pact (which will henceforth be known as bladelock) offers about a 50/50 split between magic and melee.

Having played through 7th level as a bladelock I'd say this isn't strictly accurate. You're really a melee character who can do a fair amount of at will magic and can cast fairly occasional spells. In terms of how I found it played I'd really say it's more of a 75/25 split between magic and melee. Other people may have different experiences, but I definitely spend vastly more rounds on melee attacks than I do on any kind of magic.

Bladelocks are also very locked into a specific invocation progression. Armor of Shadows is the absolute best AC you're going to be able to get short of feats, which is pretty necessary for a melee combatant, and Thirsting Blade is absolutely the only choice for a 5th level bladelock. That's two of your first three invocations spoken for.

From my experience a Bladelock is distinct for its ability to just go and go for the entire day (which is the warlock shtick in general). You'll be a melee fighter with some limited magic options, but you'll have those limited options in most fights for most of the day. You absolutely won't have the burst of a paladin, a fighter or a sorcerer however. What sets you apart is your ability to be solidly middle of the road effective in every single fight over the course of an extended adventuring day.

You definitely get gishier as you move on into higher level spell slots. Especially with Armor of Agathys, Vampiric Touch, and eventually one of the elemental investitures as the 6th level arcarnum.

[The Shadowdove]

Which seems like a more capable magicky melee combatant out of:

Dex blade-lock with armor of shadows

or

str blade-lock with heavily armored feat?

[Flashy]

Which seems like a more capable magicky melee combatant out of:

Dex blade-lock with armor of shadows

or

str blade-lock with heavily armored feat?

Dex bladelock with armor of shadows is definitely less of an investment. Since you only have light armor proficiency you'd have to take moderately armored before you could qualify for heavily armored. It depends whether you think an Invocation or a +2 is worth more.

[Giant2005]

Which seems like a more capable magicky melee combatant out of:

Dex blade-lock with armor of shadows

or

str blade-lock with heavily armored feat?

Str is better due to Polearm Mastery but that is already two feats down (And a third if you aren't a Dwarf).
The character is probably better off being an Eldritch Knight than a Warlock especially if defense is an issue and the quoted question sure implies that it is. Wear Heavy Armor, a Shield and take the Defensive Fighting Style. Then take Blur as a spell when you get to level 7 and you will be golden.

The other option which is one I would prefer for the campaign if I was playing it is the Paladin. Due to being evil you can play as an Oathbreaker which is an option you would miss in most campaigns and Oathbreakers are both very cool and very competent.

[Rhaegar14]

Bladelocks are also very locked into a specific invocation progression. Armor of Shadows is the absolute best AC you're going to be able to get short of feats, which is pretty necessary for a melee combatant, and Thirsting Blade is absolutely the only choice for a 5th level bladelock. That's two of your first three invocations spoken for.

Emphasis mine. I don't disagree that Armor of Shadows is the best for AC, but when it's a one-point improvement over standard, studded leather armor, I would argue it is not the least bit worth one of your precious invocations.

[Flashy]

Emphasis mine. I don't disagree that Armor of Shadows is the best for AC, but when it's a one-point improvement over standard, studded leather armor, I would argue it is not the least bit worth one of your precious invocations.

Honestly, having played a bladelock for a while I'm increasingly very much of this opinion. There are dozens of occasions I've wished I had access to agonizing blast and only a few times that extra point has stopped me being hit.

[Mandragola]

There's a halfling bladelock in the group I play in and she works pretty well. Thing is, she very often uses EB rather than hit stuff, because it's basically easier to do and less risky. A dex-based bladelock's melee damage basically cannot compete with its own EB damage, which is sort of a problem.

Eldritch knights have a pretty limited number of spells per day. I actually think they make good tanks thanks to shield, but defensive duelist is probably just as good - especially at higher levels. I've never seen one in play but honestly I'm not sure if they work, as they only get spells very late on, meaning that they won't be all that dangerous to the monsters you meet at that point.

Arcane trickster rogue might be an interesting option. A human one with moderately-armoured could be reasonably durable and she could fluff that she was a devious assassin type who used magic to mess with people's heads before stabbing them. It's subtler than a traditional gish, but certainly a useful character. On the whole I think the illusion-type things an arcane trickster gets work better on higher-level monsters than the evocations that an eldritch knight has.

If you could multiclass then starting out as a human with a level of fighter and polearm mastery could make a pretty potent gish. But that's because you get a bunch of stuff from that fighter level. Or you could just possibly go with paladin instead if you felt like it. Note that there's no particular reason to go with oathbreaker since any of them could in theory be evil, particulary the avenger. But that's a diversion since you can't MC.

I've yet to see a really convincing gish build if I'm honest. There are quite a few that nearly work, but none that are amazing. The problem is the delay in getting the spells, which always means they end up being pretty weak at the level you get them. The spells you can do therefore tend not to be worth an action to use and you end up just bashing things - at which point you'd be better off being a champion or battle master. Or for the warlock you just find EB spam more effective than hitting things, so you spam EB - at which point you'd be better off taking the pact of the book or chain.

[holygroundj]

I've played both to about level 8.

The absolute first question I have is this: in your prior playing, how many short rests did you get per "day"? If the answer is one, or none, then I'm just going to say go Eldritch Knight.

I enjoyed my bladelock until we got to level 5 and then stopped taking short rests. I was the only one in my group that really benefited from them, and so I was the only one pushing hard for them. THat being the case, I basically just got off two hexes a session and that was pretty much it.

For my AL eldritch night, I felt more like the idea that I had, which was a martial dude that augmented this with the occasional spell, which filled out my options. I also had better stats for standing in melee at the beginning, too, and didn't feel like I needed to multiclass for anything.

but that's just experience.

[Safety Sword]

It's a real shame that multi-class is ruled out. There are many combinations that can make the feel of the character you want here.

If you decided to go "Bladelock" you have to make a conscious decision to stick to that philosophy of combat and not fall into being a blaster from range with melee abilities. You have to invest your invocations and spells into the style to make it work.

EK has never grabbed me. The spells you get seem underwhelming because of the limit to the schools you can choose from. It make sense from a flavour perspective, but in reality the spells don't really add that much to the chassis.

[Hawkstar]

... I suggest Oathbreaker Paladin, if you want to be a magical Sauron-type. Unfortunately, you miss out on Fireballs that way :(

[ruy343]

OK, so it's not arcane, but maybe you should take another look at the Cleric's War domain. That might also fit the mold of what you're trying to accomplish (heavy armor, melee character, as much sword and board as magic, etc).

In fact, it's one of the few class options that does fun things to boost melee prowess (extra attacks? sign me up!). You'll also get some great flavorful spells.

I feel like it's my job to present interesting alternatives. At least consider it.

[TheOOB]

A fighters primary means on contributing to a battle is by weapon attacks, a warlocks is by casting spells. Fighters are tougher and higher high sustained dps, warlocks have more utility and better burst dps. Which of those appeals to you?

[Steampunkette]

For Bladelocks I -strongly- suggest talking to the DM about some of the house rules people have put forth to fix them.

Bladelocks, by the book, throw out less damage per round than a straight up blasting warlock, thanks to how Eldritch Blast is designed. And the higher level you get the more glaring it becomes.

Talk to the GM about at least utilizing an increased Attacks Per Round schedule wherein you get a third at level 11 through invocation and where Blade Pact just flatly gets extra attack at 5 or 6. At least that way you can offhand a Staff as an arcane focus to brain folks with a somewhat competitive combat schedule. (Or a mace if your GM will allow you to wield one as a 'rod')

I know your GM is new but this would be advice from other GMs and players who came together to find a middle ground.

[MeeposFire]

A fighters primary means on contributing to a battle is by weapon attacks, a warlocks is by casting spells. Fighters are tougher and higher high sustained dps, warlocks have more utility and better burst dps. Which of those appeals to you?

Do warlocks really have higher nova DPR as a single class? Its best offensive abilities seemed to be sustained DPR type of abilities like hex. Also you have things like EB and your blade lock abilities are aslo sustained not burst type.

Fighters have action surge which is much more nova style than anything I can think of for the warlock.


I do think that the warlock has better chance of affecting the battlefield and probably AOE DPR but I am not so sure about NOVA DPR unless I am forgetting something special.

[Ashrym]

For Bladelocks I -strongly- suggest talking to the DM about some of the house rules people have put forth to fix them.

Bladelocks, by the book, throw out less damage per round than a straight up blasting warlock, thanks to how Eldritch Blast is designed. And the higher level you get the more glaring it becomes.

Talk to the GM about at least utilizing an increased Attacks Per Round schedule wherein you get a third at level 11 through invocation and where Blade Pact just flatly gets extra attack at 5 or 6. At least that way you can offhand a Staff as an arcane focus to brain folks with a somewhat competitive combat schedule. (Or a mace if your GM will allow you to wield one as a 'rod')

I know your GM is new but this would be advice from other GMs and players who came together to find a middle ground.

Weapons on a blade pact do more damage at most levels than eldritch blast provided the investment into feats & such, and possibly multiclassing, is made.

The issue isn't the damage. The concern is the higher investment requirements to get that damage.

A 3rd attack at 11th level is too good with that same investment and steps on fighter toes. A better option is defensive options in the invocations for blade pact because the weapon is a melee weapon while the subclass is short on defensive options built within it.


To answer the OP:

Blade pact typically has more magical options and learns higher level magic as well as learning it faster. The eldritch knight is more solid defensively and with that 3rd attack (and eventually 4th) more capable of melee damage.

When all your spells are cast in a higher level slot that which is even available to an eldritch knight then it looks like a much better option to me if offense is important. I would recommend blade pact.

As others have mentioned, clerics and paladins meet the style regardless of not being arcane. Smiting channels magical damage through the attack and a vengeance paladin is an excellent choice to match the concept.

Many of the options listed require focus on a casting stat and a combat stat. This can be done but it's a bit Mad.

The choices to work around the MAD are in the nature cleric and the valor bard. Both can gain access to shillelagh using their own casting stat so MAD is less applicable. Both use full casting progression and can do what you want.

The cleric can use divine strikes to vary damage type, which is nice, and the bard eventually can cast a spell and make an attack every turn. A CHA valor bard who picks up shillelagh and spirit guardians at 10th level and eldritch blast or poison spray at 14th level is at least decent ;-)

[ChubbyRain]

Str based cleric, pick up Nature, Tempest, or War domain.

A patron gives you power instead of a deity... And blamo.

Vuman Warcaster cleric does about the best gishing in the game.

Though I did see a Vuman (Heavily Armored Feat) Light Cleric run around with mace + shield + spiritual weapon + spirit guardians for a grand old time. When she wanted to blast? Drop the mace and then drop the Fireball.

[Yagyujubei]

just thought I'd weigh in to say that imho Bladelock is quite underwhelming as written damage-wise it was originally the class i looked forward to most....but it's just inferior to eldritch blast in every way. like i dont even understand the logic behind the design...

without checking with your DM to gain access to some of the homebrew I wouldn't go for it.

Honestly I would probably do valor bard if your looking for a gishy feeling build, just take some big blasty spells as your arcane secrets choices.

[ruy343]

Key question: What levels will the campaign focus on?

[Steampunkette]

Weapons on a blade pact do more damage at most levels than eldritch blast provided the investment into feats & such, and possibly multiclassing, is made.

The issue isn't the damage. The concern is the higher investment requirements to get that damage.

A 3rd attack at 11th level is too good with that same investment and steps on fighter toes. A better option is defensive options in the invocations for blade pact because the weapon is a melee weapon while the subclass is short on defensive options built within it.

It's good enough so long as you use two optional systems, one of which the DM is already saying no to...

That the blade pact warlock needs feats and multiclassing to be as effective as a nonmulticlassed caster warlock without feats is pretty clear evidence of imbalance.

And while, yes, the warlock is fairly squishy as a gish they're meant to be damage dealers rather than tanky folks. So I remain of the opinion that bladelocks need moar damage. Up to and including a third attack. To hell with the fighter's toes when a monk can fling four fists at level 5 and a barb can swing three times by the same level. Give it a limited number of uses per rest and run with it so that eldritch agonizing blast doesn't become the clearly better use of your action as you level.

Because 2 greatsword swings are great and all, but 4d10 plus charisma on each is the clear winner. Especially with a magic rod or arcane focus adding to the attack and damage rolls.

[DivisibleByZero]

It's good enough so long as you use two optional systems, one of which the DM is already saying no to...

That the blade pact warlock needs feats and multiclassing to be as effective as a nonmulticlassed caster warlock without feats is pretty clear evidence of imbalance.

And while, yes, the warlock is fairly squishy as a gish they're meant to be damage dealers rather than tanky folks. So I remain of the opinion that bladelocks need moar damage. Up to and including a third attack. To hell with the fighter's toes when a monk can fling four fists at level 5 and a barb can swing three times by the same level. Give it a limited number of uses per rest and run with it so that eldritch agonizing blast doesn't become the clearly better use of your action as you level.

Because 2 greatsword swings are great and all, but 4d10 plus charisma on each is the clear winner. Especially with a magic rod or arcane focus adding to the attack and damage rolls.

I disagree. In fact, I couldn't disagree more.
Warlocks are not "meant to be damage dealers." That is merely one possibility. It's the first one that comes to mind for most people because EB with invocations makes it extremely competitive. But that's not what it was "meant to be."
Just look at the warlock's spell list. It contains things such as charm person, hold person, suggestion, etc. These are the spells that you would focus on as a bladelock (obviously with hex in there as well, for when you wanted to deal some damage).

Bladelock was not meant to be as powerful a caster as a tomelock, or even as powerful a caster as a chainlock. Bladelock was meant as a melee capable alternative to those. If you want the flavor of a warlock, with some melee capability, as well as 9th level casting, then bladelock is perfect.

To be frank, if it was competitive in melee with the other melee classes, then it would have to lose full caster status. Making bladelocks competitive with other melee classes while retaining full caster status would make all other melee classes obsolete.

If you want more melee and a little casting, EK/AT is the way to go.
If you want a good balance between the two, Paladin is the way to go.
If you want more casting, but with adequate melee capability, Valor Bard or Bladelock is the way to go.

I do believe that rolling the two bladelock invocations into the subclass would have been cool, but those aren't really the subclass options. The subclass options are Patron dependent. So I can see why making the Pact options invocation based was the right decision.
And now I'm thinking about offering the first Pact restricted invocation for free when it becomes available. BoAC@3, VotCM@3, TB@5.

[Ashrym]

It's good enough so long as you use two optional systems, one of which the DM is already saying no to...

That the blade pact warlock needs feats and multiclassing to be as effective as a nonmulticlassed caster warlock without feats is pretty clear evidence of imbalance.

And while, yes, the warlock is fairly squishy as a gish they're meant to be damage dealers rather than tanky folks. So I remain of the opinion that bladelocks need moar damage. Up to and including a third attack. To hell with the fighter's toes when a monk can fling four fists at level 5 and a barb can swing three times by the same level. Give it a limited number of uses per rest and run with it so that eldritch agonizing blast doesn't become the clearly better use of your action as you level.

Because 2 greatsword swings are great and all, but 4d10 plus charisma on each is the clear winner. Especially with a magic rod or arcane focus adding to the attack and damage rolls.

Warlocks don't need multiclassing to make the bladelock do competitive or better damage; it's just easier. Feats, on the other hand, are very important to the blade pact. However; a person cannot include magical items for use with eldritch blast and then not include magical items for weapons, and blade pact warlocks at 2 ability score bonuses to the attacks instead of just one for a pretty good deal.

At first level the weapon choices clearly do more damage and at second level even with agonizing blast TWF options are still superior in damage. Fortunately for weapon users, there's an ultimate weapon buff available in weapons by acquiring black market poisons that can be applied to weapons and cannot be applied to eldritch blasts. This is also within the control of the DM but any DM who willfully cripples any character concept probably isn't worth playing with, tbh, and at this point seems to be stonewalling the build after taking so many options away. Someone might take it for a flavor build for fun at that rate, regardless.

Aside from poison, the second attack at 5th level via invocation for our weapon user still out-damages eldritch blast until that 3rd blast becomes available, but opportunity attacks will exist for the weapon user and not the blaster if we're ignoring feats, and the blaster takes attacks at disadvantage if range has been closed for a huge drop in damage, and the odd ball situational difference where magic is disrupted via other magic is still going to impact the agonizing blaster. The target creature may also use your other party members as cover from ranged attacks or willfully drop prone for the same effect while crawling to more cover.

Even without feats there are factors and options available that provide a purpose for a weapon using warlock. The best uses of cantrips don't even start for the best cantrip uses as far as damage is concerned until the campaign is half over or more and even then they aren't necessarily competitive with weapon options. Buying or harvesting poisons leaves those cantrip users well in the dust; even such a limited resource is well worth weapons if it's used.

[Steampunkette]

Sure. They're not meant to be damage dealers. Fine.

But Eldritch Blast is the core of their damage dealing and aren't particularly tanky/durable on their face was my point.

No fireballs. No called lightning. Their spellcasting doesn't -do- much damage. It tends, instead, to either outright kill with death effects or provide control/support/self-healing. Or it adds damage to attacks. Sure they've got Arms of Hadar and a couple of other low-tier spells that scale up, but most of what they're getting as they level up is more variety of spells.

Taking away Eldritch Blast, like Pact of the Blade essentially does, needs to add something back that is comparable to Eldritch Blast in terms of damage per round and survivability increase. There's a reason longbows don't do 2d6 damage like flying greatswords: You're less likely to get meleed to death while 80 feet away from your target. Especially if each of the 4 hits you fling at them pushes them back 10 more feet like an Eldritch Blast can.

So in order for balance to be achieved the Pact of the Blade needs to dish out similar damage to eldritch blast while maintaining the same survivability, roughly. That would be balanced. As it stands, Pact of the Blade is weaker.

[DivisibleByZero]

So in order for balance to be achieved the Pact of the Blade needs to dish out similar damage to eldritch blast while maintaining the same survivability, roughly. That would be balanced. As it stands, Pact of the Blade is weaker.

Once again I disagree.
Don't compare warlock to warlock.
Compare caster to caster, or melee to melee.
Yes, during the second half of the game EB deals more damage. Big deal. So what if EB deals more damage? We're talking about a Bladelock, not a blaster. And nothing is preventing the Bladelock from taking AB, as you suggest. EB is not removed, it is complimented.
A blastlock (any warlock with EB and AB, including Bladelocks) deals spell damage on par with a fighter. If a Bladelock did the same in melee, while retaining 9th level spells, then congratulations, you've just invalidated every single other weapon user in the game.
Good job with your so-called balance. [/sarcasm]

[Steampunkette]

Balance is not exclusively external, DBZ. It has to be internally consistent to the class.

And having 1 9th level spell per day which is Astral Projection, Foresight, Imprisonment, Power Word Kill, or True Polymorph is not that freaking overpowered.

Oooo! Look! My Bladelock can, once per long rest, enter into a sleeping coma and project her spirit elsewhere into the world. Obviously I'm superior to a Fighter throwing out two attack actions and a middle finger twice per rest.

(And yes. I'm being intentionally obtuse about it not being Power Word Kill because it's more funny this way).

Comparing Fighter to Bladelock is a really terrible proposition. The fighter wins, hands down, in damage dealing and survivability thanks to heavy armor and their action surges (Which recharge on a short rest rather than a long one, like that Astral Projection!)

You need to deal with internal balance. If the Bladelock with spells is "OP Compared to Fighters!" Then holy balls the EB Casterlock must be even MORE OP since they deal more damage, at range. That's a ridiculous argument. Even with a third attack the fighter is gonna dish more damage on average and survive the combat better. Larger hit dice. Better armor. Innate self-healing. An extra attack. And on top of it all the ability to make another 4 attacks twice.

I suspect your fighterbias.

[DivisibleByZero]

I suspect your fighterbias.

I have no fighterbias. I have a balancebias.
With an average of 2-3 short rests per adventuring day, this means you'll have 3 or 4 times as many spells as listed. So 12-16 5th level spells per day, plus one each of 6th+.
We'll average the 12-16 at 14.
Using the spell point system, we can gauge how much casting power a warlock has.
5th level spells cost 7, so 14*7=98
6th cost 9, making 107
7th cost 10, making 117
8th cost 11, making 128
9th cost 13, giving us an average total of 141
A 20th level non-warlock caster has 133.

So the warlock not only has more casting power on an average day than a bard or what have you, but they also have fighter level at-will damage without using any slots. And that's if we don't even attempt to factor in free spells via invocations, like silent image or mage armor or whatever all day long for free.
A Bladelock has all of that, plus 75% of the fighter's damage in melee.

In terms of raw power, warlocks are one of the most powerful classes in the game. This cannot be disputed. But you think that they deserve more, simply because a fighter deals more damage with weapons?
And you think they're unbalanced, and actually deserve a boost in DPR potential?
Simply put, that's just rubbish.

[Steampunkette]

Also, arguing that the Bladelock can use Eldritch Blast is just... Mindboggling.

The point of the Blade is to more or less replace the Blast. They both take your action in combat and they can't be used together like an Eldritch Knight fighter gets to do, eventually. It's a nice fallback ability while closing or trying to get into a better position when you're not close enough to hit someone, sure. But it's not meant to be the bread and butter of a pactblade warlock like it is for the other subclasses.

If your options are "Really good blasting damage at range with commensurate survivability increase" and "Get into melee to take more damage and deal less damage" then the options aren't balanced against each other. Internal balance needs to exist alongside external balance. If the Bladelock having 3 attacks and 1 9th level spell would make them "Too Powerful" compared to a fighter (even though they've got the durability of a wet cobweb) then the whole Warlock class needs to be nerfed down to compensate.

[DivisibleByZero]

Also, arguing that the Bladelock can use Eldritch Blast is just... Mindboggling.

The point of the Blade is to more or less replace the Blast.

No, arguing that EB suddenly may as well not exist for Bladelocks is what is mind boggling.
Bladelocks can take EB as a cantrip just like any other warlock, and they'll have an outstanding ranged option without needing a weapon if they do.
To ignore that EB exists for a Bladelock is to ignore an extremely potent and complimentary ability that they have access to.

And I think you're clearly missing the entire point of Bladelock.
It isn't an option for power, it's an option for flavor.
It has everything that any other warlock has, but it also has 75% of the damage a fighter can do in melee.
Just like Tomelock has all the warlock goodies, plus he's an amazing ritual caster. Just like a Chainlock has all of the warlock goodies, plus he makes an excellent scout.
Not only does a Bladelock have everything that any other warlock has, along with 75% of the fighter's melee power, but until that fighter actually gets to level 20 the Bladelock is either holding his own with him, or is strictly better. ONLY at level 20 does the fighter actually surpass him by that 25%.
So no, I cannot in good conscience agree that a Bladelock needs a boost in any way, shape, or form.

[Steampunkette]

No, arguing that EB suddenly may as well not exist for Bladelocks is what is mind boggling.
Bladelocks can take EB as a cantrip just like any other warlock, and they'll have an outstanding ranged option without needing a weapon if they do.
To ignore that EB exists for a Bladelock is to ignore an extremely potent and complimentary ability that they have access to.

And I think you're clearly missing the entire point of Bladelock.
It isn't an option for power, it's an option for flavor.
It has everything that any other warlock has, but it also has 75% of the damage a fighter can do in melee.
Just like Tomelock has all the warlock goodies, plus he's an amazing ritual caster. Just like a Chainlock has all of the warlock goodies, plus he makes an excellent scout.

Okay. Let me try to explain this.

I'm okay with Bladelocks being an option for FLAVOR. But to be a FLAVOR option it still needs to be EQUIVALENT to the other options. FLAVOR should not cost COMPETENCE. When you want some salt on your french fries you don't give up 25% of your french fries to get some more flavor.

When the Bladelock fights in melee they're not casting Eldritch Blasts. That is called Opportunity Cost. This is what I mean when I say "Replace". Because in a given round of combat you can do one or the other but not both. For these two options to be balanced they need to do similar damage and have similar survivability and functionality. Maybe not the -same- but at the least -similar-.

To compound Opportunity Cost with Loss of Ability and Loss of Survivability is dumb as a box of rocks. For some reason you're incapable of seeing that fact. You poor, unfortunate, soul. As it stands the only reasonable use of a Pact Blade is to defend yourself from melee combatants that put you at disadvantage to eldritch blasting or to intentionally decrease your capabilities in favor of 'Flavor'.

That's bad game design, dude.

[DivisibleByZero]

OK, let me try to explain this.

We'll just ignore modifiers and set them at +5 stat, to make this easy, because they'll likely be similar all the way down the line. I'll even be nice an use a rapier with hex for the bladelock compared to a greatsword for the fighter.

Level 1: each have 1 attack
Fighter: 2d6+5 = 12
Warlock: 1d8+1d6+5 = 13
warlock is ahead

Level 5: both get extra attack via feature or invocation
Fighter: (2d6+5)*2 = 24
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+5)*2 = 26
warlock is ahead

Level 11: fighter gets 3rd attack
Fighter: (2d6+5)*3 = 36
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+5)*2 = 26
warlock loses the edge here, but remember, he still has 5th level spell slots by this point

Level 12: warlock gets invocation
Fighter: (2d6+5)*3 = 36
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+10)*2 = 36
warlock is caught up again after being down for one single level, and remember, he still has 5th level spell slots by this point. Right back to being even

Level 20: fighter gets 4th attack
Fighter: (2d6+5)*4 = 48
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+10)*2 = 36

There are only two levels throughout the entire game where a fighter is better than a warlock for melee damage, and those are levels 11 and 20. For the other 18 levels, the warlock either holds his own or outright surpasses him.
Action surge will give the fighter a bit of burst, but not so much that the warlock needs a boost. He has 9th level spells to fall back on instead of action surge.
If you give warlock a boost to melee, his 9th level spellcasting breaks balance into little pieces and makes the fighter absolutely useless. Welcome to 3.75e.
Nope, this is 5e, leave it alone and don't make weapon classes useless. That problem has been fixed. Don't reintroduce it.


To compound Opportunity Cost with Loss of Ability and Loss of Survivability is dumb as a box of rocks. For some reason you're incapable of seeing that fact. You poor, unfortunate, soul.

Not cool. And I'm done with this discussion if you're going to take that tone. I'm sorry if you can't do simple math, or realize that a 20th level fighter (and basically only the 20th level fighter) should be better at fighting with weapons than someone with 9th level spells. You poor, unfortunate soul.

[Troacctid]

*shrug* Your math puts them on similar footing as damage-dealers. The Fighter has more survivability, more feats, and is generally beefier. So, whatevs.

[DivisibleByZero]

*shrug* Your math puts them on similar footing as damage-dealers. The Fighter has more survivability, more feats, and is generally beefier. So, whatevs.

Exactly.
Fighter gets his third bump one level earlier than bladelock does, but beyond that they are neck and neck all the way to 20.
The fighter has more survivability, more feats, and is beefier.
The warlock has 9th level spells.
Once level cap is reached the fighter finally has a lasting advantage, but literally not until 20th level.

Boosting a Bladelock's damage is not the answer to balance, because they are already balanced. One could easily argue that Bladelocks need to be tuned down a bit rather than keyed up. Leave their damage output alone.

[ChubbyRain]

Actually I don't think the fighter has more survivability.

The play style of the fighter put them in more danger than the warlock. The bladelock can easily enough switch up their style (darkness + devil sight) and get the hell out of dodge.

[Steampunkette]

"Making it all 5s" does not show balance, DBZ. It shows you understand the basic rules of the system and don't want to acknowledge MAD so your point is 'obvious' to the point that anyone who doesn't understand must be ignorant of simple math. But what you're actually doing is painting over everything and hoping the color similarity makes the cracks in the wall disappear.

And even WITH your ridiculous example the Warlock deals less damage. And you know what else? She's less survivable than that Fighter. And she'll do less damage than the fighter during the fighter's action surges. And probably crit less if it's a Champion or deal multiple d8s, d10s, or d12s less damage if it's a battlemaster.

So yeah. You're skipping over all kinds of REALLY important stuff to try and make your point, and it's REALLY undermining your point. Especially since you're having the Warlock throw on a Hex for the extra 1d6 damage but ignoring the fighter's damage increasing abilities.

And it doesn't get into the differences in SURVIVAL. Plate Armor and bigger hit dice and with no Charisma MAD means more constitution, on average.

But if you ignore EVERYTHING else, sure. The Warlock does more damage than a fighter at low levels and part of the midrange. But it's not a damage dealing class. :P

And if you wanna be done that's fine. But you started the sarcasm, not me.

[Flashy]

I do think it's worth considering that the compared damage outputs use a fighter with no features beyond the attack progression against a warlock attacking with a spell you don't have to choose.

It'd be like arguing that Blade Pact warlocks are defensively fine because they have armor of agathys, vampiric touch and the fiend patron starting feature. Sort of valid but not options that every single warlock will end up with for reasons of fluff, interest, or personal taste.

Really I find that they are a theoretically effective class that suffers mildly in actual play, simply because many of their best options have to be actively sought out.

Edit: Sort of ninja'd?

[DivisibleByZero]

I do think it's worth considering that the compared damage outputs use a fighter with no features beyond the attack progression against a warlock attacking with a spell you don't have to choose.

It's not even worth mentioning. If you are playing a warlock and want to be a damage dealer, then you will use Hex, regardless of which subclass you choose. Not counting Hex would have been worthy of noting in a damage calculation.

Any other features a fighter may have from a subclass will change things, pulling the fighter slightly ahead at certain points, but none of them will be marked enough to warrant entire spreadsheets worth of data (which is what it would take).

The entire point was to show that by the base numbers (and in a damage comparison hex is indeed a base number) the two are very well balanced and even all the way to 20.
Even the slightest bump beyond what they have here (such as a third attack, as suggested) would put bladelocks well into "why should I ever play a fighter?" territory. If you boost a bladelock's damage output without boosting others', you break the class.

[Steampunkette]

By using one of the Warlock's "once per short rest" spell slots you're expending her resources. And then comparing her to someone not expending any of theirs.

For a REAL balance analysis between the two you'd need to create a DPR chart with several rounds on it, not this snapshot you've got. And in that chart have the fighter and the warlock both expend resources. Then you'll be able to actually compare the numbers they're doing.

To make it as fair as possible, I suggest giving them the default array and making them baseline humans (+1 to all stats). The result will be that the Warlock is less survivable and deals less damage, on average, than the fighter does.

Bladelocks less so in both categories.

[DivisibleByZero]

Bladelocks less so in both categories.

Yes, they will be.
What I don't understand is why you think they shouldn't be?
Why do you think for even one moment that a fighter should not be ahead in both of those categories? Why do you think for even one moment that a warlock should have some sort of equivalency in either of those categories?
You have yet to explain it in any way that makes sense from a balance perspective, and that's probably because it can't be done.

The numbers are extremely close.
They're a LOT closer than they should be given the fact that the warlock is also a full caster.
The Bladelock doesn't need a boost to get him even.
If anything, the Bladelock needs a nerf so he's not quite so close.

[JNAProductions]

Because a Bladelock fills a similar role, just worse. It should fill a similar role in a similar capacity, or at least a comparable differnt one, such as more damage, less survivability.

[DivisibleByZero]

That's the trade-off for playing a full caster.
If you want more melee, and if you want to fill that role better, then you need to not play a full friggin' caster!

You guys want the warlock to have his cake and be able to eat it, too.
Not gonna happen, and you certainly can't argue balance in favor of it.

[Chaosvii7]

I don't know if anybody has brought this up, but you could show your DM the third Unearthed Arcana article and suggest she play a Favored Soul with the War domain. Medium armor, 9th level spells, metamagic, and some strong combat utility coming from both the War domain bonus spells plus her own Favored Soul abilities. An Elf Favored soul won't have a massive bonus to Charisma, but the Dexterity bump should get you to the +2 DEX bonus cap on medium armor, as well as proficiency with longswords and longbows. If not, find a feat to take to expand your repertoire and take a CHA-heavy race.

As others have said, it depends on whether or not she wants a balance between casting and melee or not. Everything is basically a 75/25 split except for the Paladin, who's probably a solid 50/50 split between spells and swords. If she wants, talk to the DM about making a custom oath for being more a spellsword than just being a holy warrior.

[Ghost Nappa]

The Eldritch Knight has the benefits of having more focused core stats (CON, STR/DEX and maybe INT) over the Bladelock (CHA, DEX, CON) as well as to more flexibility with when those scores can be raised and which atttributes EK actually wants to use. (EK only needs 2, BL needs 3). The EK gets more feat opportunities, more HP, generally higher AC and better generic weapons.

The Bladelock gets better multi-class synergies (Bard, Paladin, Sorcerer, the one experimental Rogue subclass), better cantrip support, a cooler, more powerful and more customizable subsystem (invocations).

I have more experience with the Eldritch Knight and can't really explain the benefits the Bladelock has but I would not let my poor selling of the Bladelock dissuade from that path.

[Troacctid]

Actually I don't think the fighter has more survivability.

The play style of the fighter put them in more danger than the warlock. The bladelock can easily enough switch up their style (darkness + devil sight) and get the hell out of dodge.

The enemies aren't going to throw up their hands and surrender just because nobody is engaging them in melee. They're going to attack someone. The Fighter's survivability means she can afford to put herself in danger. She has a high AC because she's heavily armored (and she can boost her AC higher with her extra feats and/or combat style), she has good HP thanks to her large hit dice, and her HP is a renewable resource thanks to her second wind. She doesn't have to get out of Dodge.

[Steampunkette]

Yes, they will be.
What I don't understand is why you think they shouldn't be?
Why do you think for even one moment that a fighter should not be ahead in both of those categories? Why do you think for even one moment that a warlock should have some sort of equivalency in either of those categories?
You have yet to explain it in any way that makes sense from a balance perspective, and that's probably because it can't be done.

The numbers are extremely close.
They're a LOT closer than they should be given the fact that the warlock is also a full caster.
The Bladelock doesn't need a boost to get him even.
If anything, the Bladelock needs a nerf so he's not quite so close.

The issue isn't that the Bladelock is closer to fighter than you're comfortable with. The issue is that they're weaker than OTHER WARLOCKS.

That has been the issue this entire time. You've been redirecting things to fighters and then specifically underestimating fighter damage values to show how much more powerful warlocks are than fighters.

If Warlocks need a nerf then it's not BLADELOCKS that need a nerf, it's WARLOCKS in total. And the Bladelock needs to get buffed up either before or after that nerf to be equivalent to the rest of the Warlocks.

That has been the thrust of my argument this whole time. Bladelocks need to be as strong as Warlocks who don't use a sword.

[Dralnu]

I've heard it said many times on these forums that Eldritch Knight is a "trap" option but honestly I dig it. You're a fighter that uses some spells to augment your fighting abilities.

I'd focus on mostly stuff that don't interfere with your "I hit it with my weapon" strategy. Reactions, buff spells. AOE / ranged attacks picked sparingly.

1st level spells: Absorb Elements, Shield, either Thunderwave or Burning Hands that you can cast when enough enemies are around

2nd lvl: Mirror Image is great, but I wouldn't know what else. Shatter?

3rd lvl: HASTE!!!! COUNTERSPELL! dispel magic, fireball, melf's minute meteors (full attack + bonus action meteor!), walls

4th: Banishment, Blight, Control Water, Fire Shield, Evard's Black Tentacles, GREATER INVISIBILITY, Phantasmal Killer, lots of goodies

More than enough to keep me happy personally. Would definitely recommend that.

EDIT: Oh yes, and one 1st lvl wizard spell of any kind at 3rd level. Find Familiar! Free scout and pretty much advantage+ on your perception checks. Amazing.

[DivisibleByZero]

That has been the thrust of my argument this whole time. Bladelocks need to be as strong as Warlocks who don't use a sword.

This has been the crux of my argument the entire time.
Bladelocks are as powerful as other warlocks, because they are warlocks! They have access to the same spells and invocations as everyone else. They just also have access to just as much melee damage as a fighter, except at level 20 when the fighter pulls ahead.

[JNAProductions]

Except ranged EB damage is better with a single invocation. Making them a distinctly subpar choice.

[Troacctid]

This has been the crux of my argument the entire time.
Bladelocks are as powerful as other warlocks, because they are warlocks! They have access to the same spells and invocations as everyone else. They just also have access to just as much melee damage as a fighter, except at level 20 when the fighter pulls ahead.

Well, no, they don't really have access to the same spells and invocations as the other Warlocks. They spent multiple spell and invocation slots in order to get their pact blade.

[DivisibleByZero]

Well, no, they don't really have access to the same spells and invocations as the other Warlocks. They spent multiple spell and invocation slots in order to get their pact blade.

A Tomelock or Chainlock that wants to focus on EB will probably spend three invocations:
1) Agonizing Blast
2) Repelling Blast
3) Book of Ancient Secrets or Voice of the Chain Master
and possibly a fourth for Chainlocks (Carceri)

A Bladelock that wants to have EB as a ranged alternative will probably spend three invocations:
1) Thirsting Blade
2) Lifedrinker
3) Agonizing Blast
and possibly a fourth for Bladelocks (Repelling)

That leaves damage and/or EB focused locks with 4 or 5 invocations open for other things, no matter your specialty.

The spells that benefit Bladelocks also work with EB, so there is no difference there.

[Troacctid]

You just named several differences. Those are things are different. :smallconfused:

No matter how you slice it, you are by necessity giving up three cantrips or a familiar. That's kind of how it works, yeah?

[Steampunkette]

So you're problem with giving bladelocks more power is that there'll be no point to playing a fighter.

Fine. Then what is the freaking point of playing a Bladelock?

Any turn you spend in melee combat fighting people is a turn you're not at range throwing MORE DAMAGE and surviving better because you're not in Fireball Formation with the party's fighter and rogue.

So if a Bladelock can have alllll of the same power of any other warlock, what is the point of having a bladelock at -all-? Why bother taking more damage and dealing less damage with a sword if you can just blast stuff 24/7?

They do less damage when they actually use their melee abilities, they only do "More Damage than Fighters" if they're also casting spells and have balogna stats that are maxed out down the board specifically to show them doing more damage while the fighters are just standing still and hitting stuff without using any of their resources or special abilities at all, even the -passive- ones like Fighting Styles and Increased Crit Range.

The Bladelock when actively Bladelocking is worse than a warlock, DBZ. Therefore they need a buff to fighting in melee in order get in line with the rest of Warlockdom and make melee fighting a real option rather than something you do to get your ass kicked.

If the Warlock does too much damage in general then the whole class needs to get nerfed in general. But in THAT SPECIFIC INSTANCE, fighting with a Pact Blade, Warlocks need to be buffed in order to be internally competitive.

[DivisibleByZero]

You just named several differences. Those are things are different. :smallconfused:

No matter how you slice it, you are by necessity giving up three cantrips or a familiar. That's kind of how it works, yeah?

Yeah, you're giving up a few cantrips and ritual casting or a familiar for all of the fighter's melee damage until you reach level 20.

Context.
We're talking about base invocations and spells, which have nothing to do with the other Pact choices.
You get everything that a warlock gets, including EB w/ AB & RB if you want them.
So he can be exactly as effective a blaster as any other warlock if he chooses. He loses nothing on that front. So for Steampunkette to complain about the fact that a Bladelock's melee needs to compare to EB is incorrect, because he can have the exact same EB as anyone else if he wants it.

The comparison needs to be between:
1) Bladelock: melee damage comparable to a fighter through 19 levels
2) Tomelock: extra cantrips and fantastic ritual casting
3) Chainlock: an exceptional familiar

Comparing EB to a Bladelock's weapon damage is a mistake. It's the wrong thing to compare it to.

[JNAProductions]

Except having the same blasting is exactly the issue! That puts them on par with other Warlocks when they blast. NOT when they use their blades.

[DivisibleByZero]

Except having the same blasting is exactly the issue! That puts them on par with other Warlocks when they blast. NOT when they use their blades.


The Bladelock when actively Bladelocking is worse than a warlock, DBZ. Therefore they need a buff to fighting in melee in order get in line with the rest of Warlockdom and make melee fighting a real option rather than something you do to get your ass kicked.

If the Warlock does too much damage in general then the whole class needs to get nerfed in general. But in THAT SPECIFIC INSTANCE, fighting with a Pact Blade, Warlocks need to be buffed in order to be internally competitive.

I will refer both of you to my earlier post:


That's the trade-off for playing a full caster.
If you want more melee, and if you want to fill that role better, then you need to not play a full friggin' caster!

You guys want the warlock to have his cake and be able to eat it, too.
Not gonna happen, and you certainly can't argue balance in favor of it.

[JNAProductions]

So then nerf the main Warlock to be in line with Bladelock if you think Warlock is OP. Don't pretend Bladelock is equal to other Warlocks.

[DivisibleByZero]

Bladelock is equal to other warlocks, because a Bladelock IS A WARLOCK!
A Bladelock just also happens to have the melee capability of a 19th level fighter instead of extra cantrips/rituals or a familiar.

Furthermore, a Bladelock with the ritual caster feat can have most of the things that warlocks from other Pacts have (familiar-chain, wizard rituals-tome), but can also have the melee capabilities of a 19th level fighter.
You can even do it with standard array.
Str: 10
Dex: 15 +1race +2 ASIs = 20
Con: 12
Int: 8
Wis: 13 (for ritual caster)
Cha: 14 +2race +2 ASIs = 20
Variant human gives you ritual caster for free and saves an ASI, allowing you to take another feat or boost Con to 14. Half elf gives you another +1 to work with, making Wis a 14 if you wanted.

[JNAProductions]

If they spend at least two invocations. As opposed to Blasterlocks, who only need to spend one.

Oh, and if they have two 20s, in Charisma and Dexterity.

And spend a spell slot every single fight.

Then yes-they are as good at DPR as Fighters who aren't using resources.

[Ashrym]

For some perspective. I am tired but the math should be correct. Please forgive me if I err. It does happen from time to time. ;)


Level 1

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, 16 STR, vs AC 15) --
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +3 damage = 0.983
50% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +3 damage = 5.665
Damage = 6.648

Warlock (2 shortswords, hex, 16 STR or DEX, vs AC 15)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +3 damage = 0.85
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
50% normal chance for 2d6 +3 damage = 5.0
50% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 3.5
Damage = 10.05

Warlock (eldritch blast, 16 CHA, vs AC 15)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 = 0.9
50% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 = 4.5
Damage = 5.4


Level 2

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, 16 STR, vs AC 15)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +3 damage = 0.983
50% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +3 damage = 5.665
Damage = 6.648

Warlock (2 shortswords, hex, 16 STR or DEX, vs AC 15)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +3 damage = 0.85
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
50% normal chance for 2d6 +3 damage = 5.0
50% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 3.5
Damage = 10.05

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 16 CHA, vs AC 15)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +3 = 1.05
50% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +3 = 6.0
Damage = 7.05

The twf warlock is outdamaging the agonizing blast warlock with zero investment at this point and will continue until requiring thirsting blade at 5th level.


Level 5

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 18 STR, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +4 damage = 1.033 (*2)
55% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +4 damage = 6.7815 (*2)
Damage = 15.629

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, hex, 18 DEX, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +4 damage = 0.9 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
55% normal chance for 2d6 +4 damage = 6.05 (*2)
55% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 3.85
Damage = 18.45

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, hex, 18 STR, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +4 damage = 1.25 (*2)
55% normal chance for 3d6 +4 damage = 7.975 (*2)
Damage = 18.45

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 18 CHA, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +4 = 1.1 (*2)
55% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +4 = 7.15 (*2)
Damage = 16.5

The fighter's issue is a lack of strong combat spell support at these lower levels with slow progression and limited slots.


Level 6

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*2)
Damage = 18.162

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, hex, 18 DEX, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +4 damage = 0.9 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
55% normal chance for 2d6 +4 damage = 6.05 (*2)
55% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 3.85
Damage = 18.45

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, hex, 18 STR, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +4 damage = 1.25 (*2)
55% normal chance for 3d6 +4 damage = 7.975 (*2)
Damage = 18.45

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 18 CHA, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +4 = 1.1 (*2)
55% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +4 = 7.15 (*2)
Damage = 16.5

I added this level to the comparison because of the fighter's bonus ASI. This catches him up in damage while ignoring feats, but only temporarily and his spell options are still very lacking.


Level 8

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*2)
Damage = 18.162

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, hex, 20 DEX, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 damage = 0.95 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 damage = 7.2 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 21.2

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, hex, 20 STR, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 damage = 1.3 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 damage = 9.3 (*2)
Damage = 21.2

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 20 CHA, vs AC 16)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*2)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*2)
Damage = 19.1


Level 11

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*3)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*3)
Damage = 27.243

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, hex, 20 DEX, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 damage = 0.95 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 damage = 7.2 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 21.2

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, hex, 20 STR, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 damage = 1.3 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 damage = 9.3 (*2)
Damage = 21.2

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 20 CHA, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*3)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*3)
Damage = 28.65

The oddity here is in granting a 3rd attack one level before granting lifedrinker. With feat support this is a negligible issue and without it there's a clear gap in the warlock sublclasses where weapon use is less damage for the first time. There is still the option of using poisons on the blades, however, and that favors TWF. Eldritch blast is also still susceptible to disadvantage on attacks if within 5 ft of a hostile creature etc so with this is still debatable on an issue actually existing on that 3rd blast. It is debatable at this point where previous levels were in favor of the weapons for a blade pact warlock.


Level 12

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*3)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*3)
Damage = 27.243

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 DEX, 16 CHA, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 +3 damage = 1.1 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 +3 damage = 9 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 25.1

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 STR, 16 CHA, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 +3 damage = 1.45 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 +3 damage = 11.1 (*2)
Damage = 25.1

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 20 CHA, vs AC 17)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*3)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*3)
Damage = 28.65

Adding lifedrinker in gets the bladelock back into very similar damage for only one more invocation in the cost, and all the benefits for weapons still exist while eldritch blast still loses damage to disadvantage from melee range hostiles so this isn't a real issue over those couple of points.


Level 16

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*3)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*3)
Damage = 27.243

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 DEX, 18 CHA, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 +4 damage = 1.15 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 +4 damage = 9.6 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 26.4

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 STR, 18 CHA, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 +4 damage = 1.5 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 +4 damage = 11.7 (*2)
Damage = 26.4

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 20 CHA, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*3)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*3)
Damage = 28.65


Level 17

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*3)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*3)
Damage = 27.243

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 DEX, 18 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 +4 damage = 1.15 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 +4 damage = 9.6 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 26.4

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 STR, 18 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 +4 damage = 1.5 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 +4 damage = 11.7 (*2)
Damage = 26.4

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 20 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*4)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*4)
Damage = 38.2

That last attack on eldritch blast is a big bonus. Even with situational drawbacks weapons is turning into a tough sell at this point because there is no big bonus coming for the bladelock. With feats or multiclassing the bladelock can still be the better option but without that we need to look specifically at the magic items available to the characters and we would be looking at poisons. It's possible to work with poisons to compete and I would recommend it at that point if not earlier. I haven't added the haste spell to the fighter yet even though it became available at 14th level to the eldritch knight because it cannot be maintained half the day. Also note that I have not added the foresight arcanum; it's usually better spent on another character and the blasting warlock is likely to take a different arcanum. The weapon user is more likely to take the arcanum and might use it but there are too many choices to really consider it a given.


Level 19

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*3)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*3)
Damage = 27.243

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 DEX, 20 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 +5 damage = 1.2 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 +5 damage = 10.2 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 27.7

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 STR, 20 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 +5 damage = 1.55 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 +5 damage = 12.3 (*2)
Damage = 27.7

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 20 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*4)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*4)
Damage = 38.2


Level 20

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*4)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*4)
Damage = 36.324, 45.405 for up to 5 encounters hasted

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 DEX, 20 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 +5 damage = 1.2 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 +5 damage = 10.2 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 27.7

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 STR, 20 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 +5 damage = 1.55 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 +5 damage = 12.3 (*2)
Damage = 27.7

Warlock (eldritch blast, 20 CHA, vs AC 19)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*4)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*4)
Damage = 38.2


The bottom line is that blade warlocks are better damage at most levels even without multiclassing and feats. With those options they become much better at damage. It's only at the highest tiers of play that there is any issue without those options. In response to the OP, I hope this helps with your choice of blade warlock or eldritch knight. The eldritch knight makes for a better defensive or utility option without feats, or multiclasses well with wizards. With feats the eldritch knight is much better for combat in the style but it's with the same melee / ranged options all fighters use. Also keep in mind that hex is used in maintaining that high damage to be ahead of fighters and that hex is not necessarily a given. Without feats DEX and TWF is the better option for a blade warlock because more benefits will apply to that 3rd attack on the bonus action.

[MeeposFire]

Conceivably if hex was really needed to compete the fighter could spend one of his extra ASIs on magic initiate and get hex as his 1st level spell. Depending on who you talk to that could add that to your 1st level spell casting in addition to casting it for free 1/day.

I would imagine thought that not all would play that way.

Either way the fighter would get even more mileage out of hex than even the warlock as he could get up to five attacks if built for it.

[DivisibleByZero]

<snip>

See here guys? Ash did a bunch of math for you and guess what it shows?

[Ashrym]

Conceivably if hex was really needed to compete the fighter could spend one of his extra ASIs on magic initiate and get hex as his 1st level spell. Depending on who you talk to that could add that to your 1st level spell casting in addition to casting it for free 1/day.

I would imagine thought that not all would play that way.

Either way the fighter would get even more mileage out of hex than even the warlock as he could get up to five attacks if built for it.

Valor bard gets 5 attacks at 14th level with battle magic if he spent one of his magical secrets on eldritch blast to get a bonus like that, but I prefer having picked up crusader's mantle instead. It might only be d4's but with a 30 ft radius for everyone to get in on it and not losing damage or attacks to bonus actions moving hex to a new target it becomes worthwhile on the smaller damage die.

If feats are an option I don't think hex is needed for a fighter to be competitive, but it would come in handy. The existing damage feats fill any gaps, crosses those gaps, and then creates new gaps with fighters on the other side. Bonus feats and that 3rd attack is pretty good. An eldritch knight also doesn't have the bonuses in the spell list to do much beyond some AoE or defensive abilities, really. The spells are too slow and restricted. A battle master or champion does more damage while leveling, particularly the battlemasters with superiority dice.

[DivisibleByZero]

If feats are an option

If feats are an option then it just means that fighters have a reason to exist again, because in a game without feats (or multiclassing) there is almost no reason to play a fighter over a Bladelock. When you can dish out comparable melee damage, while having an amazing ranged option as a full caster.... why play a fighter?
Luckily most tables will allow either one or both, so it's usually not going to be an issue because the improvements with feats and/or multiclassing means that fighters will still have a place.

They did a great job balancing the different classes in 5e overall, and the people that think otherwise are simply mistaken.

[Flashy]

They did a great job balancing the different classes in 5e overall, and the people that think otherwise are simply mistaken.

Fair enough really. I guess there's just something about playing one that has felt a little iffy from time to time. It has a strong set of options, but playing a bladelock who didn't take hex for fluff reasons and who often has his armor of agathys burned off by ranged attacks has made me feel like I'm just not the contributor that the paladin or monk in my party are on a regular basis.

It probably doesn't help that our short rests have been spaced further and further apart as the levels have gone by.

Anyway, I was arguing from a specific and largely biased case, which was unfair of me. It is absolutely true that the classes are by and large spectacularly well balanced against one another.

[Steampunkette]

Ashyn: I respectfully disagree.

I see your math. But I'm still seeing the same problems as before. You're having the Warlocks throw Hexes but not having the Fighters use their Superiority dice or action surges. Also worth noting: That Bladelock is gonna get chewed up in combat pretty hard thanks to their MAD setup compared to the fighter who can dish it out and take it at the same level. Redo your calculations to include that and you'll see it balances out more appropriately.

Seriously, what is with everyone and single round snapshots for these kinds of DPR analyses? At least you put in the GWF style bonus damage, though, and I really appreciate that.

[Hawkstar]

It's not even worth mentioning. If you are playing a warlock and want to be a damage dealer, then you will use Hex, regardless of which subclass you choose. Not counting Hex would have been worthy of noting in a damage calculation.
Want to know what else is worthy of noting in damage calculation? Great Weapon Fighting Style, Great Weapon Master, Action Surge, and either Improved Critical or Expertise Die bonus damage.

[DivisibleByZero]

Want to know what else is worthy of noting in damage calculation? Great Weapon Fighting Style, Great Weapon Master, Action Surge, and either Improved Critical or Expertise Die bonus damage.

GWFstyle: Included above
GWMfeat: now we're adding feats and calling them base calculations?
Improved Crit & Expertise dice: On an Eldritch Knight?

The calculation Ash made was done exactly as it should have been done. Guess what it showed? The exact same results I told you it did in my brief synopsis.
Levels 11 and 20 were notably better for the fighter, but 11 is only because the fighter gets his third attack one level earlier than the warlock gets his invocation. The only true difference lies at level 20.

[ChubbyRain]

The enemies aren't going to throw up their hands and surrender just because nobody is engaging them in melee. They're going to attack someone. The Fighter's survivability means she can afford to put herself in danger. She has a high AC because she's heavily armored (and she can boost her AC higher with her extra feats and/or combat style), she has good HP thanks to her large hit dice, and her HP is a renewable resource thanks to her second wind. She doesn't have to get out of Dodge.

Well yes, and I didn't day they would just give up. That's silly.

However the Fighter play style is mostly going to be upfront in your face AND they have no real good options for escape. So once a fighter is being pummeled by enemies they don't have a good way of getting away. They have actions that take away from their effectiveness in combat (dodge, disengage, and dash) and sometimes may have misty step (mid to late levels when they do).

Warlocks get some cool fricken spells that they can use when they are in trouble and want to get away.

Using arms of hadar stops creatures from reacting to the warlock. Hunger of Hadar + Devil Sight + EB (which all are options a Warlock of any type would makes for a great escape + shoot tactic.

Once the fighter is in trouble they are kinda stuck there... That doesn't scream survivability but sacrificial lamb you know.

Survivability isn't just AC and HP, tactics weigh more on how long you survive than anything else. The warlock will usually have better options for better tactics as they can be close up, mid range, or long range at the same time and not worry about too much. The fighter can't focus on their tactics like that, even with the two fighting styles the fighter would need frats to take away long range disadvantage with weapons and still will suffer from melee damage if they went Dex focus.

And guess what, with the way 5e is made, all those low CR creatures are still a threat at high levels. And since there are MORE of them as they horde up, the chances a fighter getting hit goes up. Seen it too often where a fighter wades into a horde thinking they are immune and suddenly they are at half or 1/4 HP. Sure a fighter can take out a ton of enemies but a ton of enemies can take out a fighter.

It boils down to the fighter not having to many options for survival, second wind sucks, mostly options for destruction. Whereas the warlock has good options for destruction and good options for survival.

The fiend warlock even gains temp HP for killing creatures... That a HUGE boost in survival once they hit around level 6 or so.

[JNAProductions]

Assuming you use Hex. That's a pretty big spell tax to use every fight.

[ChubbyRain]

Assuming you use Hex. That's a pretty big spell tax to use every fight.

3rd-4th level slot: 8 hours
5th level slot: 24 hours

So not really, once you hit higher levels and you cast this once you can keep it going till your next short rest or your next long rest.

Resilient Con + Warcaster build would keep our concentration up.

Edit

By higher levels I meant 3rd level spells and beyond. Not like, level 10+.

[JNAProductions]

Costing you two feats on a MAD build. So by level 8, you're still looking at 16 at best in Charisma and Dexterity.

[ChubbyRain]

Costing you two feats on a MAD build. So by level 8, you're still looking at 16 at best in Charisma and Dexterity.

And 16 works just fine in real games. On paper you may see a difference but in real games I've seen 16s do well enough up to around level 14 or so, and even then it is campaign specific that determines how good or bad higher/lower stats will perform (haven't played in AL games that high so no clue about that).

Not an issue.

Vuman Warlock starts with Warcaster, 16 dex and cha. Level 4 grabs +2 dex, level 8 grabs resilient Con.

You will do just fine. Your range option at 16 cha has 2 chances to hit. Most ACs won't be too terribly high and you have other options (weapon w/Dex).

Hex isn't a bad spell tax once it stays on got 24 hours.

[Ashrym]

Ashyn: I respectfully disagree.

I see your math. But I'm still seeing the same problems as before. You're having the Warlocks throw Hexes but not having the Fighters use their Superiority dice or action surges. Also worth noting: That Bladelock is gonna get chewed up in combat pretty hard thanks to their MAD setup compared to the fighter who can dish it out and take it at the same level. Redo your calculations to include that and you'll see it balances out more appropriately.

Seriously, what is with everyone and single round snapshots for these kinds of DPR analyses? At least you put in the GWF style bonus damage, though, and I really appreciate that.

I left superiority dice and improved criticals out because I was staying on topic with the eldritch knight as part of the discussion.

I calculated sustained damage. Action surge is a burst ability. The 3 metrics for damage I normally look at are sustainable, burst, and total average.

If we assume ~36 rounds of combat in an average day with 2 short rests then we can multiply the fighter damage by 13/12 from levels 2 thru 16 and by 7/6 from levels 17 thru 20 for a quick estimate that adds action surge to the listed averages.

I dub those Ashrym's numbers. Because I listed them. It's part of Ashrym's theorem.


Edit: to be clear, I don't agree with the premises of issues with fighters even without feats. That 3rd attack is a key to the class, better hp, heavy armor, fighting styles, second wind, and action surge are useful. The eldritch knight in examples also has haste available at 14th level to increase damage that can be added in. By 17th level with a couple of hastes it's not in rough shape at higher levels. Just not really gish in the powerful magic sense. A battlemaster doesn't need feats for solid burst ability with action surge and superiority dice.

[-Jynx-]

Costing you two feats on a MAD build. So by level 8, you're still looking at 16 at best in Charisma and Dexterity.

The two feats not only help make sure you do your 1d6 hex dmg (more than the +2 dmg gain you'd be getting from two ASI boosts) but also help with concentration checks on anything. And Resilient con saves are frequent enough to make it a very useful feat.

Don't get me wrong +2 x2 to some stats are nice and they affect skills, to hit, and damage. However don't downplay Warcaster/Resilient Con like its clearly a poor choice just because you don't approve of it.

[Steampunkette]

On topic about the Eldritch Knight? Pffft...

My argument was about the freaking Bladelock being weaker than a standard Warlock while in melee, swinging away. DBZ brought Fighters into it because he didn't understand (or care) about the issues of internal class balance and only cares about how "Powerful" they are compared to fighters.

And now the ONLY fighter he's comparing them to is the Eldritch Knight with no spells on or cast or any special actions. Meanwhile his reasoning is "Who will bother playing a fighter at all if bladelocks are any better?!" in a classic "Won't someone think of the children?" angle.

The topic was "Bladelocks who fight in melee don't do as much damage or have the survivability of Warlocks who cast at range, and that's something that should probably be houseruled a bit to bring the pact's functionality up on par with eldritch blast."

We've been off topic ever since.


For Bladelocks I -strongly- suggest talking to the DM about some of the house rules people have put forth to fix them.

Bladelocks, by the book, throw out less damage per round than a straight up blasting warlock, thanks to how Eldritch Blast is designed. And the higher level you get the more glaring it becomes.

Talk to the GM about at least utilizing an increased Attacks Per Round schedule wherein you get a third at level 11 through invocation and where Blade Pact just flatly gets extra attack at 5 or 6. At least that way you can offhand a Staff as an arcane focus to brain folks with a somewhat competitive combat schedule. (Or a mace if your GM will allow you to wield one as a 'rod')

I know your GM is new but this would be advice from other GMs and players who came together to find a middle ground.

With the MAD required for a classic attack stat and casting stat, the lowered constitution for concentration due to that MAD, light armor or mage armor basically demanding a light fighter (with commensurate damage options as regards weapon sizes and feats to increase that damage), off-hand weapons not having stat bonuses unless you splash fighter, the Opportunity Cost of spending a "full casting class's" action on swinging a weapon instead of flinging more damaging eldritch blasts or spells, and actively moving into melee combat to use the Pact of the Blade, Bladelocks face significant disadvantages if they actually pursue using their pactblade in a given round.

Adding some salt to my french fries shouldn't cost me 25% of my fries as a Flavor Cost.

[Ghost Nappa]

On topic about the Eldritch Knight? Pffft...

My argument was about the freaking Bladelock being weaker than a standard Warlock while in melee, swinging away. DBZ brought Fighters into it because he didn't understand (or care) about the issues of internal class balance and only cares about how "Powerful" they are compared to fighters.

And now the ONLY fighter he's comparing them to is the Eldritch Knight with no spells on or cast or any special actions. Meanwhile his reasoning is "Who will bother playing a fighter at all if bladelocks are any better?!" in a classic "Won't someone think of the children?" angle.

The topic was "Bladelocks who fight in melee don't do as much damage or have the survivability of Warlocks who cast at range, and that's something that should probably be houseruled a bit to bring the pact's functionality up on par with eldritch blast."

We've been off topic ever since.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. The OP's questions were the following:



Which, between the EK and bladelock, make more of a fearsome and noticeable presence in combat and out of combat?

What are their strengths?

How do they differ?

What does the class do to change the 'feel' of play?


-Dove

Any and all comparisons that are going on in this thread are supposed to be answering questions related to gishes (specifically non-multiclass ones). This could conceviably include the Paladin or the Bard but the OP specifically asked for EK Vs. Bladelock.


With the MAD required for a classic attack stat and casting stat, the lowered constitution for concentration due to that MAD, light armor or mage armor basically demanding a light fighter (with commensurate damage options as regards weapon sizes and feats to increase that damage), off-hand weapons not having stat bonuses unless you splash fighter, the Opportunity Cost of spending a "full casting class's" action on swinging a weapon instead of flinging more damaging eldritch blasts or spells, and actively moving into melee combat to use the Pact of the Blade, Bladelocks face significant disadvantages if they actually pursue using their pactblade in a given round.

Adding some salt to my french fries shouldn't cost me 25% of my fries as a Flavor Cost.



The short version is that the Eldritch Knight is a Fighter with some magical options while a Bladelock is a Mage with some weapon options. They both can do both effectively but they are much stronger in their respective specialization than the other is.

[Troacctid]

Once the fighter is in trouble they are kinda stuck there... That doesn't scream survivability but sacrificial lamb you know.

If you want more mobility, you could always take Mobile as a feat. You get extra feats. It's a thing. Fighters are cool like that. You can also cast Shield and just dodge opportunity attacks, if you have to. What's the worst that's gonna happen? 'Specially if you shove them prone before you move to give them disadvantage.

But being a Fighter isn't about running away. It's about standing and fighting and fearlessly wading into battle with your allies at your back. And the class gives you tools to do that. Warlocks can invest some resources towards gaining a temporary HP buffer, but it's not a big buffer, and it doesn't refresh all that easily. They're not going to be tanky like a Fighter or Paladin. I mean, you could build a Warlock to be tanky, but unless you did it by, like, dipping Fighter, he'd be tanky in a totally different way, and the character would have a different feel to him, gameplay-wise. It's not a case of one class just being straight-up worse than another at accomplishing the exact same thing, like it often was in 3.5 (e.g. with Paladins vs. Clerics).

[Steampunkette]

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. The OP's questions were the following:



Any and all comparisons that are going on in this thread are supposed to be answering questions related to gishes (specifically non-multiclass ones). This could conceviably include the Paladin or the Bard but the OP specifically asked for EK Vs. Bladelock.





The short version is that the Eldritch Knight is a Fighter with some magical options while a Bladelock is a Mage with some weapon options. They both can do both effectively but they are much stronger in their respective specialization than the other is.

Oh, no. I don't disagree with the OP's topic. But the whole discussion of how much damage bladelocks do compared to warlocks (Or 'fighters' as DBZ brought up upthread)was spawned off that post I made on page 1. The whole "Bladelocks need a buff to be equal to Castlocks" and it's subsequent "Bladelocks do too much damage" rebuttal were off -that- line.

And it was only after several posts of avoiding the issue of the fighter's core and subkit abilities that it magically went from "Fighter" to "Eldritch Knight". Don't get me wrong. I think the Eldritch Knight could use a lot of work to make it into a better subkit. But I feel it would be disingenuous to say the running argument from my post to this point was about Eldritch Knights and Bladelocks rather than the issues between Bladelocks and Warlocks and how fighters are weaker by comparison (but only if you ignore all of their abilities and just swing a sword) to Bladelocks (with maxed stats and spellcasting).

[ChubbyRain]

If you want more mobility, you could always take Mobile as a feat. You get extra feats. It's a thing. Fighters are cool like that. You can also cast Shield and just dodge opportunity attacks, if you have to. What's the worst that's gonna happen? 'Specially if you shove them prone before you move to give them disadvantage.

But being a Fighter isn't about running away. It's about standing and fighting and fearlessly wading into battle with your allies at your back. And the class gives you tools to do that. Warlocks can invest some resources towards gaining a temporary HP buffer, but it's not a big buffer, and it doesn't refresh all that easily. They're not going to be tanky like a Fighter or Paladin. I mean, you could build a Warlock to be tanky, but unless you did it by, like, dipping Fighter, he'd be tanky in a totally different way, and the character would have a different feel to him, gameplay-wise. It's not a case of one class just being straight-up worse than another at accomplishing the exact same thing, like it often was in 3.5 (e.g. with Paladins vs. Clerics).

Fighters don't get enough spell slots to keep using shield. No where enough. The dodge action puts you at 0 effectiveness at damage for the round unless you use the action surge, which then puts you at 50% (since you used two actions for half the effect).

Mobile works against one creature per attack. At most you will stop, maybe, 4 attacks against you. Plus this isn't the fighter doing it but a feat (look into what made the fighter bad in 3e).

The fighter is about fighting, yes, but that doesn't mean running away isn't an option. Tactical retreat is always an option and sometimes the best option. You may not be running away but trying to get into better position or into a place that helps your allies (say... Trying to get out of the way so the wizard can drop the fireball). Go ahead and keep letting hordes attack you, see how fast you roll up a new character.

Just because the fighter has high AC and weapon attack doesn't mean they have to be the classic Big Stupid Fighter. We got rid of the Heal Bot and Trap Monkey so it is time to get rid of the Big Stupid Fighter as well.

Recently played in a game at level 6 and saw this sooo... At level 6 the Warlock is gaining 6+cha temp HP for each kill that lasts... For a long time (doesn't stack of course). Warlocks are great at killing.

With a Con +3 the fighter at level 6 will have 57 HP
With a Con +3 the Warlock at level 6 will have 50 HP + 10 Temp HP (60 effective HP).

AC of the warlock was 13+4 = 17
AC of Fighter was 18 (2 handed fighter)

The warlock was a half elf and the fighter was a half orc, both playing toward strengths.

The warlock was doing just fine. The biggest difference was that when the warlock needed to get out of trouble, they had the ability to do so.

Disengage + Cast/refocus Hex + Move worked as did Arms of Hadar / Hunger of Hadar + move. The fighter was typically stuck surrounded by enemies or had to reduce their effectiveness to 0 (or close) she dealing with issues.

The play style of the fighter (and the notion it should be played as a Big Stupid Fighter) leads the fighter into surviving less than almost any other class out there... Except maybe the barbarian.

[DivisibleByZero]

The whole "Bladelocks need a buff to be equal to Castlocks"

And what you still fail to realize is that Bladelocks are still Castlocks simply by virtue of being Warlocks. So no boost is needed, because that ability hasn't been taken away from them.
The ability to melee doesn't remove the ability to blast, it compliments it. And they don't need to be equal. One can be better than the other, and that says nothing about balance, because the other hasn't been removed from the equation.
If Bladelocks suddenly have EB and its associated invocations removed from their spell list, then you'd have an argument about balance.
But it hasn't been and you don't.

[Mandragola]

Yeah agreed. Take agonising blast as one of your evocations at 2nd - when there aren't any relevant bladelock ones to take. Now you do as much damage as any other blastlock with your EB, and also you can cut people up.

I'm perplexed by the comparison saying fighters need feats and MCing to be viable - not because it isn't true but because it clearly applies just as much to bladelocks.

[Steampunkette]

And what you still fail to realize is that Bladelocks are still Castlocks simply by virtue of being Warlocks. So no boost is needed, because that ability hasn't been taken away from them.
The ability to melee doesn't remove the ability to blast, it compliments it. And they don't need to be equal. One can be better than the other, and that says nothing about balance, because the other hasn't been removed from the equation.
If Bladelocks suddenly have EB and its associated invocations removed from their spell list, then you'd have an argument about balance.
But it hasn't been and you don't.
Dude, No.

Just stop.

You either don't understand the problem or don't want to understand the problem. I can't figure out which it is, but it's one of those two. You're not helping because of that fact. You're just creating confusion and wasting our time.

[DivisibleByZero]

Dude, No.

Just stop.

You either don't understand the problem or don't want to understand the problem.

That's because you're making the problem up.
It doesn't exist.
A Bladelock has all the blasting ability that any other Warlock has. It also has enough melee ability to keep it competitive with a fighter all the way to 20th level, at which point it falls behind.
Show me where the problem is?
Please!
There is no problem. You're inventing the problem.


Level 16

Fighter (greatsword, great weapon fighting style, extra attack, 20 STR, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 4d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 1.083 (*3)
60% normal chance for 2d6 plus rerolls +5 damage = 7.998 (*3)
Damage = 27.243

Warlock (2 shortswords, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 DEX, 18 CHA, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +5 +4 damage = 1.15 (*2)
5% crit chance for 4d6 +0 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6 +5 +4 damage = 9.6 (*2)
60% normal chance for 2d6 +0 damage = 4.2
Damage = 26.4

Warlock (greatsword, thirsting blade, lifedrinker, hex, 20 STR, 18 CHA, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 6d6 +5 +4 damage = 1.5 (*2)
60% normal chance for 3d6 +5 +4 damage = 11.7 (*2)
Damage = 26.4

Warlock (eldritch blast, agonizing blast, hex, 20 CHA, vs AC 18)
5% crit chance for 2d10 + 2d6 +5 = 1.15 (*3)
60% chance for 1d10 + 1d6 +5 = 8.4 (*3)
Damage = 28.65

Level 16, all three of fighter, bladelock and blastlock are competitive.
At level 17-20 is when the fighter and blastlock pull ahead.
That's when they truly start to shine. At level 17 or level 20. Literally in the very latest stages of the game, or the absolute last stage of the game in the fighter's case.
So your problem is that the full caster's melee option isn't as powerful as his caster option. Well guess what? He's a caster. His melee option is eventually going to fall behind his casting. That's because he's a caster.
Up through and including 16 levels of play, his melee is just as good as or better than his blasting. But that's not good enough for you. It's so not cool with you that he needs a boost, to the point where you get insulting when someone points out the extremely obvious fact that his melee is more than adequate. It's amazing for a full caster.
A fighter has option 1 above.
A Blastlock has option 4 above.
A Bladelock has either option 2 or option 3 above and also has option 4 above.
There is no balance issue with the Bladelock's damage output. None whatsoever. None at all. The only issue is in the way that you're looking at it.

[JNAProductions]

The problem is it's a better choice to blast than it is to blade. A Bladelock is an inferior Warlock, that's the issue.

And they are not equal simply because a Bladelock can also be a Blastlock. That's just being a Blastlock.

[Steampunkette]

He kept complaining "Why would anyone play a fighter if they could bladelock?", before, but he doesn't comprehend the fact that I'm asking "Why would anyone play a Bladelock when they could Blastlock?"

He doesn't understand that the flavor of fighting in melee is gonna cost damage and hit points and it ain't balanced. And just because the character CAN fight at range doesn't fix the problems they have in melee. It just invalidates going into melee in the first place as a reasonable playstyle.

Though, at this point, it's pretty clear he doesn't -want- to understand that rather than simply not getting it.

[DivisibleByZero]

And she doesn't understand that her opinion that playing something slightly less than 100% optimal is not a reasonable play style is just that.
Her opinion.
It is a perfectly reasonable play style.
And just like I've said multiple times before, Bladelock exists to fill a niche, not because it's the most optimized. This isn't an MMO and not everyone absolutely has to play the perfectly optimal character or be considered useless.

From the OP: "She wants to smash things to death with weapons as she displays the powers of the arcane as well as she uses her magical abilities and physical prowess to get her out of tricky roleplay situations."

Bladelock is an option here. You may not like it, and you may incorrectly think it has balance issues, and you may want to continue insulting me and acting passive aggressively, but none of that changes the fact that Bladelock fits what the OP asked for. None of that changes the fact that Bladelock is a perfectly reasonable character. Nonoe of that changes that a Bladelock doesn't need a boost in any way, and some may even argue that Warlocks need to be toned down.... not up.
The fact that a Blastlock deals a little bit more damage in the last four levels of play, while remaining on approximately eual footing with a melee Bladelock for the first 16 of them, does not in any way mean that a Bladelock is a suboptimal choice, nor does it mean that it needs a boost.
It is balanced well enough. It is amlost skirting the line on OP. It certainly doesn't need moar damages.
Deal with it.

[JNAProductions]

As Steampunkette, I, and possibly others have said before, if that's you opinion:

Nerf the Warlock down to match the Bladelock.

If you think Bladelock is balanced and Warlock in general is OP, that's fine. But what we're saying is that compared to other Warlocks, a Bladelock is inferior and that should not be. So Bladelock needs a buff or Warlock (excepting Bladelock) needs a nerf.

[Steampunkette]

"This is suboptimal. That is optimal. These things are balanced. In fact the suboptimal option is almost OP. Intraclass balance is irrelevant. Interclass balance is relevant. They don't need to be balanced."

He's taken enough positions that the topic is now surrounded!

I'm done making fun of him at this point. I just thought that was hilarious.

[D-naras]

As a Bladelock player I see that you all fail to mention one great strength of the Bladelock. He *always* has a magic weapon that he can use competently in melee when Eldritch Blasting is made with Disadvantage. Seriously, magic weapons bypass most monster resistances and only the Bladelock is ensured of having one in a game. If you suspect that campaign will not feature magic weapons and you want to gish, then a Dex Bladelock will be great and will make you feel *awesome* and *super-special* when you deal full damage every turn.

The beauty is that you can (and definitely should) use Eldritch Blast just as competently as other Warlocks but still rock a d8+Dex or 2d6/1d10+Strength weapon when the enemies stick to you, while other warlocks would have to resort to lesser measures such as shocking grasp or arms of haddar.

Personally, I don't even use Hex. I devote 1 spell slot to Armor of Agathys which scales monstrously and makes me have more hp than the fighter or paladin. The long duration makes it quite likely that you can have it on prior to most battles. The fiendish patron compliments this lovely, ensuring that you stay alive during fights. One favorite trick is using Armor of Agathys and spamming Blade Ward while running around, provoking opportunity attacks and making myself an easy target. Half damage for me, 15 cold damage for the poor sods that take the bait. If they ignore me, then it's back to old classics like rapier to the spleen or blast in the face. Good times.

[DivisibleByZero]

But what we're saying is that compared to other Warlocks, a Bladelock is inferior and that should not be..

And what I'm saying is that Bladelocks are not inferior at all.

Chainlock: Blasterlock with an amazing familiar.
Tomelock: Blasterlock with fantastic ritual capabilities.
Bladelock: Blasterlock with fantastic melee capabilities.

None of them are inferior. Well, to be honest, I personally consider Chainlocks garbage, but that's a matter of taste.
Tomelocks? They have better than normal ritual casting. Big whoop. You know who else can be a ritual caster? Literally every single character ever made, as long as they toss a 13 into either Wis or Int. And that person can have a familiar as well.
Like a Bladelock with Ritual Caster. Now he's got a familiar and can cast most of the good rituals that a Tomelock can. But he can also melee it up like a boss on top of it.

Bladelocks inferior? Bladelocks are the strongest of the Warlock Pact choices. Calling them inferior is hilarious.


As a Bladelock player
<snip>

The beauty is that you can (and definitely should) use Eldritch Blast just as competently as other Warlocks but still rock a d8+Dex or 2d6/1d10+Strength weapon when the enemies stick to you, while other warlocks would have to resort to lesser measures such as shocking grasp or arms of haddar.

See kids? Bladelocks using EB in conjunction with and in compliment of weapons.
It's not one or the other for Bladelocks. It is one or the other for other warlock, because they don't get the Bladelock goodies. But Bladelocks get both, and should be using both dependent upon the situation.

[Ardantis]

Speaking about DBZ in the third person doesn't help your point, Steampunkette, and is more than a little petty.

That said, there is no such thing as a Blastlock build. Oh sure, you can choose to play with those skills, but all Warlocks have access to them.

Bladelocks are the true gish. They have melee options, they have magical options, they have ranged options. They are not weaker than Tome or Chain, they just have different options. They may choose spells and invocations to support those options.

They are actually a lot like a champion who chooses duelist and archery as his styles- a competent melee combatant and archer. Never at the same time, mind you, but he can meet different circumstances equally well. Just as a Bladelock can melee or EB depending on the circumstances, or even cast spells.

To address the OP, the EK may have better survivability, but he is not a true gish the way the Bladelock is.

As a final note, I've been watching this thread with interest because I am figuring out how to transfer my 3.5 Hexblade to 5e. Your debate has made me more and more inclined towards the Bladelock, and also enthusiastic about playing one.

[Steampunkette]

If you're in a game where magic weapons are rare and nonmagic item resistant enemies aren't then you should quit the game because your GM is obviously a sadistic **** to non magic-using characters. Or doesn't know what he's doing.

Also worth noting, all the casters will have no goddamned problem with that situation. Including the bladelock who can cast.

And it's cool that you folks like having the ability to fall back on a weapon if enemies get into melee which is what the bladelock, apparently, is. That's not really a playstyle changing thing, though. And those of us who feel like the pact of the blade should change the playstyle (into a character actively seeking to engage enemies in melee to be fairly gishy) will continue to see it as weak compared to other options. Not only in survivability but in damage.

[DivisibleByZero]

And those of us who feel like the pact of the blade should change the playstyle (into a character actively seeking to engage enemies in melee to be fairly gishy) will continue to see it as weak compared to other options. Not only in survivability but in damage.

Weak in survivability? Let me refer you to this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=19268239&postcount=90) most recent post on it.
Weak in damage? Let me refer you to this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=19265311&postcount=60) most recent post on it.
Your claims are simply not based in fact, and that is why you don't understand that the Bladelock does not have the problems that you attribute to it.

[Submortimer]

Since none of these salient points have come up yet, I'll make them now.

1) In terms of combat ability, Tomelocks are literally the WORST option. Why? Well, they get three free cantrips, which are nice, but, as has been stated many times before, all cantrips pale in comparison to a boosted EB. Any time you are not casting EB, you're doing sub-optimal damage. Even the riders and elemental damage types don't help, because nearly everything will be damaged by Force; as far as combat goes, Tomelock gives you literally nothing. OUTSIDE combat, Tomelocks are amazing, but inside combat, they're the worst of the three.

2) Chainlocks create a target that can be (Easily) killed. they have some great benefits in combat, but you don't really want them there, since they're most likely to be ganked. Again, much more useful outside of combat than within.

3) Bladelock's ability can be boosted through use of magical weapons. This is a whole class of magical items that warlocks in general can't use effectively, and no matter what it is you come across, the bladelock can use it and rock with it. This, more than other types, depends a bit more on how nice your GM is, but it's still something that Bladelocks can do that the others can't.

They are simply the best COMBAT option out of the three, because they're the only ones that present an additional VIABLE combat option.

[Hawkstar]

Go EK instead of Bladelock. Eldritch Knights eventually get Fireball. Bladelocks never get Fireball. Fireball is best spell, and everyone who casts spells should get it. Any caster that can't cast Fireball is a disgrace. :smalltongue:

Anyway... reading this discussion is making it seem that the way to play a Bladelock is not by having him wade into melee and smack people with his sword all the time, but stand back, shooting swordbeams at the bad guys, smacking them with the sword when they get close instead of Swordbeaming them.

[DivisibleByZero]

Go EK instead of Bladelock. Eldritch Knights eventually get Fireball. Bladelocks never get Fireball. Fireball is best spell, and everyone who casts spells should get it. Any caster that can't cast Fireball is a disgrace. :smalltongue:

The level 5 Fiend Pact Bladelock waves to you, while the level 12 EK still can't cast it. :smalltongue:

[Hawkstar]

The level 5 Fiend Pact Bladelock waves to you, while the level 12 EK still can't cast it. :smalltongue:
Hmm... so they do. I really need to read my PHB more often.

[Ardantis]

Certainly the Bladelock playstyle will change to accommodate their melee capabilities, also bearing in mind that they do not have the tanking capabilities of a barbarian, paladin, or fighter.

I imagine their relationship towards melee will be a lot like a rogue's- tactful. A rogue gets enhanced mobility to dance in and out of melee. A Bladelock gets spells which can modify or even shut down melee as suits the circumstance. Each class uses its abilities in conjunction with their melee abilities to form a playstyle.

And that playstyle is what makes the Bladelock a true gish.

[Fyndhal]

Both EK and Bladelock are sub-par options. Either is okay for a single battle, but in any sort of case where extended/multiple combats happen, both end up falling by the way side. Neither is a top contender for Nova damage and neither is best for sustained combat.

You pick them for flavor and cool factor. You don't pick them for "OP-ness."

[Submortimer]

Certainly the Bladelock playstyle will change to accommodate their melee capabilities, also bearing in mind that they do not have the tanking capabilities of a barbarian, paladin, or fighter.

They don't generally have the AC of any of those classes. This is true. Tanking ability though...

Not taking into account feats, lets look at what the warlock can do all on it's own. to the get highest numbers, we're looking at Armor of shadows for AC. That nets us an 18 ac once we get our dex up to 20, which we should be able to do by either 8th or 12th level. As far as health goes, it's Dark One's Blessing and Armor of Agythys all the way. Not only does AoA agive you temp HP, you ALSO do a crap ton of damage with it, which has the potential to proc DOB and keep the sweet, sweet temp HP train rolling.

[Steampunkette]

"The pseudodragon can serve another creature as
a familiar, forming a magic, telepathic bond with that willing
companion. While the two are bonded, the companion
can sense what the pseudodragon senses as long as they
are within 1 mile of each other. While the pseudodragon is
within 10 feet of its companion, the companion shares the
pseudodragon's Magic Resistance trait. At any time and
for any reason, the pseudodragon can end its service as a
familiar, ending the telepathic bond."

Pact of the Chain: Granting advantage on every magic saving throw there is. Quasit has the same ability.

The other options (Imp and Sprite) go invisible, giving them advantage on attack rolls making them far better at delivering touch spells from within 100 feet of the Warlock.

Both the Imp and Quasit have magic resistance, damage immunities, condition immunities, typed resistances, and Darkvision of 120ft which make them great for sense-sharing scouting missions, though that's an out of combat ability.

They can, of course, move independently on their turns without any actions from you. Just so long as they don't attack. Which means using magic items is an option. After all: Cast a Spell is not an Attack Action. Unless it requires a touch attack, but that becomes part of the cast action, of course...

Yeah. Ya'll just don't know how to use your familiars! :P

[DivisibleByZero]

They can, of course, move independently on their turns without any actions from you. Just so long as they don't attack. Which means using magic items is an option. After all: Cast a Spell is not an Attack Action. Unless it requires a touch attack, but that becomes part of the cast action, of course...

So my casting Scorching Ray doesn't count as an attack?
There is a difference between making an attack, and "taking the Attack action." You can do things which are considered attacks without taking the attack action. Casting a spell is an attack if it targets an enemy and does damage. It's just a magical attack instead of a physical attack (which is what the Attack action is). So no, your familiar cannot use a Wand of Magic Missile or whatever without any actions from you.

[Submortimer]

Pact of the Chain: Granting advantage on every magic saving throw there is. Quasit has the same ability.

You're correct, very useful. Also can be taken away by a single Fireball, even IF the save is passed.


The other options (Imp and Sprite) go invisible, giving them advantage on attack rolls making them far better at delivering touch spells from within 100 feet of the Warlock.
What touch spells are you casting? Spider Climb? Fly? Vampiric Touch?

If this was available to a cleric, I'd say this would be amazing. As far as warlock goes, nothing they have beats EB.


Both the Imp and Quasit have magic resistance, damage immunities, condition immunities, typed resistances, and Darkvision of 120ft which make them great for sense-sharing scouting missions, though that's an out of combat ability.

Exactly. They're AMAZING outside of combat.


They can, of course, move independently on their turns without any actions from you. Just so long as they don't attack. Which means using magic items is an option. After all: Cast a Spell is not an Attack Action. Unless it requires a touch attack, but that becomes part of the cast action, of course...

Using magic items is an option, but a very limited one. They can't attune to any magic items, so only the lowest level wands and whatnot are available, and magic items only refresh on a long rest which limits these options to, at most, 3/day.

Familiar's are NOT very good in combat, and they're not designed to be. Magic resistance is quite good, but it also puts your familiar directly in harms way, where you don't want it to be.

Bladelocks, as I said before, offer the only REAL, viable combat option out of the three.

[Troacctid]

You're correct, very useful. Also can be taken away by a single Fireball, even IF the save is passed.

And? So? Re-summon it. You can do that. It's not like you take any penalties if your familiar dies, aside from the negligible cost of the material components to perform the ritual again.

Familiars can't attack, but they can use the Help action with no restrictions. That's worth advantage on your (or an ally's) first attack of every turn. It can also work on shoves and grapples and whatnot. Pretty valuable in combat. Familiars are awesome.

[Steampunkette]

I don't have my dmg at work, but the basic rules say creature and specify no further on attunement. And ther is nothing in the phb about familiars being unable to attune. As for the attack argument, maybe. I'm sure a dm could rule it that way, reasonably. But wall of fire doesn't attack anyone by being cast unless you put it in someone.

[Jamesps]

You're correct, very useful. Also can be taken away by a single Fireball, even IF the save is passed.



Imps are immune to fire and poison, and take half damage from everything else.

Generally speaking you should consider their hp to be at least double what's actually in the MM.

I actually made a very effective imp combatent (pre level 5). I took inspiring word to give him a few extra temp hp (which were effectively doubled from his resistance) and he was the toughest thing to kill in the entire party. Because imps get double hp from all boosts, they can be a worthwhile thing to throw healing and temp hps towards, at least until their combat effectiveness dies out later on (though they'll still be great spies). Aid, inspiring word, healing word, all of these have double effectiveness on your familiar.

[Gnomes2169]

Pretty sure a bladelock that has even a slightly magical weapon will be dealing more damage than a blastlock until level 17. Now let's do some math here...

Level 5 (a +1 weapon and 18 dex (you don't need cha for most of the warlock's "best" spells, such as darkness or hex) vs eb+18 cha):

Bladelock: 2 attacks at +8 apiece, each dealing 1d8+4, likely with 1d6 extra on top from hex.
If the bladelock started as a variant human, then they can take the "trap" dual-wielder feat to use two rapiers at once, attacking with it at +7 and dealing an extra 1d8+1d6 on rounds where they do not retarget hex.

Vs an AC 18 target, the bladelock misses 45% of the time, hits normally 50% of the time, and crits 5% of the time. If they took DW, then their off-hand attack hits 45% of the time and crits 5% of the time.

Damage over all: ((1d8+4+1d6)/2+(2d8+4+2d6)x.05)x2=12+2=14 DPR vs AC 18, with an optional additional (1d8+1d6)x.45+(2d8+2d6)x.05=3.6+.8=4.4 DPR from dual-wielder (which honestly isn't a trap on bladelocks, seeing as they have so few sources of AC or uses for their bonus action otherwise).

Total with all options at level 5: 18.4 DPR vs AC 18.

Blastlock Now since the blastlock's mahic weapon is rare instead of uncommon like the bladelock, we'll give it to them at a later level. So their attack bonus is +7, and their only use for their bonus action is hex. Vs AC 18 they hit 45% of the time and crit 5% of the time.

Damage over all: ((1d10+4+1d6)x.45+(2d10+5+2d6)x.05)x2=11.7+1.15=12 .85 DPR vs AC 18, with no way to improve that, and no option for bonus-action attacks.

Both can get advantage on attacks with the darkness+Devil's sight combo, and it washes both of their attacks for one round, so that is a wash as far as who gets advantage easier.

As it stands, even without the DW bonus attack, a +1 rapier, which can be assumed by the time a character is level 5 as per the DMG (in all but the lowest magic settings, and a warlock isn't exactly a "low magic" class), the bladelock is doing more damage. I'm not even going for the most out there dwarf str polearm master bladelock either, this is about the most standard dexlock you can get.

A blastlock built the same way but without DW will have an open feat slot... But nothing to increase their combat damage potential from it, as eldrich blast is their most powerful cantrip, and very, very few creatures who negate force damage are merely resistant. So they have a bit more flexability with their feat, but likely very little combat applicability.

Level 11

By now the bladelock can be assumed to have a +2 rapier as well as their +1 rapier (they do not lose any magic items in the DMG section, they just gain more), which makes the DW pickup at level 1 a little more desirable. And on top of that they get the lifedrinking blade, and increased their dex to its full 20 status! Meanwhile the blastlock will have their +1 pact rod, likely has taken agonizing and repelling blast, and likely has one of their own pact invocations. As well, their cha is probably 20 as of level 8.

Bladelock
+11 attack, +5 dex damage, +3 cha damage, +2 weapon damage. Vs AC 18 (still above average for this CR) has 65% normal hits and 5% crits.

Damage over all: ((1d8+10+1d6)x.65+(2d8+10+2d6)x.5)x2=23.4+2.6=26 DPR vs AC 18.

Off-hand weapon bonus from DW (if applicable): +10 attack, +1 damage. 60% accuracy, 5% crit

Damage over all: (1d8+1+1d6)x.6+(2d8+1+2d6)x.05=6+.85=6.85

Total: 32.85 vs AC 18 target w/dual wield.

Blastlock
+10 attack, +5 damage/ shot. 60% accuracy, 5% crits, 3 attacks.

Damage over all: ((1d10+5+1d6)x.6+(2d10+5+2d6)x.05)x3=25.2+3.45=28. 65 DPR vs AC 18

So at level 11 I suppose I'm somewhat wrong, without an off-hand attack, the bladelock will fall slightly behind the blastlock. However, the blastlock will not be increasing their damage from any source beyomd accuracy until level 17. Meanwhile, the bladelock sees the following changes:

Level 12
Cha boost, +4 bonus now. DPR/ round vs AC 18: ((1d8+11+1d6)x.65+(2d8+11+2d6)x.05)x2=24.7+2.7=27. 4 (34.25 w/ an off-hand attack)

Seems pretty close, yes? At level 16 (when the bladelock likely has a +3 weapon or something better in their main hand, discards the +1 weapon and uses the +2 weapon in their off-hand, and higher prof bonus) they get another small damage bump from improving their charisma to 20, and wind up slightly ahead even without the +3 weapon factored in.

Now then, let's take a peek at level 17...

Level 17
By now the blastlock and bladelock likely have their very rare items, meaning a +2 pact rod on our blastlock and a +3 weapon (or its equivalent) on our bladelock. They both likely have 20 in dex and charisma by this point, though the 20 dex really only matters for the vladelock in this example, but it's a good thing to note.

Bladelock
+14 attack bonus (2 attacks) vs AC 20 (more typical for this level)

Accuracy: 70% hits, 5% crits

Over all damage: ((1d8+13+1d6)x.7+(2d8+13+2d6)x.05)x2=29.4+2.9=32.3

Offhand weapon has the +2 sword from before, so it has 65% accuracy with 5% crits.

Offhand damage: ((1d8+2+1d6)x.65+(2d8+2+2d6)x.05)=6.5+.9=7.4

Totalled together vs an AC 20 target, the bladelock would have 39.7 damage after reaching level 17.

Blastlock
Blastlock has a +13 to hit, giving it a 65% accuracy on EB and they crit on an additional 5% of their attacks crit.

Over all damage: ((1d10+5+1d6)x.65+(2d10+5+2d6)x.05)x4=36.4+4.6=41 DPR vs AC 20

Conclusion

So then, they seem to be pretty consistent with even the most basic of magic weapons right up to level 17, especially if the bladelock grabs the dual wielder feat from variant human. As well, the per-hit damage is quite a lot higher on the bladelock, and they can fall back on it and use opportunity attacks rather easily to deal buttloads of damage with this weapon. It's still a viable option, and is a functional gish until the later levels, even with the most bland and honestly lowest impact magic item progression readily available to them. However, it's the closest thing we have to a RAW "expected" magic item progression system, so that's what I'm falling back on to work my math skills here.



However, back to the subject of the thread, a bladelock is going to be more castery, while the eldrich knight will be tanky and more focused on stabbing then they are on magicing. Most of the EK spells are best spent on defense (such as shield/ mirror image) and buffs (haste or fly), while your bladelock will typically be casting hex and darkness/ hunger of hadar in a more high-aggro damage style. So whichever one fits your friend's concept/ playstyle works.

[Mandragola]

Your bonus action isn't for attacking with, it's for moving/casting hex. Any assessment of dpr that ignores the fact that you'll have to cast or move hex a hell of a lot just isn't valid. Warlocks simply cannot count on an extra attack from DW, polearm mastery or whatever.

That said, EB calculations tend to disregard cover, which will apply a lot of the time - unless you take spell sniper of course.

The fact does remain though that EB out-damages the blade and is safer to do. On paper, you shouldn't take pact of the blade. My experience of seeing two warlocks in play (one with blade and the other with book and spell sniper) was different. The book/blast warlock was probably the most boring dnd character I've ever seen, doing the exact same action almost every turn with hardly any reference to what else was going on. Pick target, hex, EB, repeat. Meanwhile the bladelock is hardly any worse at blasting (no spell sniper) but has the option of stabbing things up close, which is extremely useful a lot of the time.

The fact is that DMs tend to like having monsters close down your ranged PC. When that happens a blaster is in some difficulty but a bladelock is more or less fine. That's what pact of the blade gives you.

[Gnomes2169]

I listed the bladelock's bonus action and attack action damage separately because they cannot use a bonus action attack on a round that hex wreks people during. However, that doesn't change the bladelock edging out in the early game, being basically equal from levels 11-16 in the mid-late game and then finally falling behind at level 17+ on their base attack damage alone when combined with a "properly leveled" magic weapon (honestly, most DM's will like their players enough to give them a legendary weapon or item that complements their main playstyle, which for the bladelock probably means a +3 rapier with some kind of elemental damage attached to it, element probably dependent on the patron). It of course assumes that you are not in a low-magic setting... but that's pretty reasonable, seeing as the warlock (and every full caster) is most certainly not a low-magic class, so that shouldn't be too much of a worry.

On rounds where the bladelock is able to use their bonus action attack, which is actually going to be more common than one might think (especially given the HP-spongey nature of CR 2-8 monsters who can potentially take 2-3 rounds to take down if not focused), they easily beat out the damage of an EB warlock until level 17, and even then they only fall slightly behind. And yes, it is just as disingenuous to say that a bladelock will be spending every single round retargeting their hex with a bonus action as it is to say that they will always have their bonus action free to attack with. Let's say that the bladelock/ blastlock will basically switch targets once every 2 or so rounds... The DW bladelock gets the following results:

Level 5: 16.2 DPR

Level 11: 29.925 DPR

Level 17: 36 DPR

The blastlock stays the exact same.

This still follows the same pattern, just slightly tilting things more in favor of the blastlock (who we'll say took spell sniper, since our v. human bladelock got DW, thus ignoring all effects of cover).

Bldelock really strikes me as a more early-mid game sustained damage character, while still keeping the power to dish out some pretty decent hurt in the late game (though mostly just on melee targets/ opportunity attacks... which are made against melee targets.) Seems perfectly fine to me, really.

[Mandragola]

Seems perfectly fine to me, really.

On this we agree then. Sorry for not seeing that you'd built in moving hex.

Magic items certainly swing the balance towards bladelocks. In my campaign our halfling bladelock (with strength 8 and dex 16) found a pair of gauntlets of ogre power, which would have radically changed the character and opened up a ton of new weapon options. I don't feel like equivalent stuff really happens for casters. Giving a blaster a headband of intellect wouldn't make much difference at all. And while you can get those rods of the pact master to improve EB, they certainly aren't as significant as some of the high-end magic weapons.

I think that personally I'd build my bladelock without DW though. I think I'd take something like moderately-armoured at 1st, or maybe resilient (con) or warcaster - or I'd start with a fighter level and be strength-based. Bladelocks do high damage per hit at high level thanks to hex and lifedrinker so I can see a case for getting abilities like riposte or sentinel to get extra hits, and preferably wielding some kind of weapon that causes extra damage on hit.

So on the whole I think a bladelock is a pretty good character and, crucially, a fun one to play.

[D-naras]

If you're in a game where magic weapons are rare and nonmagic item resistant enemies aren't then you should quit the game because your GM is obviously a sadistic **** to non magic-using characters. Or doesn't know what he's doing.

Also worth noting, all the casters will have no goddamned problem with that situation. Including the bladelock who can cast.

And it's cool that you folks like having the ability to fall back on a weapon if enemies get into melee which is what the bladelock, apparently, is. That's not really a playstyle changing thing, though. And those of us who feel like the pact of the blade should change the playstyle (into a character actively seeking to engage enemies in melee to be fairly gishy) will continue to see it as weak compared to other options. Not only in survivability but in damage.

Or, you know, the story doesn't support magic loot left and right. It's not like magic items are assumed by default in 5e, nor are all DMs that don't include magic weapons, bad DMs.

As for other casters having no problem with mundane-resistant monsters, yeah that is a given. Only this thread is about eldritch knight vs bladelock, not mundane vs magic. Of all the classes, only the bladelock and monk can ignore mundane weapon resistances by default and that is power that no other class can boast. I realize that in standard games, all fighting types will eventually get a magic weapon of some kind but until everyone in the party does, the bladelock is happily hacking at resistant enemies from level 3.

Regarding the playstyle thing, eldritch blast is not assumed for every warlock, as silly as that sounds. Otherwise, all warlock players would be given it at level 1 and wouldn't have to pick it as they do now. Same thing with Hex. Thankfully the game holds up just great without optimizing every choice. For instance, my 6th level Bladelock is in a party of 3, a Fighter, Paladin and me. I don't use Armor of Shadows nor did I take Hex. My Combat spells are Armor of Agathys, Eldritch Blast, Blade Ward, Hellish Rebuke and Fireball. My non combat spells are far more important: Invisibility, Tongues (which is my MVP spell due to our campaign being a story of dimensional refugees), Charm Person and Prestidigitation (being able to flavor anything is handier than shockingly grasping people so that you can move out of melee when you are a refugee).

My invocations are Agonizing Blast (because why not? +Cha damage on EB is far better than the +1 AC I would get from Armor of Shadows), Beguiling Influence (being a Half-elf Pirate Warlock with this means I am proficient in 8 Skills: All charisma skills, medicine, perception, athletics and stealth), the 2nd attack with the blade and I am seriously considering picking Runekeeper's Eyes for my next one. I am by far the most versatile character in the group, I pack serious AoE power with fireball, deal great damage at range with Eldritch Blast, I am harder to kill than the fighter due to Armor of Agathys and deal mightily respectable damage in melee. If I wasn't a Bladelock, I would be the equivalent of a magic archer. By being a Bladelock, I am a magic commando, strong at both melee and range. It might not be actively entering melee, but being capable of kicking ass in any range feels better to me than simply kicking ass in melee. The Bladelock is fine as it is.

However, I will admit that the warlock is not a newbie-friendly class, as most versatile classes are. You get so many options and so few spell slots that you have to weigh in every single one. At least the Bladelock makes that easier, since every round that the warlock casts shocking grasp or arms of haddar to get out of melee, is a bad round for the warlock. The Bladelock simply thrusts his rapier or swings his greatsword while feeling smart that he chose the Blade instead of the Chain or Book. Now out of combat, the Bladelock is the worst of the bunch but that's the price of choice.

[Fyndhal]

My issues with Warlocks center around the fact that being a Bladelock is higher risk for less reward compared to a Blastlock. Range = Safety. This same issue exists with archers vs. Melee to some degree, as well. Compare a Greataxe to a Longbow -- the difference is, essentially, 1 damage, yet the Greataxe character takes greater risks by going into melee.

Bladelocks tend to be a bit MAD, needing Strength, Dexterity, Constitution and Charisma. Of those, the only one that could be considered "optional" is Strength, since Finesse is an option.

[Elderand]

My issues with Warlocks center around the fact that being a Bladelock is higher risk for less reward compared to a Blastlock. Range = Safety. This same issue exists with archers vs. Melee to some degree, as well. Compare a Greataxe to a Longbow -- the difference is, essentially, 1 damage, yet the Greataxe character takes greater risks by going into melee.

Bladelocks tend to be a bit MAD, needing Strength, Dexterity, Constitution and Charisma. Of those, the only one that could be considered "optional" is Strength, since Finesse is an option.

That is utter nonsense, you're no more safe at a distance than you are in melee because the opposition can also use ranged attacks.

[Mandragola]

That is utter nonsense, you're no more safe at a distance than you are in melee because the opposition can also use ranged attacks.

It's not nonsense. Some enemies can use ranged attacks, but not all of them and not always with as much effect as their melee attacks. Plus of course, sometimes the bad guys are in places where you can't hit them with melee attacks.

That said, I don't think warlocks are necessarily the best option in the "archer" role. Actual archers can get hold of magic bows and arrows (which appear to stack), the archery fighting style to be more accurate and the sharpshooter feat to sometimes do more damage against low-AC targets. To be fair the differences are fairly minor, so it probably comes down to a question of taste really.

An archer has the considerable advantages of proficiencies and that they attack in melee and at range with the same stat, so a ranger or fighter arguably comes with equivalent bonuses to a bladelock built in. Plus more hp, armour etc. Then of course the warlock gets spells... but so does the ranger to a degree. You could kind of go round and round with this one!

[Malifice]

OK, let me try to explain this.

We'll just ignore modifiers and set them at +5 stat, to make this easy, because they'll likely be similar all the way down the line. I'll even be nice an use a rapier with hex for the bladelock compared to a greatsword for the fighter.

Level 1: each have 1 attack
Fighter: 2d6+5 = 12
Warlock: 1d8+1d6+5 = 13
warlock is ahead

Level 5: both get extra attack via feature or invocation
Fighter: (2d6+5)*2 = 24
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+5)*2 = 26
warlock is ahead

Level 11: fighter gets 3rd attack
Fighter: (2d6+5)*3 = 36
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+5)*2 = 26
warlock loses the edge here, but remember, he still has 5th level spell slots by this point

Level 12: warlock gets invocation
Fighter: (2d6+5)*3 = 36
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+10)*2 = 36
warlock is caught up again after being down for one single level, and remember, he still has 5th level spell slots by this point. Right back to being even

Level 20: fighter gets 4th attack
Fighter: (2d6+5)*4 = 48
Warlock: (1d8+1d6+10)*2 = 36

There are only two levels throughout the entire game where a fighter is better than a warlock for melee damage, and those are levels 11 and 20.l.

Your numbers conveniently ignore GWF style, feats and superiority dice and Action surge. Four core Fighter class features. GWF style alone pushes the Fighter ahead in terms of DPR.

It also assumes stats of 20. The Fighter can safely dump Dex, Int and Cha pump Strength, Con (with Wisdom a distand thrid for saves). The Dex based Bladelock Needs Dex to hit and damage, Cha for spells and more damage, Con for hit points, saves and concentration (and wisdom for the same reason the Fighter needs it). One extra stat to pump up, with two less ability score increases.

Lets compare them at 6th level. Assume optimal characters and default array.

Half Orc Fighter (BM) GWM feat and +2 Str. GW style. Full plate, Greataxe, enough javelins. Manouvers: Precise strike, Trip attack, Riposte (3d8). Action surge, extra attack, 2 x ASI, second wind 1d10+6, Savage attacker, Relentless endurance

S 18
D 12
C 16
I 10
W 13
Ch 8

Attack +7, 1d12+4 (re-roll 1-2) x2
Ranged +7. 1d6+4, x2
HP: 64, AC: 18, Init +1

Tiefling Warlock (Fiend/ Blade) +1 Cha/ Dex. Hex, 2x3rd level slots per SR. 3 Invocations (Thirsting blade, Agonising blast, Armor of shadows), Dark ones blessing (10hp), Dark ones luck (+1d10 per short rest), resist fire, Thaumaturgy, Hellish Rebuke, Darkness 1/long rest. Rapier

S 8
D 16
C 14
I 9
W 10
Ch 18

Attack +6, 1d8+3 (+1d6 for hex) x2
Ranged +7, 1d10+4 (+1d6 hex) x2
HP: 50, AC: 16, Init +4

VS AC 15, melee

Fighter, no action surge, 1 dice expended, GWM 'on':
Roll: Avg damage
1-8 (miss) 0
9-12 (miss + precise strike for hit) 22 damage
13-19 (hit + trip attack) 26.5 damage
20 (Crit + trip attack + savage attacks) 47 damage

16 damage w attack 1

Attack 2 (swing, no dice, no GWM)
Roll, damage
1-7, 0 damage
8-19 16.5 damage
20 37 damage

11.75 damage w attack 2

2/20 of crit and trigger bonus GWM Attack +1.175 damage

Total DPR of Fighter 6 with 1 dice expended: around 29 damage per round.

Warlock: (Hex cast)
Roll, damage
1-8, 0 damage
9-19, 11 damage
20, 19 damage

7 damage per attack, 2 attacks per round = Total melee damage for Warlock = 14 DPR

The Fighter 6 is double the DPR of the Warlock (Without action surge mind you, and only blowing one dice per round), with 25 percent more HP, 2 points better AC. When it comes to ranged DPR they are both about equal. The Warlock has a few tricks up his sleeve (another 3rd level spell slot for a fireball, and his hellish rebuke) but the Fighter still has his action surge to fall back on (and his average damage with full nova action surge + sup dice is around 62 DPR).

In DPR stakes, its a no contest. Fighter wins hands down at every level.

[JNAProductions]

Minor note there-Superiority dice are not a core fighter feature. It's only a Battlemaster feature.

[Malifice]

Minor note there-Superiority dice are not a core fighter feature. It's only a Battlemaster feature.

To be fair, specific pacts and patrons arent core features for Warlocks either. Theyre archetypes just like BM/ Champion/ EK are I picked the most optimal ones for melee DPR.

Technically Champion comes out ahead of the BM in DPR if you get more than about 9 rounds per short rest.

Comapring spomething to a Fighter without an archetype, action surge, feats and extra ASI's is literally ripping half the guts from the class (leaving only extra attacks)

[DivisibleByZero]

<snip>

If you wanted to be more precise, as you clearly do, then the Bladelock would be dual wielding, since he has the Dex to dual wield finesse weapons and can't use a shield. So if we're using GWF style for the fighter, then we're also using dual wielding for the Bladelock.
Action Surge isn't sustainable, it's burst, so we're not using it.
Superiority dice are not available to an EK without a feat, so we're not using them.

And you probably missed it quoting a post from like three pages ago, but those calculations have been done. It changes nothing. Level 11 the fighter pulls ahead. Level 12 the Bladelock catches up. Level 20 the fighter pulls ahead again.
The Bladelock's melee damage is competitive all the way to 20.

[MrStabby]

If you wanted to be more precise, as you clearly do, then the Bladelock would be dual wielding, since he has the Dex to dual wield finesse weapons and can't use a shield. So if we're using GWF style for the fighter, then we're also using dual wielding for the Bladelock.
Action Surge isn't sustainable, it's burst, so we're not using it.
Superiority dice are not available to an EK without a feat, so we're not using them.

And you probably missed it quoting a post from like three pages ago, but those calculations have been done. It changes nothing. Level 11 the fighter pulls ahead. Level 12 the Bladelock catches up. Level 20 the fighter pulls ahead again.
The Bladelock's melee damage is competitive all the way to 20.

If you are assuming twf then you also have to assume that the bladelock cannot use hex - casting it and shifting it from target to target will use you bonus action. Also as you select only one weapon to be your pact weapon I am not sure that TWF would be best for a bladelock. I would have thought that a polearm would be ideal for a bladelock.

[Malifice]

If you wanted to be more precise, as you clearly do, then the Bladelock would be dual wielding, since he has the Dex to dual wield finesse weapons and can't use a shield. So if we're using GWF style for the fighter, then we're also using dual wielding for the Bladelock.
Action Surge isn't sustainable, it's burst, so we're not using it.
Superiority dice are not available to an EK without a feat, so we're not using them.

And you probably missed it quoting a post from like three pages ago, but those calculations have been done. It changes nothing. Level 11 the fighter pulls ahead. Level 12 the Bladelock catches up. Level 20 the fighter pulls ahead again.
The Bladelock's melee damage is competitive all the way to 20.

If you want to blow your only feat on TWF go for it. Your stats are even lower. Seeing as you need to use a bonus action on round 1 to lay down your hex, you don't get to use the off hand till round 2 either.

And saying action surge is to be discounted (1 per short rest) is like saying discount the warlocks spell slots. On average you get 2-3 encointers per short rest/ action surge. The damage spike is considerable enough to factor into the overall DPR of the fighter over that time. Just like you would factor in a PF magus with spell strike + shocking grasp averaged over the expected number of encounters.

If we're going eldrich knight, in a straight DPR comparison, then don't forget to add haste, shield and mirror image into the numbers too - only one helps DPR, but the other two treble the survivability of the EK (which is already higher thanks to extra HP, second wind, and higher AC) threefold.

Feel free to nominate a level vs a EK great weapon fighter and I'll happily show you how the Ek fighter trumps the same level blade lock for DPR over 10 roinds (2-3 encointers) before the classes recover many class features.

[DivisibleByZero]

Using your bonus action on some rounds to move hex does not mean that TWF is a poor choice. It means that on some rounds you'll be using your bonus action to do other things.... just like every other TWFer.

A Warlock is a full caster. A Bladelock has melee capability competitive with a fighter for the vast majority of the game. If the full caster eventually (or in certain circumstances) falls behind the Fighter in melee damage, this is not something that needs to be "fixed," this is working as intended.
The fact that he can even come close and be competitive in many circumstances should make you jump for joy.

edit:
And Malifice, what part of "we're not using feats" is so difficult to understand. Feats aren't base.
As for using EK, read the title of the thread.
Or maybe just go back and find that other damage calculation that I was referring to. It answers all of the questions and situations that you are about to bring up.
I would link it (again), but it might help the circular debate if you have to look for it.

[MrStabby]

edit:
And Malifice, what part of "we're not using feats" is so difficult to understand. Feats aren't base.
As for using EK, read the title of the thread.
Or maybe just go back and find that other damage calculation that I was referring to. It answers all of the questions and situations that you are about to bring up.
I would link it (again), but it might help the circular debate if you have to look for it.

I don't think you get that WE ARE using feats. There is a big difference between "we're not" and "i'm not".

Using feats is more common than not. As it is the OP specifically says no Multiclass but (unless my reading/memory is poor) nothing about no feats.

[Fyndhal]

full caster

A class that may only cast 2 spells per short rest up to level 11 is a strange definition of "full caster." Wizards, Sorcerers and Clerics? Full Casters. Warlocks are something else.

[DivisibleByZero]

A class that may only cast 2 spells per short rest up to level 11 is a strange definition of "full caster." Wizards, Sorcerers and Clerics? Full Casters. Warlocks are something else.

Once again, circular debate via people not knowing what has been stated in this thread already.


With an average of 2-3 short rests per adventuring day, this means you'll have 3 or 4 times as many spells as listed. So 12-16 5th level spells per day, plus one each of 6th+.
We'll average the 12-16 at 14.
Using the spell point system, we can gauge how much casting power a warlock has.
5th level spells cost 7, so 14*7=98
6th cost 9, making 107
7th cost 10, making 117
8th cost 11, making 128
9th cost 13, giving us an average total of 141
A 20th level non-warlock caster has 133.

So the warlock not only has more casting power on an average day than a bard or what have you, but they also have fighter level at-will damage without using any slots. And that's if we don't even attempt to factor in free spells via invocations, like silent image or mage armor or whatever all day long for free.

A Warlock has 9th level magic and more casting power in a day than a bard or a moon druid or a cleric.
The Sorc very slightly edges him out via sorcery points.... until we factor in any possible Invocations which allow the warlock to cast low levels spells all day long for free.
The Wiz is the only one that blatantly has more casting power, via their level 18 & level 20 abilities and arcane recovery.
But then we have the Warlock's capstone, which increases his effective spell points by another 28, for a total of 169, making him HANDS DOWN the single most powerful caster in the entire game.
A Warlock is absolutely, 100%, without a doubt a full caster.

A Bladelock has all of the above, plus competitive melee damage.

[zeek0]

DBZ and Steampunkette:

I have come here to clarify the claims. Only by doing this will the debate be any good.

Steampunkette fully realizes that a bladelock can also do EB damage. She just wants to be able to hit things with her blade every turn instead of an EB. And her frustration is that, for some reason, the melee (more dangerous) option does less damage. The frustration is that the cool feature you got (killing things in melee) does less damage than the thing you already have.

DBZ, you make reasonable claims about the fighter, and the damage that it can put out in relation to the bladelock. I agree that they are comparable (I shan't do numbers).

I don't know any solutions, I just wanted to adjudicate. And if you can, talk about a single subject at a time (warlock v. bladelock; bladelock v. EK) to make things easier to follow.

Cheers.

[Fyndhal]

Once again, circular debate via people not knowing what has been stated in this thread already.



A Warlock has 9th level magic and more casting power in a day than a bard or a moon druid or a cleric.
The Sorc very slightly edges him out via sorcery points.... until we factor in any possible Invocations which allow the warlock to cast low levels spells all day long for free.
The Wiz is the only one that blatantly has more casting power, via their level 18 & level 20 abilities and arcane recovery.
But then we have the Warlock's capstone, which increases his effective spell points by another 28, for a total of 169, making him HANDS DOWN the single most powerful caster in the entire game.
A Warlock is absolutely, 100%, without a doubt a full caster.

A Bladelock has all of the above, plus competitive melee damage.

That's some great mental gymnastics there. Bravo.

In a single encounter, at level 8, a Warlock can cast 2 spells barring invocations. That is extremely limited spell casting. Assuming "Hex" in damage calculations is really risky, considering it is a Concentration effect and, even if you have advantage, you will end up losing it from time to time. With limited spell slot availability, it's at least somewhat unlikely you'll be able to recast it once lost.

EDIT:
I'll add that Warlocks cast few, but powerful spells. That is their niche as a spell caster. It's unique and cool, but...limited.

[Steampunkette]

Full caster is really wrong.

For 6th and up they get one spell from a very narrow list, most options on which are noncombat Or combat adjacent. If you can cast magnificent mansion at 9th level 40 times per day you'll sure seem like the most powerful caster by the spell point metric. But it isn't representative of reality.

A big part of being a powerful caster is your ability to do large area contol, large healing, or large area damage. Warlocks only get a fraction of that, with most control and damage they fling out being single target. They also can't keep casting through extended combats or through several fights in between short rests.

A wizard can go 3 fairly long fights between short rests and still have fireballs to fling when it's time to hit the sack. Warlocks not so much. Their vaunted short rest ability only comes into play when they can get one. And most of the party doesn't need one after every fight. So a goodly portion of fights winds up being eldritch blasts.

Your metric looks great on paper, but doesn't reflect reality.

[Ashrym]

A class that may only cast 2 spells per short rest up to level 11 is a strange definition of "full caster." Wizards, Sorcerers and Clerics? Full Casters. Warlocks are something else.

That's a side topic but given the short rest mechanic on those slots and the fact those spells are always cast in the highest level available up to 5th-level spell slots.

A 5th level cleric can only wish for 6 3rd-level spell slots in a day on atheist assumed 2 short rests per the DMG. At 11th level it's 9 5th slots and a 6th-level arcanum vs 2 5th-level and 1 6th-level slot. There cleric doesn't match the top end slots. The cleric does more lower level but 7 5th-level slots vs 13 lower level slots isn't a bad trade off, particularly when the warlock can cast a couple of lower level spells at will through invocations to easily be competitive.

At 20th level, it's 20 spells for the warlock with 22 spells for the cleric but the bulk of them are still 5th-level slots. Plus invocations.

What makes warlocks full casters is the access rate to high level spells at the same rate as other "full casters". A full caster on a different power structure is still a full caster. The only difference is a forced pacing.


Keeping on topic...

Keeping focus on melee and spells forces either one or the other to take precedence at the expense of the other unless the plan is not to use save or attack roll spells for the character. Building on both often means delaying effectiveness a bit but in the end even a 17 or 18 DC instead a 19 or 18 DEX instead of 20 DEX is pretty good backing up the other aspect of the build.

The blade pact warlock can do both which is why I would recommend it over the eldritch knight if combat and magic is what the OP desires.

A blade pact warlock has all those same spells. That goes up to a 9th-level arcanum compared the 4th-level spells for the eldritch knight.

[DivisibleByZero]

What makes warlocks full casters is the access rate to high level spells at the same rate as other "full casters". A full caster on a different power structure is still a full caster. The only difference is a forced pacing.

This.
If you look at the spell point system as a power structure, then Warlock is the single most powerful caster in the game, period.
Just because he is essentially forced to use that system and create only the highest slots available to him (with a per short rest limit on creating slots) doesn't mean he isn't a full caster.
It's a different mechanic, but it amounts to the same exact thing.
No mental gymnastics required, and your (Fyndhal) calling it so is insulting and mislead.
Just as much arcane power as any other caster (more, actually) and 9th level spells on time with others.
He's a full caster, and there is nothing you can say to change that fact.

[Steampunkette]

Honestly... I kind of feel like I need to make a Pact of the Chain Warlock Tiefling of the Fiend with an Imp to level 3, then go 17 levels of Battlemaster fighter.

Knockback and charisma on my EBs, 3 attacks per round, and probably finesse fighting. Give the imp a staff of Thunder and Lightning, a Ring of Shooting Stars, and a Necklace of Fireballs. All of them require attunement, but none of them have casting class requirements (which is what was meant up-thread but I didn't understand at the time).

Every round give up one of my three attacks to have the imp throw off a damaging spell from 100 feet above me, hex with my bonus action, and kick all kinds of butt with warlock-spellcasting reflavored Superiority dice. I'd be a better gish than most other classes.

[Fyndhal]

This.
If you look at the spell point system as a power structure, then Warlock is the single most powerful caster in the game, period.
Just because he is essentially forced to use that system and create only the highest slots available to him (with a per short rest limit on creating slots) doesn't mean he isn't a full caster.
It's a different mechanic, but it amounts to the same exact thing.
No mental gymnastics required, and your (Fyndhal) calling it so is insulting and mislead.
Just as much arcane power as any other caster (more, actually) and 9th level spells on time with others.
He's a full caster, and there is nothing you can say to change that fact.

If you assume resting as needed and you assume level 20, then yes, the spell point system does indicate the Warlock is a powerful caster. In most (definitely in excess of 95%, more than likely exceeding 99%) of games, neither of those two assumptions are givens. The last time I played in a game that lasted to level 20 was in college over 25 years ago. It's rare and basing arguments on these assumptions is pure theorycrafting.

At level 8, in a single encounter, a warlock can cast 2 spells (unless they have specific Invocations otherwise) from a limited list. If you're talking about Bladelocks (the thread topic) it's almost certain that one of those spells will be "Hex" which eats into that spellpoint pool. Thankfully, that Hex is going to last 8 hours, assuming you can make a con save each time you are damaged. If you also cast the popular "Armor of Agathys" you've just used up all your spell power until you take a short rest...and, if you hit another 2 encounters before that rest, you may be in trouble.

In any case, you say nothing I can say will change your mind, so I'm just wasting my time and yours at this point. I do apologize for being insulting; it was uncalled for.

[DivisibleByZero]

If you assume resting as needed and you assume level 20, then yes, the spell point system does indicate the Warlock is a powerful caster. In most (definitely in excess of 95%, more than likely exceeding 99%) of games, neither of those two assumptions are givens. The last time I played in a game that lasted to level 20 was in college over 25 years ago. It's rare and basing arguments on these assumptions is pure theorycrafting.

At level 8, in a single encounter, a warlock can cast 2 spells (unless they have specific Invocations otherwise) from a limited list. If you're talking about Bladelocks (the thread topic) it's almost certain that one of those spells will be "Hex" which eats into that spellpoint pool. Thankfully, that Hex is going to last 8 hours, assuming you can make a con save each time you are damaged. If you also cast the popular "Armor of Agathys" you've just used up all your spell power until you take a short rest...and, if you hit another 2 encounters before that rest, you may be in trouble.

In any case, you say nothing I can say will change your mind, so I'm just wasting my time and yours at this point. I do apologize for being insulting; it was uncalled for.

OK, let's look at level 8 then, shall we? We'll use the spell point system, to put them on equal footing.

At level 8, another caster has 44 spell points. 3rd level slots cost five each. That means he can create eight 3rd level slots and has 4 points left over for one 2nd level slot (or two 1st level slots). Nine or ten spells for the day, if he wants them to be as powerful as possible.
The Warlock can cast two spells, each at 3rd level, per short rest. We'll say 2.5 short rests, as between two and three is recommended, which gives him two to start, two more per short rest, totaling seven 3rd spells.
We can compare that to a Paladin (who has 17sp for four 2nd and one 1st) and an EK (who has 6 sp, for two 2nd).

So different full caster: eight (8) 3rd, and one (1) 2nd or two (2) 1st
Warlock: between six and eight (6-8), average seven (7) 3rd
Paladin: five (5) 2nd and one (1) 1st
EK: two (2) 2nd

Looks to me like the warlock is keeping up with the full caster for the most part, especially when you consider Invocations that grant free casting of low level spells (like mage armor, disguise self, silent image, etc)

But choosing an even numbered level skews it a bit. If we choose an odd numbered level, the warlock holds his own with the other casters.

Other caster at level 7: 38sp: seven (7) 3rd and one (1) 2nd
Warlock at level 7: between six and eight (6-8), average seven (7) 3rd
Paladin at level 7: four (4) 2nd and one (1) 1st
EK at level 7: still two (2) 2nd
Warlock looks like a full caster to me, especially when you consider Invocations that grant free casting of low level spells.

Other caster at level 9: 57sp: nine (9) 4th,
Warlock at level 9: between six and eight (6-8), average seven (7) 4th
Paladin at level 9: still four (4) 2nd and one (1) 1st
EK at level 9: four (4) 2nd, one (1) 1st
Warlock still looks like a full caster to me, especially when you consider Invocations that grant free casting of low level spells.

As you gain higher levels but don't get more slots, the Warlock's power level seems to taper off a little in comparison. Every single time he gains a new slot, it jumps and catches him up.

For example:
Other caster at level 11: 73sp: ten (10) 5th and one (1) 2nd
Warlock at level 11: between nine and twelve (9-12), average ten and an half (10.5) 5th
Paladin at level 11: five (5) 3rd and one (1) 1st
EK at level 11: four (4) 2nd and one (1) 1st
Looks like the Warlock is still keeping up with the other full caster, and once again this is not including Invocations that grant free casting of low level spells.

Warlock is a full caster, and has overall casting power generally very balanced against other full casters. He just happens to be on a forced progression rather than having the flexibility that other full casters have.
The reason that he doesn't get a third slot until level 11 is because giving it to him earlier would make him MUCH more powerful than any other caster between the level it would have been granted and level 11 (where it would even out again). Rather than making him comparatively OP during those levels, they played it safe and kept him at two slots during the levels prior.

Full caster progression, on time, to 9th level spellcasting, which stays relevant and competitive with full casters throughout the entire game.
Single target blasting capabilities on par with any other class in the game.
Melee damage which can, if you choose to use resources, be absolutely competitive with any other melee class in the game through 19 levels.
Given the proper choices, temp HP can make him just as durable as most defensive classes, at the expense of some of your offense.
The Blade Pact Warlock is the definition of a Gish in 5e, right out of the box.

[Hawkstar]

The Blade Pact Warlock is the definition of a Gish in 5e, right out of the box.
Wait.... how does the Blade Pact Warlock turn the character into a Githyanki Fighter/Wizard?

[Malifice]

Using your bonus action on some rounds to move hex does not mean that TWF is a poor choice. It means that on some rounds you'll be using your bonus action to do other things.... just like every other TWFer.

I've noticed that 5e combats tend to be over fast. Really fast. Normally around the 3-4 rounds mark if not sooner. The assumed short rest interval is one every 2-3 encounters. I work with a default of: Long rest (E)(E)(E) short rest (E)(E)(E) short rest (E)(E)(E) long rest. My default is to assume 9 encounters in the adventuring day, each of around 3.333 rounds, and bracketed by long rests.

Maths wise, this works out to be 10 rounds and 3 encounters between rests. I have a feeling this is what the devs based the game around too (the maths works best at this sweet spot).

(Obviously some days you get the 5 minute adventuring day, some days are total meat grinders with no chance to rest at all; I'm working on the assumed and recommended averages).

When I look at the expected melee damage output over that time from a TWF Fighter v a TWF Bladelock (no feats as requested). Even if we assume Hex remains up all the time for our Warlock (who, as a front-line MAD melee orientated character, with Con as his third most important stat, and who isnt proficient in Con saves barring MCing or a feat, it's a big assumption to make):

Half Orc TWF style Fighter 4, no feats +2 Str (EK, spells and EK class features not used). Banded mail, sword + shortsword
S 18
D 10
C 16
I 13
W 12
Ch 8

Melee: +6, 1d8+4 and +6 186+4 (b)
AC 17
HP: 40

Half Elf Fiend/ Blade lock 4, no feats, +2 Dex, studded leather, rapier, dagger
S 10
D 18
C 14
I 8
W 12
ch 16

Melee: +6, 1d8+4 (+1d6) and 1d4 (+1d6) (b)
AC 16
HP: 31

Fighter (vs AC 15) 11 rounds of
1-8 (damage 0)
9-19 (damage 8.5)
20 (damage 17.5)

and 10 rounds of

1-8 (damage 0)
9-19 (damage 7.5)
20 (damage 14.5)

Total; [(10+1) x (5.5)] + [10 x 4.85] = DPR: 10.9 vs AC15

Warlock(vs AC 15) 1st round x 10
1-8 (damage 0)
9-19 (damage 12)
20 (damage 20)

And 7 rounds of:

1-8 (damage 0)
9-19 (damage 6)
20 (damage 12)

Total; DPR: (10 x 7.6) + (7 x 3.9) = 10.33 DPR vs AC15

We have the Fighter just edging out the Bladelock in terms of single target sustained melee DPR (10.9 vs 10.33).

Next level when extra attack/ thirsting blade kicks in, as long as the warlock can keep Hex up, the Warlock edges in front:

Fighter; [(20+2) x (5.5)] + [10 x 4.85] = DPR: 16.95 vs AC15
Warlock; DPR: (20 x 7.6) + (7 x 3.9) = 17.93 DPR vs AC15

Of course this doesnt take into account the Warlocks squishiness for a frontline fighter (lower AC, less HP) and unlikely ability to keep Hex up all day (or take into account any EK class features).

At 11th level by the way, the EK pulls away and never looks back thanks to Haste+Extra attack.

Finally, TWF on a no-feat EK is a terrible choice as it screws with your casting. Great weapons or polearms are almost certainly better.


A Warlock is a full caster. A Bladelock has melee capability competitive with a fighter for the vast majority of the game. If the full caster eventually (or in certain circumstances) falls behind the Fighter in melee damage, this is not something that needs to be "fixed," this is working as intended.

Yes and no. A Bladelock will be burning both slots on Hex per short rest, pretty much all day long.


And Malifice, what part of "we're not using feats" is so difficult to understand.

The OP is using feats. He's not using MC rules (which is a pity, as Bladelocks gain the most from MCing).


A Warlock has 9th level magic and more casting power in a day than a bard or a moon druid or a cleric.

Nah he doesn't really bro. This guy is a Bladelock. To maintain competitive DPR we need to assume he has blows at least 1 slot on Hex per rest (the assumption is he gets hit (often) being a front line combatant with a lower than average AC and poor Con saves and Hex drops, or occasionally he may drop Hex due to wanting to cast another concentration spell).

This means from levels 2-11 he has 1 spell slot to use during the expected 10 rounds of combat between short rests. Occasionally (if Hex gets dropped) he'll need to use that slot to recast it to maintain his DPR.

That's literally half his career, he gets 1 spell to cast every 3 encounters/ 10 rounds (plus a lot of at will goodies and a damn fine cantrip). You'll always feel vulnerable, and running on empty.

It gets better past 11th level (he gains 2-3 spells per 10 rounds to use, and an extra up to 4 arcanums to ration out among 30 rounds of the adventuring day, meaning at 17th level he has 9 x 5th level slots per day and 1 slot of 6, 7, 8, and 9th level; probably enough for one spell every encounter/ 3 rounds and have 4 x big showy effects of 6th-9th level to blat when needed selected from a very narrow list).

The above numbers will feel 'right' to anyone thats actually played a Bladelock I reckon.

[DivisibleByZero]

Nah he doesn't really bro. This guy is a Bladelock. To maintain competitive DPR we need to assume he has blows at least 1 slot on Hex per rest (the assumption is he gets hit (often) being a front line combatant with a lower than average AC and poor Con saves and Hex drops, or occasionally he may drop Hex due to wanting to cast another concentration spell).

Wait, so you're saying that the gish is using magic to compliment and augment his generally lower melee capability?
What a crazy concept.
Dude, that's exactly what a gish is and that's exactly what a gish does.
If he wants to improve his melee prowess, he uses magic to do so.
If he wants to improve his defensive prowess, he uses magic to do so.
You just described a gish perfectly. Not a fighter, not a tank, not a melee combatant at all. A full caster that has the capability to use magic to make himself better in melee.
You know, a gish.

The fact that he's using that magic for melee purposes does not change the fact that he has those magical resources to use. He still has them. He still has just as much (or more at very high levels) than any other full caster. He's just using them differently.

[Malifice]

Wait, so you're saying that the gish is using magic to compliment and augment his generally lower melee capability?
What a crazy concept.
Dude, that's exactly what a gish is and that's exactly what a gish does.
If he wants to improve his melee prowess, he uses magic to do so.
If he wants to improve his defensive prowess, he uses magic to do so.
You just described a gish perfectly. Not a fighter, not a tank, not a melee combatant at all. A full caster that has the capability to use magic to make himself better in melee.
You know, a gish.

The fact that he's using that magic for melee purposes does not change the fact that he has those magical resources to use. He still has them. He still has just as much (or more at very high levels) than any other full caster. He's just using them differently.

You miss my point mate. The bladelock has either respectable melee DPR or he can cast spells. For the lions share of his career (levels 1-11). He cant do both (unlike the EK).

From levels 1-11 he gets to cast around 1 spell every 3 encounters/10 rounds if he wants to maintain Hex (assuming it needs to be cast three times during the day as it goes down from damage, time or choice twice during those 30 rounds).

Its gets a little better from 12th level onwards, where he can start dropping 1 spell per encounter/ 3 rounds on average, but he is still a little crippled by a very narrow spell selection (only knowing 1 spell of levels 6-9).

His DPR arguably is also lower than the numbers I presented above, as it assumes single creature encounters and thus only needing to lay the bonus action to Hex something once per encounter; this is a very unlikely occurrence.

I'd hazard a guess based on the above numbers that

[Ashrym]

You miss my point mate. The bladelock has either respectable melee DPR or he can cast spells. For the lions share of his career (levels 1-11). He cant do both (unlike the EK).

From levels 1-11 he gets to cast around 1 spell every 3 encounters/10 rounds if he wants to maintain Hex (assuming it needs to be cast three times during the day as it goes down from damage, time or choice twice during those 30 rounds).

Its gets a little better from 12th level onwards, where he can start dropping 1 spell per encounter/ 3 rounds on average, but he is still a little crippled by a very narrow spell selection (only knowing 1 spell of levels 6-9).

His DPR arguably is also lower than the numbers I presented above, as it assumes single creature encounters and thus only needing to lay the bonus action to Hex something once per encounter; this is a very unlikely occurrence.

I'd hazard a guess based on the above numbers that

He only needs to recast hex if he loses it to failed concentration, which happens to any subclass of warlock. He also accesses additional spells in the invocations. At will spell like abilities are available at 2nd level from a limited list and it's easy to pick up a couple of useful ones. Other spellcasters run out of slots fast trying to keep up to at will. It takes an 18th level wizard to get a similar ability but the warlock has higher level at will choices by that point.

At level 11 the warlock has 3 slots, btw (your range should be 1-10 ;) ), and he doesn't lose hex on a short rest. Hex only adds ~5 DPR to a blade pact warlock with 2 attacks so it's easy enough to let go in the event casting another spell would be more effective. Losing hex is actually a bigger impact to high level eldritch blasts because of the higher number of attacks. Generally, hex is an option for more damage but not forced to have been cast so the number of spell slots available for spell casting is still there as a choice.

I understand what you are saying and I largely agree. At lower levels splitting spellcasting and melee combat in a build has an impact to one, the other, or both during play. It is possible to plan around that for a build that blossoms into both better later on. The ironic part of that is that the eldritch knight has the same issue splitting INT and either STR or DEX just like every other spell casting melee that tries the same thing. The only one that really gets away with it earlier is the weapon oriented nature cleric who picked up the shillelagh cantrip for a staff and shield style of combat.

[Malifice]

He only needs to recast hex if he loses it to failed concentration, which happens to any subclass of warlock.

As a MAD melee bladelock (low Con saves, low AC for front line fighting, in the thick of it) it will happen a hell of a lot more! This bears out in actual play too. I factor in addition to casting it once in the morning, it should need to be cast twice more in a (9 encounter/ 30 round) adventuring day (evens out to around 1/ short rest - leaving you 1 slot for a spell to lob once during each 3 encounters/ 10 rounds).

Ranged blast locks are less vulnerable to high damage ranged attacks (the Brute type high damage monsters tend to hit you in melee).


He also accesses additional spells in the invocations. At will spell like abilities are available at 2nd level from a limited list and it's easy to pick up a couple of useful ones.

For sure. They get access to neat cantrips at will (including EB) and invocations. I wouldnt hang my hat on them to provide much though (aside from EB, and this character is a melee fighter).


Other spellcasters run out of slots fast trying to keep up to at will. It takes an 18th level wizard to get a similar ability but the warlock has higher level at will choices by that point.

The wizard doesn't need to keep up with at will minor effects. He gets to end 3/9 of those encounters per day from 1st level [lets say with sleep spell] blatting fire bolts for the remaining 6 encounters. The number of encounter ending spells available to the Wizard sits at around the 3-4 mark for most of his career (with firebolt being replaced with lower level spell slots). The assumption is he always has the right spell prepared.

A high level Warlock can do similar with EB and situational minor at-wills always available, 1 spell of 5th level available on average 'per encounter', and up to 4 'daily' spells each of levels 6-9 (the Wizard has 5 thanks to spell recall, and can blat out lower level spells in those higher level slots in addition to memorizing multiple high level spells - the assumption is the Wizard will always have 3-4 encounter appropriate ending spells per day), The Warlock's high level 'encounter ending powers' are going to be very situational due to the limited choices available to him, and often not appropriate to ending the encounter at all.


At level 11 the warlock has 3 slots, btw (your range should be 1-10 ;) ), and he doesn't lose hex on a short rest. Hex only adds ~5 DPR to a blade pact warlock with 2 attacks so it's easy enough to let go in the event casting another spell would be more effective.

If he's letting Hex drop for another spell, that's no different to him getting hit and losing concentration. A melee focused bladelock needs Hex to be competitive in melee DPR - otherwise; why is he a melee focused bladelock? In a 9 encounter/ 2 short rest/ 30 round 'adventuring day' a character that is focused around fighting in melee with low Con saves and light armor is going to lose concentration at least twice throughout the day (willingly or otherwise).


Losing hex is actually a bigger impact to high level eldritch blasts because of the higher number of attacks. Generally, hex is an option for more damage but not forced to have been cast so the number of spell slots available for spell casting is still there as a choice.

TWF or bonus action attack warlocks also get great synergy out of Hex. Without Hex 'up', in melee combat a straight Bladelock 12 is no better than a Fighter 5 (great weapon fighting style almost making up for the bonus damage from the 12th level invocation).


I understand what you are saying and I largely agree. At lower levels splitting spellcasting and melee combat in a build has an impact to one, the other, or both during play. It is possible to plan around that for a build that blossoms into both better later on. The ironic part of that is that the eldritch knight has the same issue splitting INT and either STR or DEX just like every other spell casting melee that tries the same thing. The only one that really gets away with it earlier is the weapon oriented nature cleric who picked up the shillelagh cantrip for a staff and shield style of combat.

Yeah I agree. I love the Warlock, and its a nice utility class with some decent ranged striking for minimal investment (as opposed to a dedicated archer type).

I really want an Elric/ Stormbringer Bladelock to work (my favorite trope), and the only way it becomes worth it is with a 3 level dip into Fighter (V Paladin also works). The addition of either an extra Hunters mark (to save burning W slots on Hex) + advantage via divine channel + smites w warlock slots + heavy armor or (with fighter) Action surge, BM manouvers, Con saves and Heavy armor, mitigate a lot of what is the bigger issue with the lack of real melee combat effectiveness with the Bladelock. And you get all that in exchange for... well not losing much at all aside from delayed Warlock progression.

It's a damn shame the OP's DM doesnt let him MC.

[Steampunkette]

Malifice has got the right of it, more or less.

Though remember that moving Hex between targets takes a bonus action. So that TWF will need to get bypassed at least once in those 3 rounds of combat scheduled. In extended fights, or fights in which lots of smaller enemies are engaged either at once or in a series of wave attacks (Defending an object/person/place scenarios) that DPR analysis is going to drop significantly.

That said, I've never been in a fight in 5e that lasted less than 5 rounds. Maybe it's just the DMs I've played with (and my own brand of encounter design) but there's usually a lot more enemies spread out more (or using cover when the fireballs fly) that require some movement and running combat.

[Gnomes2169]

On the length of battles: The longest one that I've run was 4 rounds. And my party immediately needed a short rest, because they took a massive beating from the berzerkers and half dragon, and needed a bit of time to recover. More typical (2-3 round) combats can still do a number, but the longer they last, the more likely the party is to need some time to recover afterwords. It's hard to fight when the front and mid lines are ribbons already, after all.

[Steampunkette]

I guess we should stop focusing on larger quantities of weaker enemies, then... Personally I prefer that style, since the average return on damage values increase over a large number of enemy attacks while players can get off their cleaves or strike multiple enemies in motion and enjoy the flow.

It does tend to limit itself to large scale engagement campaigns, though. The last two I've run (one of which was a 13th Age game) wound up being more about the war than the adventure that was meant to use the war as a backdrop.

Still. I'll never forget the rogue in the 13A game stealing "The Enemy Leader's Authority". OR FORGIVE.

[Malifice]

That said, I've never been in a fight in 5e that lasted less than 5 rounds. Maybe it's just the DMs I've played with (and my own brand of encounter design) but there's usually a lot more enemies spread out more (or using cover when the fireballs fly) that require some movement and running combat.

I've had the same experience. Ive found the average combat lasts about 3 rounds give or take a round. And we generally get around 3 in between short rests. Sometimes 2.

[Fyndhal]

Still. I'll never forget the rogue in the 13A game stealing "The Enemy Leader's Authority". OR FORGIVE.

I did warn you.

And yeah, Malefice really did explain what I was talking about far more in depth and accurately than I had.

[Steampunkette]

*shakefist at Fyndhal* You will rue the day. RUE IT!

[Ashrym]

snip

The blade warlock letting hex drop for another spell isn't any different than an agonizing blaster letting hex drop for another spell. Another spell doesn't have to be a concentration spell. He also has the option of "encounter ending" spells and using sleep from your example, would cast a more powerful version of sleep more often than the wizard because it's in a higher level slot and can be done once or twice per short rest. Sleep is available to fey patron. Command is pretty good for fiend but fireball is also there and that's more likely to be taken for the defensive components, hurl through hell, and more temp hp opportunities early. Or any warlock can cast hypnotic pattern for their encounter ending ability.

The warlock doesn't need to be low on CON. For example, standard array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 and mountain dwarf is an option. +2 STR and +2 CON works for the subclass and we can go with STR 16, DEX 10, CON 15, INT 8, WIS 12, CHA 15 at 1st level. 5 ASI's / feats gives us heavy armor (already proficient in light) and polearm mastery. 1 ASI gos to CON and CHA for three 16's and CON can remain there. This gives us the option for 18 STR and 18 CHA or 20 STR and 16 CHA (what I would do with a dwarf). 16 CHA was a sacrifice for AC on the build but the choice to cast spells is a difference of DC 17 vs DC 19. If, for example, I choose to cast hypnotic pattern on 20 targets without save proficiencies (which is normal) and WIS 10 (for simplicity in the average) then the average is 16 targets who fail instead of 18 targets who fail. That's a minor concession for the melee ability and why the dwarf would still be as much a caster as an agonizing blaster, and the dwarf could cast that same spell 16 times in a day with short rests plus 4 arcana. A wizard could cast it 14 times in a day after having used arcane recovery if he still wants to keep 4 top level spell slots to match the arcana.

If the warlock uses hex twice in the day, they are reasonably similar with such an encounter ending spell. Hex is just casting a spell using a spell slot which is what spellcasters do. They are also similar in that the wizard has 2 at will spells from spell mastery (my favorite wizard feature, by far) while the blade warlock has a choice of several at will spells of higher levels than the wizard can select with spell mastery. Alter self, silent image, levitate, and arcane eye are nice options in that list. What has been termed a non-spell caster still has the option for true polymorph so from what I can see the similarities are pretty darn close enough to go with a full spell caster. Moreso than a war cleric, for example, who is in much of a similar situation but was also listed as a full caster simply based on a spell progression chart instead of what the mechanics between the 2 separate systems provide. Spellcasters have their own differences in their classes and warlocks fit the mold.

Regarding the lost actions for moving hex -- they only matter if hex is moved and can be made up by opportunity attacks. That would cost the agonizing blaster another feat and require close proximity.


For convenience, damage on the dwarf example. Sans hex or foresight and at 75% accuracy +2 polearm (d10):

5% crit*2 -- 2d10+5+3+2 = 2.1
5% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+3+2 = 0.75
70% norm*2 -- 1d10+5+3+2 = 21.7
70% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+3+2 = 8.75
damage = 33.3

Versus agonizing blast *4 with 75% accuracy using +2 rod of the pact keeper (adds accuracy and DC's, not damage)

5% crit*4 -- 2d10+5 = 3.2
70% norm*4 -- 1d10+5 = 29.4
damage = 32.6

And keeping on track, an eldritch knight with 75% accuracy using pole arm mastery and a +2 pole arm

5% crit*4 -- 2d10+5+2 = 3.6
5% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+2 = 0.6
70% norm*4 -- 1d10+5+2 = 35
70% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+2 = 6.65
damage = 45.85 (-1 attack below 20th level is 36.2)


So the warlock is still casting spells on par with other full casters (melee full casters like bards and cleric), still doing better damage than eldritch blasts, and the fighter isn't struggling but the earlier suggestion (don't recall by whom) to give blade pact warlocks a 3rd attack would shoot up to 45.2 and step on the fighter's toes significantly. This is just on a standard, non-optimized build trying to mix melee with a lot of offensive magical options.

Warlocks not being full casters is a myth. Weapons being subpar compared to eldritch blast is a myth. This is more of a system mastery issue more than a mechanics issue because a person needs to understand how to make the builds work to fit the image.

[Malifice]

The blade warlock letting hex drop for another spell isn't any different than an agonizing blaster letting hex drop for another spell. Another spell doesn't have to be a concentration spell.

For sure. But the melee Warlock relies on Hex to do comparable melee damage to other martials.

Without Hex up, he's a d8 HD, light armor wearing, MAD fighter without a fighting style, superiority dice, action surge or second wind, dealing half the damage of everyone else, with a lower AC and worse HP.


He also has the option of "encounter ending" spells and using sleep from your example, would cast a more powerful version of sleep more often than the wizard because it's in a higher level slot and can be done once or twice per short rest. Sleep is available to fey patron.

I'm aware of this. I'm also aware that Fey is totally sub-optimal for a blade-lock. Fiend (with hurl though hell, bonus temp HP on killing stuff) is far and away the better choice.

No-one is saying that Warlocks don't have access to flashy spells (including AoE'S). Its that due to a very limited selection, and only having the 1 spell slot left to divide among 2-3 encounters, those flashy big spells are rarely going to be available at the right time, and when they are available to be cast, may not be the one that you want (sleep v undead, fireball v fire resistant enemies etc).

Wizards don't generally have that problem during a normal adventuring day. They can pretty much guarantee they'll always have the right tool for the job, and are assumed to 'turn the tide' in around 3 encounters per 9 encounter day.

The Bladelock has it worse as he is investing a lions share of his spell casting into making himself melee capable. Not just with Hex, but also Hellish rebuke and Armor of agathys (both of which spike his DPR considerably, and make up for his lower melee DPR).


The warlock doesn't need to be low on CON. For example, standard array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 and mountain dwarf is an option. +2 STR and +2 CON works for the subclass and we can go with STR 16, DEX 10, CON 15, INT 8, WIS 12, CHA 15 at 1st level. 5 ASI's / feats gives us heavy armor (already proficient in light) and polearm mastery. 1 ASI gos to CON and CHA for three 16's and CON can remain there. This gives us the option for 18 STR and 18 CHA or 20 STR and 16 CHA (what I would do with a dwarf). 16 CHA was a sacrifice for AC on the build but the choice to cast spells is a difference of DC 17 vs DC 19.

No warcaster and not proficient in Con saves? You get a whopping +3 to your Con saves at 20th level (and +2 for much of your career). Good luck maintaining concentration in melee with that, while regularly getting walloped for 40 plus damage a hit.

With a +2-3 to Con saves, your concentration on Hex will be dropping like flies.


For convenience, damage on the dwarf example. Sans hex or foresight and at 75% accuracy +2 polearm (d10):

5% crit*2 -- 2d10+5+3+2 = 2.1
5% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+3+2 = 0.75
70% norm*2 -- 1d10+5+3+2 = 21.7
70% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+3+2 = 8.75
damage = 33.3



With a 20th level melee focused character packing a polearm with Str 20 and a 75 percent chance of a hit, that's simply awful DPR. A 1/2 orc Champion S+B dueling fighter with the same Str outdoes that DPR by a considerable margin, while having a Con of 20, 30 percent more HP, and a much better AC.


And keeping on track, an eldritch knight with 75% accuracy using pole arm mastery and a +2 pole arm

5% crit*4 -- 2d10+5+2 = 3.6
5% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+2 = 0.6
70% norm*4 -- 1d10+5+2 = 35
70% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+2 = 6.65
damage = 45.85 (-1 attack below 20th level is 36.2)

These numbers are wrong. He uses GWS and not Dueling. Also: Factor in action surge 2/short rest and Haste into those numbers.

Just with Action surge the DPR over the 10 round period between short rests increases by an additional (20 percent of 45.85) or around 10 DPR. Bringing the EK up to 55 DPR. Haste brings it up to around 65 DPR. Haste is much more likely to stay up to thanks to warcaster, proficiency in Con saves and a decent Con.

Feel free to factor in Hex into your Warlocks DPR above. By my maths, he's still around the 40 mark, and it'll be dropping every other round when he gets hit.

[Ashrym]

I left hex out because it would be dropping on the build and not be using concentration, which makes concentration irrelevant.

The example I gave has AC 18 and +3 hp per level from CON bonus. He's fairly sturdy going with fiend patron that way.

D'oh on the fighting style. I forgot to add in the fighting style bonus. Multiple the damage by 7/6 based on 36 rounds in a day with 2 short rests for an easy coefficient that averages in the spike damage from action surges.

5% crit*4 -- 2d10+5+2 = 3.92 *7/6 action surge coefficient = 4.57
5% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+2 = 0.7
70% norm*4 -- 1d10+5+2 = 37.24 *7/6 action surge coefficient = 43.45
70% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+2 = 7.35
damage = 56.07 (-1 attack below 20th level is 44.065)

Without the action surge it's 49.21 and 38.9425 respectively. The point was the fighter is ahead of the blade warlock but adding that extra attack makes it too close because the fighter isn't ahead any longer until getting his 4th attack. This is still true adding in action surge and great weapon fighting style. Avg damage on 1d10 is 6.3 instead of 5.5 using great weapon fighting style if you want to run it yourself and confirm the math.

[MrStabby]

Hex dropping is a really big deal. Each time it drops and you put it back up you lose your bonus action to it - which is usually meaning dropping an attack. In addition you get so few sell slots that a bladelock basically cannot cast any other (non arcana) spells if they want to reliably have hex available.

Warlock casting is certainly weaker than some people here realise. They don't give enough weight to not having control over how to ration spell slots. Being a Wizard you have the option to not use spell slots or to use them lightly in the early part of the day to save them for later, potentially more risky encounters. Warlocks have to use their spare spell slot each short rest or lose it.

All the other full casters can prepare effectively for the biggest and most dangerous fights by taking a long rest. A warlock can never go into an encounter with anything like an equivalent level of power - I find these encounters are pretty uncommon, I would only burn more than 3 high level spells in an encounter once every three to four sessions but being relatively ineffective in the most important and challenging encounters is a big class weakness.

This is why it makes no sense to just assume a number of short rests per day and then add up spell slots. It matters more what you can do with spells than how many levels you have; after all if that was all you wanted then casting disguise self at will alone makes the warlock the most powerful caster EVAR.

[Malifice]

I left hex out because it would be dropping on the build and not be using concentration, which makes concentration irrelevant.

The example I gave has AC 18 and +3 hp per level from CON bonus. He's fairly sturdy going with fiend patron that way.

D'oh on the fighting style. I forgot to add in the fighting style bonus. Multiple the damage by 7/6 based on 36 rounds in a day with 2 short rests for an easy coefficient that averages in the spike damage from action surges.

5% crit*4 -- 2d10+5+2 = 3.92 *7/6 action surge coefficient = 4.57
5% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+2 = 0.7
70% norm*4 -- 1d10+5+2 = 37.24 *7/6 action surge coefficient = 43.45
70% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+2 = 7.35
damage = 56.07 (-1 attack below 20th level is 44.065)

Without the action surge it's 49.21 and 38.9425 respectively. The point was the fighter is ahead of the blade warlock but adding that extra attack makes it too close because the fighter isn't ahead any longer until getting his 4th attack. This is still true adding in action surge and great weapon fighting style. Avg damage on 1d10 is 6.3 instead of 5.5 using great weapon fighting style if you want to run it yourself and confirm the math.

At 20th level, with just 2 short rests per day, and 30 rounds of encointers (a long day) the fighter gets his DPR multiplied by 36/30 - that's a 6/5 split.

It's a 20 percent increase, even in a 3 encounter per rest, 9 encounter day.

[Steampunkette]

Honestly, I feel like the Eldritch Knight is a bad comparison for the Warlock when it comes to damage. He is the worst fighter for melee damage dealing and the best fighter for survivability.

Well. More or less. His focus on Abjuration gives him access to some pretty useful defensive self-buffing that increase his relative tankiness over the other fighter subclasses. And while he's got some evocation abilities they're not terribly powerful at being casters outside of the abjuring. (Except for Fireball)

But even with that in mind an Eldritch Knight is going to be a flat out all around better melee character than the Bladelock. Better armor, better hp, better concentration, less loss on failed concentration...

Stoneskin, Protection from Energy, Protection from Evil, freaking SHIELD and Counterspell... And if they've got a little time to set up Magic Circle gives them all the bonuses of Protection from evil without any concentration while keeping enemies away from the party on the other side of it.

So, yeah. I'm thinking that trying to compare their melee damage values exclusively is probably a bad idea. Even moreso since the Fighter can, twice per day, throw out 8d6 in a 20ft radius and 6 dueling rapier strikes in 6 seconds with a persistent +2 bonus to AC, doubled movement rate, and advantage to saving throws. And do it with 9d6, once.

Only takes 1 round of preparation and they can action surge twice per short rest, after all.

(Action Surge for 4 attacks, Fireball (at 3rd and 4th level respectively), War Magic Bonus action attack, Haste attack)

After they've used up their level 3 and 4 spell slots, though, they'll have to settle on action surging for only 5 attacks and 3 scorching rays but that's only if they wanna hit people a ways off or hit people with fire damage because they're resistant to death by sword or particularly vulnerable to fire...

Put that in your DPR. Maybe include multiple targets hit by the fireball, since players generally cast it toward groups of 3 or more enemies rather than a single target. A Warlock can't use melee attacks and cast spells in the same round. Can't even use Haste once per day. And they can't benefit from the EK's survivability increasing talents, either. Well. Unless they take 7 levels of EK for Eldritch Blasting and two melee swings (Haste and Bonus).

[Ashrym]

At 20th level, with just 2 short rests per day, and 30 rounds of encointers (a long day) the fighter gets his DPR multiplied by 36/30 - that's a 6/5 split.

It's a 20 percent increase, even in a 3 encounter per rest, 9 encounter day.

Yes, and at 36 instead of 30 is 7/6 like I said. 8 encounters of 5 rounds each would be 40 rounds. 36 rounds is reasonable based on an average day for high levels and simply stating a lower number without a reason for the lower number is meaningless.

[Malifice]

Yes, and at 36 instead of 30 is 7/6 like I said. 8 encounters of 5 rounds each would be 40 rounds. 36 rounds is reasonable based on an average day for high levels and simply stating a lower number without a reason for the lower number is meaningless.

When you look at the DPR of your 4 man party, it indicates that encounters average a lot shorter than 5 rounds. 3 Is probably the average.

That bears out in my personal experience too.

[DivisibleByZero]

In my experience the average encounter lasts between 5-8 rounds, depending on the number of weaker creatures involved.

[Ashrym]

When you look at the DPR of your 4 man party, it indicates that encounters average a lot shorter than 5 rounds. 3 Is probably the average.

That bears out in my personal experience too.

3 is either an arbitrary number you're assigning or subjective anecdotal information.

You can use 6/5 as a coefficient if you prefer and see the small increase over 7/6 and it still won't make a significant difference at 1/30 more damage through the day.

You are nitpicking small points that do not disprove my assertion.

In my experience, however, 5 rounds average.

[squab]

Can I just say that, as fascinated as I am by theory crafting, I really feel that actually game experience is far more relevant that what classes are capable of doing in theory land.

[DivisibleByZero]

Can I just say that, as fascinated as I am by theory crafting, I really feel that actually game experience is far more relevant that what classes are capable of doing in theory land.

I absolutely agree, which is why I've been arguing that the Bladelock is perfectly fine.
In play, you just need to understand the forced casting progression that you're on. If you overdo it, you're left feeling that his resources are too thin, but that's because you keep blowing your load, and that's your own fault. If you understand that you need to balance melee and ranged and spending slots, then it works very well.

[Steampunkette]

I also agree that in play they don't work out like they do on paper.

Which is why they come out weaker than other options within the same tree. Even though they 'math out' as full casters with almost fighter melee damage using your metrics.

[DivisibleByZero]

I just posted this in a different thread, and thought I'd share.


Bladelocks are nowhere near as terrible as you make them out to be. As a matter of fact, it is hands down the strongest Pact choice, by a wide margin.


Chainlocks have a fantastic familiar. This can be useful for scouting, and RP, and all sorts of different out of combat situations.
Familiars in combat are going to be extremely DM dependent. I have heard many people claim that an invisible familiar can Help an ally to grant advantage on attack rolls, by saying mean things and poking enemies in the butt (that's a quote, not me being obtuse). If your DM would allow this, then go for it, but don't count on it. If your DM doesn't allow invisible cretures slinging insults to grant advantage then your familiar is going to get killed if he's in melee range. Very quickly. And very frequently.
Pact of the Chain makes you a regular blaster warlock that has some extra out of combat utility due to an amazing familiar.

Tomelocks can have a couple extra cantrips and great ritual casting.
Their extra cantrips are basically useless in combat, because Eldritch Blast will almost undoubtedly be better. So their extra cantrip choices are useful for out of combat situations. They have amazing ritual casting, but rituals are not used in combat as they take too long, so those are also useful for out of combat situations.
So Pact of the Tome makes you a regular blaster warlock that has some extra out of combat utility in the form of extra cantrips and lots of rituals.

While the other two Pacts focus more on out of combat utility via various means, the Bladelock is a bit different. The Bladelock focuses on adding more combat options, by granting proficiency in any melee weapon you want when you manifest your pact blade, and offering ways to improve your melee aptitude.
So Pact of the Blade makes you a regular blaster warlock that has a viable melee option in combat, which is something that you cannot get from another Pact.

Tthe Ritual Caster feat gives both wizard rituals (a big part of the Tomelock's schtick) and a familiar (a big part of the Chainlock's schtick). So if he wants to, with a single feat a Bladelock can gain a large portion of the other two Pacts' benefits while retaining his own. So not only does a Bladelock have something that the other Pacts cannot get in the form of reliable and competitive melee damage, but he can also get a large portion of their tricks as well.

So for a combat oriented warlock, there is really only one option, and that option is Pact of the Blade.


I have heard many people complain that Bladelocks require more invocations than other types of warlocks. This is simply untrue.

If you choose Pact of the Tome, you are useless without taking Book of Ancient Secrets (available at level three).
That's an invocation tax.

If you choose Pact of the Chain, but do not take Voice of the Chain Master (available at level three), you would literally be better off using Pact of the Tome or the Ritual Caster feat to get your familiar. Not only that, but Chains of Carceri (available at level 15) is free, slotless CC against many outsiders, and you'd be a fool not to take it unless you know for certain that these enemies will not be prevalent in the campaign.
That's two invocation taxes.

If you choose Pact of the Blade, you will take Thirsting Blade (available at level five) and Lifedrinker (available at level 12) to keep your melee damage up to par.
That's two invocation taxes.

So the Chainlock and the Bladelock each have two invocation taxes, while the Tomelock has one.
Not much difference there at all.

Every single warlock that wants to focus on dealing damage will take Agonizing Blast. There's one invocation spoken for right away, for every warlock, no matter your Pact choice, likely right at level two. People like to claim that Bladelocks won't have the same EB that another warlock has, but let me ask you, what are you spending your invocations on prior to level five? Agonizing Blast is one of them.
Every single warlock that wants to offer a little at-will CC will take Repelling Blast. Tomelocks and Chainlocks will likely take this to keep enemies away, while the Bladelock may not because he doesn't mind being in melee.

This means we probably have three invocations spoken for already for the Tomelock: Book of Ancient Secrets, Agonizing Blast, and Repelling Blast.
This means we probably have four invocations spoken for already for the Chainlock: Voice of the Chain Master, Chains of Carceri, Agonizing Blast, and Repelling Blast.
This means we probably have three invocations spoken for already for the Bladelock: Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, and Agonizing Blast. Without Repelling, he has three invocation taxes, just like the Tomelock. If he wants, he can take Repelling, bringing the total to four just like the probable Chainlock build.

So tell me, why does everyone think that Bladelocks have some harsh invocation tax? They have no more of an invocation tax than any other warlock has. Saying that they do is simply untrue.


As I have already shown, Bladelocks will have just as good of an EB as any other warlock. They don't suddenly lose the ability to choose EB as a cantrip and its accompanying invocations by taking this Pact, although that's what some people would have you believe.
They may take a little bit longer to get their Charisma to max 20, but that's almost a non-issue in actual play. In actual play, a + or - 1 for a few levels isn't going to ruin your character like some would have you believe.

So let's look at some comparisons, shall we?
We'll make the Chainlock and Tomelock (hereafter named Blastlocks) start with a 16 Cha, raising it at levels 4 and 8, to 18 and 20 respectively.
The Bladelock will begin with a 16 in both Dex and Cha, raising Dex at levels 4 and 12, and Cha at levels 8 and 16. This will leave the Bladelock with a Cha score two points lower than the Blastlock's for a couple of levels here and there.
Zero feats, zero fighting styles, zero house rules, just straight up comparisons that literally any warlock in any game can reasonably expect.
We'll assign +1 weapons at levels 3 and 8 (I was going to do 3 and 6, but that left only the Bladelock at that level, so I postponed it for ease of use), +2 weapons at levels 8 and 11, and +3 weapons at levels 13 and 16. Remember, you only need to find a single finesse weapon. The other weapon can literally be anything, as your Pact allows you to create the weapon in any form you choose.
Blastlocks have no way to increase their EB's damage (only attack and save DCs), so we'll just give them a magical rod to aid in attack rolls at levels 3, 8, and 13.
The levels chosen for the magic items (3, 8, 13 for main, and 8, 11, 16 for off hand) are a bit arbitrary, but seem reasonable.
I will not give the Bladelock a magic rod, so his EB will be at a lower attack bonus. Although swapping weapons was described by the designers as something that should simply be able to happen, which means any time he wanted to swap he should be able to without a problem. But I'll be nice and simply not give him one.

Level 1 Blastlock and Bladelock EB: hex, 16 CHA, +5 vs AC 15
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6 damage = 0.85
55% normal chance for 1d10+1d6 damage = 4.95
Damage = 5.8

Level 1 Bladelock TWF: 2 reg sSwords, hex, 16 DEX, +5 vs AC 15
5% crit chance for 4d6+3 damage = 0.85
5% crit chance for 4d6 damage = 0.7
55% normal chance for 2d6+3 damage = 5.5
55% normal chance for 2d6 damage = 3.85
Damage = 10.9 / 6.35 without bonus action

TWF Bladelock is the clear winner at level 1, even without the use of his bonus action.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 2 Blastlock and Bladelock EB: hex, 16 CHA, +5 vs AC 15
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+3 damage = 1
55% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+3 damage = 6.6
Damage = 7.6

Bladelock TWF remains at 10.9 / 6.35 without bonus action

TWF Bladelock is still the clear winner with his bonus action, and is only 1 pt behind without it.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 3 Blastlock EB: +1 rod, hex, 16 CHA, +6 vs AC 15
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+3 damage = 1
60% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+3 damage = 7.2
Damage = 8.2

Level 3 Bladelock TWF: +1 pact sSword, reg sSword, hex, 16 DEX, +6 and +5 vs AC 15
5% crit chance for 4d6+4 damage = 0.9
5% crit chance for 4d6 damage = 0.7
60% normal chance for 2d6+4 damage = 6.6
55% normal chance for 2d6 damage = 3.85
Damage = 12.05 / 7.5 without bonus action

Bladelock EB remains at 7.6

TWF Bladelock is 4 pts ahead with his bonus action, and less than 1 pt behind without it.
Bladelock's EB is only 1 pt behind the Blastlock's.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 4 Blastlock EB: +1 rod, 18 CHA, +7 vs AC 15
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+4 damage = 1.05
65% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+4 damage = 8.45
Damage = 9.5

Level 4 Bladelock TWF: +1 pact sSword, reg sSword, hex, 18 DEX, +7 and +6 vs AC 15
5% crit chance for 4d6+5 damage = 0.95
5% crit chance for 4d6 damage = 0.7
65% normal chance for 2d6+5 damage = 7.8
60% normal chance for 2d6 damage = 4.2
Damage = 13.65 / 8.75 without bonus action

Bladelock EB remains at 7.6

TWF Bladelock is 4 pts ahead with his bonus action, and is only 1 pt behind without it.
Bladelock's EB is only 2 pts behind the Blastlock's.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 5 Blastlock EB: 2nd blast: +1 rod, hex, 18 CHA, +8 vs AC 16
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+4 damage = 1.05(*2) = 2.1
65% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+4 damage = 8.45(*2) = 16.9
Damage = 19

Level 5 Bladelock TWF: extra attack: +1 pact sSword, reg sSword, hex, 18 DEX, +8 and +7 vs AC 16
5% crit chance for 4d6+5 damage = 0.95(*2) = 1.9
5% crit chance for 4d6 damage = 0.7
65% normal chance for 2d6+5 damage = 7.2(*2) = 14.4
60% normal chance for 2d6 damage = 4.2
Damage = 21.2 / 16.3 without bonus action

Level 5 Bladelock EB: 2nd blast: hex, 16 CHA, +6 vs AC 16
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+3 damage = 1(*2) = 2
55% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+3 damage = 6.6(*2) = 13.2
Damage = 15.2

TWF Bladelock is 2 pts ahead with his bonus action, and is 3 pts behind without it.
Bladelock's EB is 4 pts behind the Blastlock's.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 8 Blastlock EB: +2 rod, hex, 20 CHA, +10 vs AC 16
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(2) = 2.2
75% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 10.5(*2) = 21
Damage = 23.2

Level 8 Bladelock TWF: +2 pact sSword, +1 sSword, hex, 18 DEX, +9 and +8 vs AC 16
5% crit chance for 4d6+6 damage = 1(*2) = 2
5% crit chance for 4d6+1 damage = 0.75
70% normal chance for 2d6+6 damage = 9.1(*2) = 18.2
65% normal chance for 2d6+1 damage = 5.2
Damage = 26.15 / 20.2 without bonus action

Level 8 Bladelock EB: hex, 18 CHA, +7 vs AC 16
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+4 damage = 1.05(*2) = 2.1
60% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+4 damage = 7.8(*2) = 15.6
Damage = 17.7

TWF Bladelock is 3 pts ahead with his bonus action, and is 3 pts behind without it.
Bladelock's EB is 3 pts behind the Blastlock's.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 11 Blastlock EB: 3rd blast, +2 rod, hex, 20 CHA, +11 vs AC 17
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(*3) = 3.3
75% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 10.5(*3) = 31.5
Damage = 34.8

Level 11 Bladelock TWF: +2 pact sSword, +2 sSword, hex, 18 DEX, +10 vs AC 17
5% crit chance for 4d6+6 damage = 1(*2) = 2
5% crit chance for 4d6+2 damage = 0.8
70% normal chance for 2d6+6 damage = 9.1(*2) = 18.2
70% normal chance for 2d6+2 damage = 6.3
Damage = 27.3 / 20.2 without bonus action

Level 11 Blastlock EB: 3rd blast, hex, 18 CHA, +8 vs AC 17
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(*3) = 3.3
60% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 8.4(*3) = 25.2
Damage = 28.5

Level 12 Bladelock TWF: +2 pact sSword, +2 sSword, hex, 20 DEX, 18 CHA, +11 vs AC 17
5% crit chance for 4d6+11 damage = 1.25(*2) = 2.5
5% crit chance for 4d6+2 damage = 0.8
75% normal chance for 2d6+11 damage = 13.5(*2) = 27
75% normal chance for 2d6+2 damage = 6.75
Damage = 37.05 / 29.5 without bonus action

At level 11 the Blastlock pulls ahead with his third blast, and at level 12 the Bladelock catches up again with Lifedrinker. I grouped all of these together.
TWF Bladelock is 2 pts ahead with his bonus action, and is 5 pts behind without it.
Bladelock's EB is 6 pts behind the Blastlock's.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 13 Blastlock EB: +3 rod, hex, 20 CHA, +13 vs AC 17
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(*3) = 3.3
85% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 11.9(*3) = 35.7
Damage = 39

Level 13 Bladelock TWF: +3 pact sSword, +2 sSword, hex, 20 DEX, 18 CHA, +13 and +12 vs AC 17
5% crit chance for 4d6+12 damage = 1.3(*2) = 2.6
5% crit chance for 4d6+2 damage = 0.8
85% normal chance for 2d6+12 damage = 16.15(*2) = 32.3
80% normal chance for 2d6+2 damage = 7.2
Damage = 42.9 / 34.9 without bonus action

Bladelock EB remains at 28.5

TWF Bladelock is 3 pts ahead with his bonus action, and is 4 pts behind without it.
Bladelock's EB is 10 pts behind the Blastlock's.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 16 Blastlock EB: +3 rod, hex, 20 CHA, +13 vs AC 18
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(*3) = 3.3
80% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 11.2(*3) = 33.6
Damage = 36.9

Level 16 Bladelock TWF: +3 pact sSword, +3 sSword, hex, 20 DEX, 20 CHA, +13 vs AC 18
5% crit chance for 4d6+13 damage = 1.35(*2) = 2.7
5% crit chance for 4d6+3 damage = 0.85
80% normal chance for 2d6+13 damage = 16(*2) = 32
80% normal chance for 2d6+3 damage = 8
Damage = 43.55 / 34.7 without bonus action

Level 16 Bladelock EB: hex, 20 CHA, +10 vs AC 18
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(*3) = 3.3
65% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 9.1(*3) = 27.3
Damage = 30.6

TWF Bladelock is 7 pts ahead with his bonus action, and is 2 pts behind without it.
Bladelock's EB is 7 pts behind the Blastlock's.

************************************************** ***************************

Level 17 Blastlock EB: 4th blast, +3 rod, hex, 20 CHA, +14 vs AC 19
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(*4) = 4.4
80% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 11.2(*4) = 44.8
Damage = 49.2

Bladelock TWF remains at 43.55 / 34.7 without bonus action

Level 17 Bladelock EB: 4th blast, hex, 20 CHA, +11 vs AC 19
5% crit chance for 2d10+2d6+5 damage = 1.1(*4) = 4.4
65% normal chance for 1d10+1d6+5 damage = 9.1(*4) = 36.4
Damage = 40.8

And at level 17 the TWF Bladelock finally falls behind, by 5 pts with his bonus action, and by a significant 14 pts behind without it. Most campaigns don't even go this far, so it is very possible that you may never see a time when your Bladelock's melee damage falls behind that of a Blastlock's EB.
Bladelock's EB is 8 pts behind the Blastlock's.

As you can see, the Bladelock's melee damage stays competitive with, or better than, the Blastlock's EB all the way through level 16. At level 17, the Blastlock pulls ahead by about 5 points.
And this entire time, the Bladelock still has a good EB himself if he wants or needs it.
And remember, I didn't give the Bladelock a magic rod. If he also has one, like the Blastlock, his EB is slightly lower between levels 4-15 due to -1 to hit comparatively because of a slightly lower Cha during those levels. But that -1 to hit doesn't change things very much. Beyond that, at levels 1-3 and 16+ he would have an identical EB to the Blastlock if he also had a rod, and will only be a tiny bit behind (by a couple of points at most) during levels 4-15.

So, in summary:
No, Bladelocks do not have any crazy invocation tax.
No, Bladelocks do not suffer from damage issues.
What Bladelocks do is offer you a second combat option in melee, and that option is fully functional and viable.
The Bladelock can spend a feat to get many of the same goodies as warlocks with other Pacts, while getting something that the Other Pacts have no way to get in a melee option that rivals a Fighter through 19 levels of play.
Why some of you think this is an inferior Pact is beyond me. It is hands down the most powerful Pact available.

[MrStabby]

I have to say that in my experience combats generally last 2 rounds for about half combats, three rounds for most of the rest. Only really big battles, or really tough opponents last more than three rounds.

Admittedly this may come from a rather damaged focussed party - (barbarian, fighter, paladin and warlock) but regularly going 5 rounds in a combat doesn't seem likely with a balanced party that knows what its doing. Possibly if your game gets to very high levels you might get a few that go in a bit longer but not enough to worry about.

Action surge is a fantastic ability and well worth looking at if you want to chose between warlock and fighter. Like the warlock spell slots it gives a powerful burst of power once per short rest (warlock can do it twice but will typically use one spell slot for Hex, so only one till level 11).

[Drizztguen]

I'm interested to hear everyone's opinion on this topic now that the new Hexblade patron has been released in unearthed arcana. There are some significant improvements for a bladelock but do they tip the scales?