Bladelock is good because...?

[JellyPooga]

OK, I'm pretty sure I'm missing something. I've done a quick search for threads on Bladelocks and whilst they all talk about how to build a good one, I'm not particularly seeing the appeal of them from a game-mechanic point of view.

Could someone enlighten me as to what makes a Bladelock good over, say, an Eldritch Knight or melee-focused Wizard (or any other Class/Build, for that matter)?

[rollingForInit]

OK, I'm pretty sure I'm missing something. I've done a quick search for threads on Bladelocks and whilst they all talk about how to build a good one, I'm not particularly seeing the appeal of them from a game-mechanic point of view.

Could someone enlighten me as to what makes a Bladelock good over, say, an Eldritch Knight or melee-focused Wizard (or any other Class/Build, for that matter)?

They get a lot of Invocations, spells that recharge on short rests. They'll never lose their weapon. They can take Agonizing Blast to be very efficient in both ranged and melee combat.

They synergise really well multiclassed with Paladins, because of how Smite synergises with a large amount of spell slots.

[JellyPooga]

...to be very efficient in both ranged and melee combat.

I get the rest of it; the invocations, plenty of spell slots that can be used for Smite and so forth, but as a standalone, I'm not seeing them as being all that efficient in melee (i.e. the whole "blade" bit of Bladelock) and at range, they're as good as any other Warlock.

Ok, so they can take an Invocation for Extra Attack and at higher levels they can add Cha to damage, but let's face it; 3d6+Str+Cha per hit (assuming Hex is active and using, say, a Greatsword) still isn't that great and that's about the best they're going to get. A level 12 Rogue is hitting for 7d6+Dex in melee or at range (assuming a 1d6 weapon), without making a single decision. The Bladelock, by comparison, has "spent" 2 Invocations and a Spell to get roughly comparable damage.

As I say; I think I must be missing something because it just doesn't look that impressive. Not impressive enough to center an entire character build around, at any rate.

[Z3ro]

I get the rest of it; the invocations, plenty of spell slots that can be used for Smite and so forth, but as a standalone, I'm not seeing them as being all that efficient in melee (i.e. the whole "blade" bit of Bladelock) and at range, they're as good as any other Warlock.

Ok, so they can take an Invocation for Extra Attack and at higher levels they can add Cha to damage, but let's face it; 3d6+Str+Cha per hit (assuming Hex is active and using, say, a Greatsword) still isn't that great and that's about the best they're going to get. A level 12 Rogue is hitting for 7d6+Dex in melee or at range (assuming a 1d6 weapon), without making a single decision. The Bladelock, by comparison, has "spent" 2 Invocations and a Spell to get roughly comparable damage.

As I say; I think I must be missing something because it just doesn't look that impressive. Not impressive enough to center an entire character build around, at any rate.

My impression has always been that, as a stand-alone, bladelock is really meant to be the "all in" combat option. Your blade is probably less effective than your blast, but you're still blasting most of the time. The blade is for when you're forced into melee range. It's just a back up.

There is one exception; if you find an exceptional magic weapon. The nice thing about bladelock is it makes you proficient with all weapons, which means you can use anything. And something like, say, Hazirawn from Horde of the Dragon Queen, and you significantly up your DPR.

[Strill]

My impression has always been that, as a stand-alone, bladelock is really meant to be the "all in" combat option. Your blade is probably less effective than your blast, but you're still blasting most of the time. The blade is for when you're forced into melee range. It's just a back up.
Then I'd say Bladelock is a terribly designed class. You're giving up a lot just for this "backup" option. You could have a permanently invisible familiar, or access to any ritual spell.

[DivisibleByZero]

Could someone enlighten me as to what makes a Bladelock good over, say, an Eldritch Knight or melee-focused Wizard (or any other Class/Build, for that matter)?

Whether or not a Bladelock is better or worse than anything else in the game is purely subjective.
However, I can tell you what I believe makes a Bladelock the best choice for a warlock.




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.

[Waazraath]

I wouldn't play a bladelock singleclass, but with a dip of even 1 level fighter, I think it can be a very nice build; the fact that it has both hex and another stat to damage, makes it very attractive with a build that had more attacks (that is, polearm master) - 3 or 4 attacks per round +str + cha + 1d6 (hex) is already a lot nicer. Besides, the warlock has very nice spells for a melee fighter (armor of agathys, mirror image, foresight), can get nice combat bonusses from fiend patron (temporary hitpoints, hurl through hell), and depending on invocations chosen and patron (fiend isn't mandatory) can also get a decent amount of utility / out of combat stuff. All together, more then nice enough.

Compared with eldritch knight: less 'fighty' (though not neccesarily less damage), but more and better spells and utility, compared with a combat wizard: much more fighty.

[rollingForInit]

I get the rest of it; the invocations, plenty of spell slots that can be used for Smite and so forth, but as a standalone, I'm not seeing them as being all that efficient in melee (i.e. the whole "blade" bit of Bladelock) and at range, they're as good as any other Warlock.

Ok, so they can take an Invocation for Extra Attack and at higher levels they can add Cha to damage, but let's face it; 3d6+Str+Cha per hit (assuming Hex is active and using, say, a Greatsword) still isn't that great and that's about the best they're going to get. A level 12 Rogue is hitting for 7d6+Dex in melee or at range (assuming a 1d6 weapon), without making a single decision. The Bladelock, by comparison, has "spent" 2 Invocations and a Spell to get roughly comparable damage.

As I say; I think I must be missing something because it just doesn't look that impressive. Not impressive enough to center an entire character build around, at any rate.

No, they aren't as good at hitting in melee as a fighter, but they are decent. In addition to that, they can cast spells like Mirror Image for defense and Fireball for offense. And they have full caster progression in terms of spell levels, which is much, much better than an Eldritch Knight.

[DivisibleByZero]

As I say; I think I must be missing something because it just doesn't look that impressive. Not impressive enough to center an entire character build around, at any rate.

You seem to be forgetting something extremely important.
Yes, he needs to spend resources (invocations, spell slots, etc) to get there, but he does, indeed, get there.
While this is true, the part you seem to be forgetting is that he's doing it as a full caster, with 9th level magic available.
The power of a full caster, with a melee option which rivals that of any other melee character in the game, excluding ONLY a 20th level fighter.

[Sigreid]

The beauty of the blade lock is that he's never out of options in combat. There are a few (very few) critters in the MM that are completely immune to magic or like the Rashaka or however it's spelled that is immune to magic below a certain level. Against those opponents most spellcasters are kind of screwed where the blade lock summons his pact weapon and sneers "Bring it B...".

Beyond that, if you multiclass with EK, you can hit something with your pact weapon and blast with EB in the same round for some spectacular arcane warrior awesomeness.

[MaxWilson]

Ok, so they can take an Invocation for Extra Attack and at higher levels they can add Cha to damage, but let's face it; 3d6+Str+Cha per hit (assuming Hex is active and using, say, a Greatsword) still isn't that great and that's about the best they're going to get. A level 12 Rogue is hitting for 7d6+Dex in melee or at range (assuming a 1d6 weapon), without making a single decision. The Bladelock, by comparison, has "spent" 2 Invocations and a Spell to get roughly comparable damage.

As I say; I think I must be missing something because it just doesn't look that impressive. Not impressive enough to center an entire character build around, at any rate.

The "best they can get" requires Polearm Master. d10+d6+CHA+STR on four attacks per round isn't bad for a full caster. The equivalent fighter would be getting five or six attacks per round, but only does d10+STR on each hit (unless GWM applies).

The Bladelock could be doing 76 points of damage per round if all attacks hit and if the Hexed target eats all four attacks. (Kind of unlikely actually.) The Rogue will be doing 29-ish.

Plus there is Armor of Agathys V, which incidentally is great for paladin/warlocks because of Find Steed.

I personally don't find Bladelocks exciting compared to fighters, but hopefully that answers your question.


The beauty of the blade lock is that he's never out of options in combat. There are a few (very few) critters in the MM that are completely immune to magic or like the Rashaka or however it's spelled that is immune to magic below a certain level. Against those opponents most spellcasters are kind of screwed where the blade lock summons his pact weapon and sneers "Bring it B...".

Beyond that, if you multiclass with EK, you can hit something with your pact weapon and blast with EB in the same round for some spectacular arcane warrior awesomeness.

Wizards are never out of options either. Against a Rakshasa you cast Conjure Elemental to get a fire elemental and then attack it with that.

(Or if you're good-aligned, even just plain Magic Weapon on a longbow and then plink away from long range, doing double damage on a hit due to its vulnerability to piercing from good creatures.)

Fire Elementals won't help against Tiamat at full power of course, but then neither will the bladelock's puny little weapon.

[Tenmujiin]

Bladelock is probably my favourite sub-class mostly because it is the closest you can get to a character that equally uses martial and magical combat with a single classed charcter

[Kryx]

Here are the numbers on a bladelock vs a fighter: DPR of Classes (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=571220328). First tab shows without -5/+10 feats and the last with them. On both the Bladelock is middle ground until 17+ where he becomes amazing. Though he invests every feat and ASI into this.

Blastlock is much higher than I have him there - took down his DPR in favor of more versatility in spells, but you can ignore that for the Fighter vs Bladelock comparison. (Did it because a full caster beating martial archers is lame).

[Giant2005]

Could someone enlighten me as to what makes a Bladelock good over, say, an Eldritch Knight or melee-focused Wizard (or any other Class/Build, for that matter)?

The Paladin is a better comparison as their melee capabilities are basically identical: Divine Smite = Hellish Rebuke, Divinve Smite = Lifedrinker. The Warlock is actually probably better in melee by virtue of having better spells at his disposal (Armor of Agathys, Hex).
Once you make that comparison, it is pretty hard to criticize the Bladelock, considering that the Paladin is regarded as one of the most competent classes in the game.

[MaxWilson]

The Paladin is a better comparison as their melee capabilities are basically identical: Divine Smite = Hellish Rebuke, Divinve Smite = Lifedrinker. The Warlock is actually probably better in melee by virtue of having better spells at his disposal (Armor of Agathys, Hex).

Hex is actually a pretty terrible spell in the concentration economy. I mean, it's great for a 1st level spell with a long duration, but the opportunity cost is high. Hitting for d10+d6+5=14 damage isn't bad (add another +5 if you've got Lifedrinker and maxed Str and Cha), but e.g. a bardlock with Repelling Blast can do d10+5+4d4=20.5 points of damage by smearing enemies across the cheese grater that is Spike Growth. And if you know Wall of Fire or Cloudkill that can be d10+5+5d8=33 points of damage.

The paladins I see take a few levels in wild sorc and are perfectly happy to have AC 28, or AC 26 with defensive Blur, instead of an extra +1d6 to damage from Hex.

[Giant2005]

Hex is actually a pretty terrible spell in the concentration economy. I mean, it's great for a 1st level spell with a long duration, but the opportunity cost is high. Hitting for d10+d6+5=14 damage isn't bad (add another +5 if you've got Lifedrinker and maxed Str and Cha), but e.g. a bardlock with Repelling Blast can do d10+5+4d4=20.5 points of damage by smearing enemies across the cheese grater that is Spike Growth. And if you know Wall of Fire or Cloudkill that can be d10+5+5d8=33 points of damage.

The paladins I see take a few levels in wild sorc and are perfectly happy to have AC 28, or AC 26 with defensive Blur, instead of an extra +1d6 to damage from Hex.

I agree with your assessment of Hex - Darkness is a far superior spell to cast depending on what you are doing (Not so much if you are using Armor of Agathys and actually want to be hit).

[Corey]

The Bladelock has:

2 attacks, eventually with CHA bonus.
A few invocations other than those used for melee attacks.
Patron features, which are sort of like invocations themselves.
Spells, which fall far short of the "full caster" standard at most levels in most campaigns, but also are far from trivial.


Counting the invocations for the Pact as reducing flexibility is wrong; they're just part of the choice.

Counting Hex as reducing flexibility is correct, however; you don't get Hex AND the benefits of being a caster who can cast Fly or whatever, at least not in the same fight.

And by the way, if you're in melee with low AC, I think you'd take more hits that force concentration-check saves on you than other casters commonly do.

[DivisibleByZero]

Spells, which fall far short of the "full caster" standard at most levels in most campaigns, but also are far from trivial.

Two or three short rests per day are recommended.
So take the Warlock's spell slots, determine how many spell points those slots are worth at that level, and multiply by 3.5 (one from start, one from each rest [2.5] = 3.5).
That gives you a virtual Spell Point total.
Now compare that to the Spell Points by Level chart.

Warlocks are full casters.
They are just full casters that can ONLY create slots of the highest level they have available.
They fall short of nothing. In point of fact, they actually have more casting power than many of the other full casters using this metric to compare them, but that power must be spread throughout the day rather than being all available for a single encounter.

They are Full casters, who are forced to essentially use the Spell Point Variant, can only create slots of the highest level available to them, and are forced to spread them out over the day.

[Sigreid]

Wizards are never out of options either. Against a Rakshasa you cast Conjure Elemental to get a fire elemental and then attack it with that.

(Or if you're good-aligned, even just plain Magic Weapon on a longbow and then plink away from long range, doing double damage on a hit due to its vulnerability to piercing from good creatures.)

Fire Elementals won't help against Tiamat at full power of course, but then neither will the bladelock's puny little weapon.

If the wizard knows the right spells. If the wizard has memorized that spell. If the wizard hasn't had to blow the spell slots. I'm not having a go at wizard, I like wizards and am playing one, but the point stands that the pact blade can be the right tool for the job, on rare occasions.

[Cybren]

Your pact boon isn't your subclass. It's just a cool ability that is both flavorful and extends your utility in some way. Your patron is your subclass.

[Corey]

Two or three short rests per day are recommended.


And how commonly is that recommendation followed?


and are forced to spread them out over the day.

That is potentially a major limitation, e.g. in boss fights.

[georgie_leech]

And how commonly is that recommendation followed?


I'd argue that if a class is struggling because the DM isn't following the guidelines, that's really not a fault of the class itself. I mean, the campaign could be set in world where all magic is banned, but that's not really a mark against the Wizard.

[Sigreid]

I'd argue that if a class is struggling because the DM isn't following the guidelines, that's really not a fault of the class itself. I mean, the campaign could be set in world where all magic is banned, but that's not really a mark against the Wizard.

When I GM, I don't give the players rests. It's up to them to decide when and where they are going to rest, and what precautions they will take. Sometimes they take more rests, sometimes less, but I am a firm believer that this is their responsibility.

[georgie_leech]

When I GM, I don't give the players rests. It's up to them to decide when and where they are going to rest, and what precautions they will take. Sometimes they take more rests, sometimes less, but I am a firm believer that this is their responsibility.

The guideline is that it should at least be possible to have 2-3 in a day without it adversely affecting the adventure. I mean, yeah, if the party goes back to town after every fight, sure, they can get more rests, but doing so is likely just going to result in reinforcements shoring up the Necromancer's lair undoing all of their work, or the BBEG getting to the Macguffin first, or the thieves getting away scot-free or whatever. If the DM is expecting their players to go 4 or 5 encounters in a row without a short rest to recharge abilities or recover hp, it's not taking into account the limitations of the system, and if the PC's include Warlocks, Battlemasters, or Monks especially it isn't taking into account the abilities of the classes.

[AvatarVecna]

It helps to start at a higher level, especially with magic items, rather than slogging through from the early levels. Personal suggestion is, if you're starting at the higher levels (like, 10 or higher), to dump Strength, and then pick up a Belt of Giant Strength. Currently playing a lvl 15 Bladelock who managed to get the Str 25 belt; she's outdamaging the fighter/rogue and the barbarian, and she's got great spell support besides.

[Steampunkette]

Throw medium armor proficiency at a bladelock and it goes from back up melee weapon wielder to someone who can reasonably fight in melee and blast at range, so long as you lock down 2 invocations for the ability to attack relatively well.

[JellyPooga]

OK, I'm convinced :smallwink:

I was just looking at the Warlock class the other day, particularly the Pact of the Blade and couldn't see the wood for the trees; when you're thinking about a Warlock as a melee dude, it's easy to forget he's also, you know, a Warlock!

Thanks Playground.

[Markoff Chainey]

I am actually all but convinced...

This is because:
- I (would) love playing a Bladelock
- I play a Warlock of the Tome (lvl 8) and made multiple Bladelock chars just for comparison

For me, a Bladelock sacrifices a lot of cool stuff to do in melee what he could otherwise do outside of melee anyways. And additionally it requires a very special build in order to have a slight damage output advantage (Fiend Patron, some melee orientated spells that would otherwise suck).

Tome or Chain gives you a huge versatility boost that can easily lead to a huge advantage in any situation - including combat - when you apply a bit of creativity, while the Bladelock is cool and gives you a bit of a damage advantage, but risks his head in melee :smalleek: and loses a lot utility.

As long as Eldritch Blast is as awesome as it is, there is too little incentive to play a Bladelock (although it would be cool to play a "Hellboy"-kind of character).

[PoeticDwarf]

OK, I'm pretty sure I'm missing something. I've done a quick search for threads on Bladelocks and whilst they all talk about how to build a good one, I'm not particularly seeing the appeal of them from a game-mechanic point of view.

Could someone enlighten me as to what makes a Bladelock good over, say, an Eldritch Knight or melee-focused Wizard (or any other Class/Build, for that matter)?

It is like a half caster, but with a level 9 spell. You can deal less damage than an eldritch knight, but more than a wizard with weapons. You have better spellcasting than an eldritch knight but worse than a wizard, like a paladin.

[JellyPooga]

It is like a half caster, but with a level 9 spell. You can deal less damage than an eldritch knight, but more than a wizard with weapons. You have better spellcasting than an eldritch knight but worse than a wizard, like a paladin.

As I've said, I'm fairly convinced it can be a viable build, but I'm not convinced it's better than going for a full-caster Warlock. Why waste the investment in trying to be a worse melee fighter than a different class when you've got the potential to be a superlative piece of Artillery? Versatility is the answer, I know, but it still doesn't sit quite right in my head (though I still can't get the idea of a Half-Orc Bladelock with a Maul for his Pact Weapon out of my head...I so want to play that dude!).

[Steampunkette]

They cast spells better than the worst spellcaster, and fight in melee better than the worst melee fighter.

[Logosloki]

Your pact boon isn't your subclass. It's just a cool ability that is both flavorful and extends your utility in some way. Your patron is your subclass.

It amuses me greatly that, if you were only to learn of the warlock from forum posts rather than reading the PHB or Analysis pages, that people would swear black and blue that the boons were the sub class. Most discussions about warlock revolve around 1) Pacts, 2) Invocations and 3) getting the most bang for your buck out of the spell/rest economy.

There are a few reasons for this. Sub classes are chosen at level one for warlock whereas pacts come at level 3 when other classes are getting their subclasses. The spell lists are expanding options to choose from rather than bonus spells known. The sub classes themselves are situational/conditional and all follow the exact order of: something nice, defensive ability, situational defensive passive, situational long rest ability.

This comes from the design choices of the warlock - it feels like it started out as the "beginner" class for casters. Warlock look like a cleric and a sorcerer had a baby.

[Tarvil]

Because with minor multiclassing (Fighter1/Warlock19) he is potent melee combatant, with two-three strong attacks, Hellish Rebuke, good amount of temporary hit points and almost permanent advantage.

AND

At the same time, he is full-fledged caster, with 9th level spells.

[Submortimer]

I get the rest of it; the invocations, plenty of spell slots that can be used for Smite and so forth, but as a standalone, I'm not seeing them as being all that efficient in melee (i.e. the whole "blade" bit of Bladelock) and at range, they're as good as any other Warlock.

Ok, so they can take an Invocation for Extra Attack and at higher levels they can add Cha to damage, but let's face it; 3d6+Str+Cha per hit (assuming Hex is active and using, say, a Greatsword) still isn't that great and that's about the best they're going to get. A level 12 Rogue is hitting for 7d6+Dex in melee or at range (assuming a 1d6 weapon), without making a single decision. The Bladelock, by comparison, has "spent" 2 Invocations and a Spell to get roughly comparable damage.

As I say; I think I must be missing something because it just doesn't look that impressive. Not impressive enough to center an entire character build around, at any rate.

This is sub-optimal anyways. Take Polearm master, use a glaive instead of a greatsword. Now, your DPR (at level 12, assuming 20 str, 20 cha, and hex) is 2d10+1d4+3d6+30, or Avg 54 per round.

[Corey]

This is sub-optimal anyways. Take Polearm master, use a glaive instead of a greatsword. Now, your DPR (at level 12, assuming 20 str, 20 cha, and hex) is 2d10+1d4+3d6+30, or Avg 54 per round.

How did you get to 20 in two different stats and also have a feat by Level 12?

[EvanescentHero]

It's quite easy. Start with 16 on each. You have 5 ASIs: 4, 8, 12, 16, 19.

GWM Build:
4 goes to GWM
8, 12 go to Str.
16, 19 goto Cha
End with 20 str, 20 cha and GWM

Polearm Build:
4 goes to GWM
8 goes to Polearm
12, 16 go to Str.
19 goes to Cha
End with 20 str, 18 cha and GWM + Polearm

That doesn't get you to 20 in two stats and a feat at level twelve.

[Hawkstar]

Wut? "End with 20 str, 20 cha and GWM"
That's a 20 in 2 stats and a feat.

Though the part I quoted was using polearm in which case it'd be 20/18.

Look at the post he was quoting.

[Steampunkette]

The post the dude was quoting was Level 12 build comparisons.

He then statted out a level 20 build.

That's what is drawing the confusion.

[Kryx]

The post the dude was quoting was Level 12 build comparisons.

He then statted out a level 20 build.
I suck at reading. I blame being out in the sun. Ignore me!

Deleting my posts!

[DivisibleByZero]

Back to the original question.
The choice between Eldritch Knight, or melee Wizard, or Bladelock, or Paladin, or what have you, is purely dependent upon concept. They all serve similar purposes, but do so in different ways and with much different fluff.

You could even brew a new subclass to achieve the same ends. For example, I am extremely interested in seeing what the Sword Coast book does with Bladesinger, because I designed a Wizard Tradition around one which I want to play as soon as my turn behind the DM screen comes to an end.
At level 2 it gets proficiencies (light armor, short swords, longswords, scimitars, and rapiers), Int based unarmored defense (but only when wielding a single weapon from the previous list and no shield, called Bladesong Style), and arcane strike (pally's smite, using d6s instead of d8s, capping at 6d6 for a 5th level slot, called Song of Fury).
At level 6 it gets Extra Attack (but only when wielding weapons listed above, called Song of Celerity).
At level 10 it gets war magic (cast a cantrip > make one melee weapon attack as a bonus, only with the weapons listed, called Lesser Spellsong).
At level 14 it gets improved war magic (same as above, but with any spell, called Greater Spellsong).

With the introduction of Favored Soul for Sorcerers, Wizards were the only class left that didn't have a viable melee option, so I made one. Although I must admit, the one that I made is missing a "ribbon" and the Song of Fury (arcane strike) may be a bit too much when combined with the rest of it. So I might tweak it a bit after playing (or after seeing the Sword Coast's option).
The bottom line is that there are many ways to play a gish, and the differences between them are mostly going to come down to fluff and concept.

[MaxWilson]

If the wizard knows the right spells. If the wizard has memorized that spell. If the wizard hasn't had to blow the spell slots. I'm not having a go at wizard, I like wizards and am playing one, but the point stands that the pact blade can be the right tool for the job, on rare occasions.

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but as a wizard I prioritize access to Conjure Elemental specifically in case I ever run across something like a Rakshasa. And for similar reasons, I always, always have Expeditious Retreat memorized.

Agreed thought that the Bladelock would be less scared of a Rakshasa than I am. So would an Eldritch Knight.

[Giant2005]

How did you get to 20 in two different stats and also have a feat by Level 12?

There are 3 ASI/Feats for a pure Warlock between levels 1 and 12, so it isn't impossible. You just need to have rolled well enough to have an average of 18 each in your two primary stats after racial modifiers. Rolling a 16 and a 17 as your two highest stats isn't really that uncommon with 4d6d1.

[Steampunkette]

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but as a wizard I prioritize access to Conjure Elemental specifically in case I ever run across something like a Rakshasa. And for similar reasons, I always, always have Expeditious Retreat memorized.

Agreed thought that the Bladelock would be less scared of a Rakshasa than I am. So would an Eldritch Knight.

A wizard, at range, can pull out a sling (or bow if they're an elf or have any multiclassing) and deal piddly damage from relative safety from the Rakshasa, since the front liners will be toe to toe with him. And, if high enough level to face a Rakshasa, will have a few spells to fling that hurt him.

Meanwhile the Warlock will stand in melee with a Rakshasa with MAD probably getting clawed up and cursed by a sometimes invisible tigerman and MAY have 1 spell that hurts him. Aside from Eyebite and Flesh to Stone they don't get a level 6 attack spell, and can't use a level 3 attack spell level boosted in a 6th level slot.

I think the Wizard has less to fear, even if she MIGHT feel more frustrated.

[Malifice]

A wizard, at range, can pull out a sling (or bow if they're an elf or have any multiclassing) and deal piddly damage from relative safety from the Rakshasa, since the front liners will be toe to toe with him. And, if high enough level to face a Rakshasa, will have a few spells to fling that hurt him.

Meanwhile the Warlock will stand in melee with a Rakshasa with MAD probably getting clawed up and cursed by a sometimes invisible tigerman and MAY have 1 spell that hurts him. Aside from Eyebite and Flesh to Stone they don't get a level 6 attack spell, and can't use a level 3 attack spell level boosted in a 6th level slot.

I think the Wizard has less to fear, even if she MIGHT feel more frustrated.

This reflects shallow theorycrafting and not an actual close look at the Melee capabilities of the bladelock. In particular its DPR.

At sixth level, hex is being cast at a 3rd level slot, lasting the entire adventure. Let's assume the warlock uses his second slot for armor of agathys (recasting after his next short rest), recasting the latter at the end of each short rest. He now has hex and AoA 'up' for the whole adventure, and has a spare slot to drop a 5d10 hellish rebuke or fireball on his foes once per short rest. In melee he's dealing 3d6 plus Str twice per round, sucking in around 10 temp hit points with every enemy he drops. Add in GWM for extra damage when needed and a bonus action cleave.

It takes some system mastery to make them work, but they do work.

The fighter dip of 1-3 levels for heavy armor, a fighting style, con saves, second wind (the latter makes for an amazing low level tank when combined with fiend temp hit points). Go to second level for action surge (another short rest recharge nova burst) and some superiority dice.

There isn't a better melee Gish than the bladelock 17/fighter 3 in my view. 9th level spells, and the ability to melee to nearly the same potency of the party fighter. Add in the utility of your pact and invocations and its a solid class.

[Corey]

At sixth level, hex is being cast at a 3rd level slot, lasting the entire adventure.

How does that work at your table(s) when all the enemies are dead?

[MaxWilson]

A wizard, at range, can pull out a sling (or bow if they're an elf or have any multiclassing) and deal piddly damage from relative safety from the Rakshasa, since the front liners will be toe to toe with him. And, if high enough level to face a Rakshasa, will have a few spells to fling that hurt him. *snip* I think the Wizard has less to fear, even if she MIGHT feel more frustrated.

You can't always count on having other PCs around though. Sometimes they've got other stuff to do, and sometimes you get surprised at home when you were expecting nothing but a pleasant day of spell research. It's nice to have options for dealing with problems when other PCs aren't around.

BTW, any wizard can use a bow even if he's not an elf. You won't get your proficiency bonus but if you have good Dex it could still be effective, especially given the Rakshasa's vulnerability. I've seen non-proficient wizards do similar things before.


This reflects shallow theorycrafting and not an actual close look at the Melee capabilities of the bladelock. In particular its DPR.

At sixth level, hex is being cast at a 3rd level slot, lasting the entire adventure. Let's assume the warlock uses his second slot for armor of agathys (recasting after his next short rest), recasting the latter at the end of each short rest. He now has hex and AoA 'up' for the whole adventure, and has a spare slot to drop a 5d10 hellish rebuke or fireball on his foes once per short rest.

Whoa there, tiger. You don't get to call someone else's opinions "shallow theorycrafting" and then assume Armor of Agathys lasts for an entire adventure just because you recast three times over the course of a day. Its duration is only an hour. I don't know how it works at your table, but at my table, PCs are often active for eight to sixteen hours a day. If you pre-cast AoA before trouble starts, you've got maybe a 50% chance of having it still up when trouble happens and a 50% chance it was wasted. Conversely if you wait until trouble happens, you have a 0% chance of wasting it before combat (although it can be wasted if you never get hit) but you lose a round casting it. In an outdoor encounter you can probably afford that round, unless you're being ambushed; but you still don't get to just take for granted that AoA will always be up. Not in a real, non-theorycrafted game anyway.

[JoeJ]

How does that work at your table(s) when all the enemies are dead?

It sounds like he's interpreting "a subsequent turn" to mean anytime later.

In context however, it really doesn't matter. The scenario was that the party was fighting a rakshasa, which is immune to both Hex and the damage from Armor of Agathys unless they're cast with at least a 7th level slot. That will be difficult to do, since warlocks never get slots above 5th level. (Their mystic arcanum spells don't use slots.)

[Steampunkette]

What Joe said. Though I thought the damage immunity was below 6, not 6 and below. Plus the whole regaining spell slots ending spells cast with them thing, unless your DM is super lenient. One casting of hex might last 24 hours, but a short rest kills it and requires a recast.

And while a bladelocks DPR is not as bad as a wizard's I was referring to survivability in my previous post. Best case scenario the warlock's AC is 1 or 2 points higher with slightly higher hit points (average of 1 per level). But the bladelock must stand in melee to get the damage increase over the wizard's weapon damage, which means the Rakshasa's melee abilities, and curse, come into sharp focus, while the sling or bow shooting wizard can at least try to maintain some range and use a 6th level spell that has a decent chance of hurting the thing.

[Malifice]

How does that work at your table(s) when all the enemies are dead?

The spell doesn't end once your enemies are dead. You can drop a foe, and then maintain concentration on it till the next encounter, placing it back 'up' as a bonus action on your first turn.



Whoa there, tiger. You don't get to call someone else's opinions "shallow theorycrafting" and then assume Armor of Agathys lasts for an entire adventure just because you recast three times over the course of a day. Its duration is only an hour. I don't know how it works at your table, but at my table, PCs are often active for eight to sixteen hours a day. If you pre-cast AoA before trouble starts, you've got maybe a 50% chance of having it still up when trouble happens and a 50% chance it was wasted. Conversely if you wait until trouble happens, you have a 0% chance of wasting it before combat (although it can be wasted if you never get hit) but you lose a round casting it. In an outdoor encounter you can probably afford that round, unless you're being ambushed; but you still don't get to just take for granted that AoA will always be up. Not in a real, non-theorycrafted game anyway.

In your standard dungeon crawl/ default core DND adventure you're getting 6ish encounters per day with 2ish short rests between them.

I'm not asserting that dungeons are a feature of every game - but they are a staple of virtually every published module, adventure path and so forth in the game. The core assumption the mechanics live in is that encounter and rest pacing. Of course you can vary it, but that variance throws the mechanics and balance out of kilter too.

I'm fairly confident I could get 2-3 encounters (rooms/ puzzles/ monsters/ traps etc) in within an hour in the majority of dungeon crawls at a majority of tables.

[Malifice]

What Joe said. Though I thought the damage immunity was below 6, not 6 and below. Plus the whole regaining spell slots ending spells cast with them thing, unless your DM is super lenient. One casting of hex might last 24 hours, but a short rest kills it and requires a recast.

And while a bladelocks DPR is not as bad as a wizard's I was referring to survivability in my previous post. Best case scenario the warlock's AC is 1 or 2 points higher with slightly higher hit points (average of 1 per level). But the bladelock must stand in melee to get the damage increase over the wizard's weapon damage, which means the Rakshasa's melee abilities, and curse, come into sharp focus, while the sling or bow shooting wizard can at least try to maintain some range and use a 6th level spell that has a decent chance of hurting the thing.

Why does a short rest kill Hex? I've never seen any rule anywhere that states you can't maintain concentration during a short rest.

[Steampunkette]

It doesn't. But recovering the spell slot should always end any spell that is still active and cast from that slot.

The PHB describes the slot as Filled by any spell that is cast on 201. So during a short rest you're either not recovering that spell slot, or immediately using it to recast hex. Unless your DM is super lenient and allows you to recover without ending hex, returning you to a full compliment of slots with hex still active.

Though whether you recast it or maintain duration during a short rest is irrelevant, as it takes a bonus action to cast from scratch or to move to a new target. But you might lose it if you hold onto it and get ambushed.

[Corey]

It sounds like he's interpreting "a subsequent turn" to mean anytime later.



Is that a common interpretation? I've seen various discussions about "Carrying around a bag of rats", the idea being you quickly kill one near the start of your next fight, wasting an attack so as to save the use of a spell slot.

[Corey]

It doesn't. But recovering the spell slot should always end any spell that is still active and cast from that slot.


So if somebody casts Geas, they should lose use of a 5th level spell slot for the next 30 days?

You obviously don't mean that. So are you suggesting this rule only in the case of concentration spells?

[Kryx]

Is that a common interpretation? I've seen various discussions about "Carrying around a bag of rats", the idea being you quickly kill one near the start of your next fight, wasting an attack so as to save the use of a spell slot.
Casting on any subsequent turn is indeed what is intended. See the duration of Hex and Hunter's Mark.

[Corey]

Casting on any subsequent turn is indeed what is intended. See the duration of Hex and Hunter's Mark.

Hmm. The exact text is something like:


If the target drops to 0 hit points before this spell ends, you can use a bonus action on a subsequent turn of yours to curse a new creature.

So yeah. The spell doesn't end when the target dies, nor require you to find a new target within 1 round or anything like that.

[Steampunkette]

So if somebody casts Geas, they should lose use of a 5th level spell slot for the next 30 days?

You obviously don't mean that. So are you suggesting this rule only in the case of concentration spells?

Yes, that is what I mean. It's an active spell you're focusing on, not a far reaching enchantment.

If you can do that with concentration sp3lls then a wizard's spell recovery ability becomes a lot stronger.

[Hawkstar]

There is absolutely nothing prohibiting a caster from having a long-duration spell up over multiple rests and short rest recoveries. Concentration has no effect on it. You're only recasting the spell if you lose concentration.

Also - Armor of Agathys only lasts, at most, a number of hits equal to its spell level.

[Malifice]

It doesn't. But recovering the spell slot should always end any spell that is still active and cast from that slot.

The PHB describes the slot as Filled by any spell that is cast on 201. So during a short rest you're either not recovering that spell slot, or immediately using it to recast hex. Unless your DM is super lenient and allows you to recover without ending hex, returning you to a full compliment of slots with hex still active.

Though whether you recast it or maintain duration during a short rest is irrelevant, as it takes a bonus action to cast from scratch or to move to a new target. But you might lose it if you hold onto it and get ambushed.

You're reading a restriction into recovering slots that isn't actually there.

I wouldn't stop a 1st level wizard from recovering the slot he used on Mage armor via arcane recovery, even if Mage armor is still running.

The game doesn't make wizards track slots in this way either. For a reason In my view.

You use the slot to cast the spell. Concentrating on it outside of that, or having its duration not have expired by the time you recover slots is a different thing entirely.

At my table, short rests don't break concentration and all slots are recovered - even slots used for spells that are still running. If you want to read a restriction in there that isn't spelled out (and the rest of the rules seem to contradict) then be my guest.

[DivisibleByZero]

You're reading a restriction into recovering slots that isn't actually there.

That's exactly what's happening.

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/20/concentration-during-rest/
Igor Ruffinengo @IgorRuffinengo
@mikemearls Howdy, Mike! Just one question: can I start a short rest while keeping concentration on a spell like Hex? Thank you!
Mike Mearls @mikemearls
@IgorRuffinengo as long as you don't sleep

Was the spell slot expended? Yes.
Do you get that slot back on a short rest? Yes.
Does the spell remain active as long as you don't lose it? Yes.
So can you potentially cast a spell during one encounter, use an higher level slot to keep it active, take a short rest, and regain the use of the slot that powered the spell while retaining that spell's effect through concentration.

[Corey]

Also - Armor of Agathys only lasts, at most, a number of hits equal to its spell level.

Where does it say that? I can't find it in the spell description.

[Hawkstar]

Where does it say that? I can't find it in the spell description.
Well, I guess it's theoretically possible to get hit for an attack that does less than 5 damage, but it's very, very, very unlikely, and most attacks do far more.

[WickerNipple]

How does that work at your table(s) when all the enemies are dead?

Why would that have anything to do with anything?

[Malifice]

Well, I guess it's theoretically possible to get hit for an attack that does less than 5 damage, but it's very, very, very unlikely, and most attacks do far more.

At 1st level it only absorbs 5 damage. By the time you hit 5th its absorbing 15. Enough for 2 or three hits, and a right pain for mooks.

It pairs well with resistance to damage (baked into the fiend lock as a class feature). Also available via spells.

You precast that upon finishing your short rest. You should have hex already cast and ready to go. This leaves you a slot for emergency purposes.

You enter Melee and rely on your armor of agathys for a temp HP buffer and a porcupine effect. Once that drops, clean out Mooks and suck down temp HP from your patron. Use Hex to boost damage. Hellish rebuke tough BBEGs that hit you.

Even at 5th level, you're swinging twice with your great sword with hex up spamming 3d6 plus strength per hit, and punishing any return attacks with 15 cold damage and 5d10 Fire damage.

It's why the fighter dip at 1st is mandatory. Con saves to keep your spells running really saves you some slots during the AD. The heavy armor, fighting style and second wind also never go astray.

I like the GWM bladelock. Dump int and dex. Take GWM ASAP then max charisma. Dip fighter at 1st then Ride warlock out till 5th level for extra Attack and 3rd level spells. Dip back into fighter for 2 levels, then it's warlock all the way to 20th.

You'll easily be able to match it in melee with the fighter, will have a great ranged option with EB, great utility via invocations and patron, and have full 9th level casting.

[Hawkstar]

At 1st level it only absorbs 5 damage. By the time you hit 5th its absorbing 15. Enough for 2 or three hits, and a right pain for mooks.
Which matches what I said - Armor of Agathys only lasts for a number of hits equal to its spell level (3 hits for a 3rd-level spell). And those temp HP don't come back.

[Malifice]

Which matches what I said - Armor of Agathys only lasts for a number of hits equal to its spell level (3 hits for a 3rd-level spell). And those temp HP don't come back.

So a third level spell that saved 15 damage and dealt 45? Once per short rest? I'll take that no problems.

Once it's down you can switch to sucking around 10 temp hit points from fiend pact back with each kill for pretty awesome tankiness.

Even in a duel with a long sword weilding duelist fighter, you can expect it to absorb 2 hits for 15 damage and deal back 30 in return. If hex is up from earlier in the morning you're dealing 3d6 plus strength twice to the 5th level fighters 2d6 plus strength twice and can rebuke him for 5d10 Fire damage in return to boot. You can kill the fighter even if he goes first and absorb most of the punishment he deals out.

Dip fighter at 1st for full plate, con saves, a fighting style and second wind. It makes a huge difference. Sick with warlock to 6th then dip 2 more in fighter so you're 5/3. Then ride warlock out till 20th for a 3/17 split.

You'll be dealing as much melee DPR as the fighter for much of your career, with all the utility of invocations, back up Eldritch blasts and spell casting to boot.

Blade locks require system mastery to pull off, but they're damn effective when done right.

[MaxWilson]

This thread makes me think that it might be fun to have a Fiendlock/Necromancer with Armor of Agathys and Fire Shield running. Anytime someone hits him, they take 34 points of damage until Armor of Agathys is depleted. Furthermore, every time he scores a kill with Fire Shield he gets (Warlock level) + CHA bonus temp HP back (thanks to Dark One's Blessing) and 8 real HP back (thanks to Grim Harvest). And he still has his concentration free for something like Blur.

You could tank an awful lot of orcs with that PC.

[Malifice]

This thread makes me think that it might be fun to have a Fiendlock/Necromancer with Armor of Agathys and Fire Shield running. Anytime someone hits him, they take 34 points of damage until Armor of Agathys is depleted. Furthermore, every time he scores a kill with Fire Shield he gets (Warlock level) + CHA bonus temp HP back (thanks to Dark One's Blessing) and 8 real HP back (thanks to Grim Harvest). And he still has his concentration free for something like Blur.

You could tank an awful lot of orcs with that PC.

Works better with abjurer. The abjurers ward hit points are tracked separately and can be topped up at will with armor of shadows.

Combine with blade ward or stone skin for half damage coming in, and armor of agathys, fire shield and hellish rebukes coming back out.

[MaxWilson]

Works better with abjurer. The abjurers ward hit points are tracked separately and can be topped up at will with armor of shadows.

Combine with blade ward or stone skin for half damage coming in, and armor of agathys, fire shield and hellish rebukes coming back out.

I beg to disagree. Pausing in the middle of a running fight with a century or two of orcs (say 80 to 200 orcs) to cast Mage Armor for 2 HP per cast is a lot worse than gaining 8 HP several times per round, every time an orc hits you with a melee weapon and subsequently dies, triggering Grim Harvest.

Blade ward isn't half-bad under these conditions but I would never, ever waste a spell slot on Hellish Rebuke under those conditions. Maybe that's just me though--I tend to play stingy.

P.S. Blade Ward/Stoneskin and Arcane Ward are an anti-synergy, since Blade Ward doesn't apply to damage that is taken by the Arcane Ward.

[Steampunkette]

The fact that concentration spells don't "Hold" the slot open recontextualizes things, significantly.

[Malifice]

I beg to disagree. Pausing in the middle of a running fight with a century or two of orcs (say 80 to 200 orcs) to cast Mage Armor for 2 HP per cast is a lot worse than gaining 8 HP several times per round, every time an orc hits you with a melee weapon and subsequently dies, triggering Grim Harvest.

Blade ward isn't half-bad under these conditions but I would never, ever waste a spell slot on Hellish Rebuke under those conditions. Maybe that's just me though--I tend to play stingy.

P.S. Blade Ward/Stoneskin and Arcane Ward are an anti-synergy, since Blade Ward doesn't apply to damage that is taken by the Arcane Ward.

You power your ward outside of combat.

At 9th level your ward holds 19 hit points and your armor holds 20 (and deals 20). Blade ward or stone skin halve incoming damage. Even getting clobbered for 15 damage a hit means you'll get 6 x 20 damage hits back before your real hit points are touched.

[Malifice]

I beg to disagree. Pausing in the middle of a running fight with a century or two of orcs (say 80 to 200 orcs) to cast Mage Armor for 2 HP per cast is a lot worse than gaining 8 HP several times per round, every time an orc hits you with a melee weapon and subsequently dies, triggering Grim Harvest.

Blade ward isn't half-bad under these conditions but I would never, ever waste a spell slot on Hellish Rebuke under those conditions. Maybe that's just me though--I tend to play stingy.

P.S. Blade Ward/Stoneskin and Arcane Ward are an anti-synergy, since Blade Ward doesn't apply to damage that is taken by the Arcane Ward.

Also - if you're fighting 200 orcs, you're already dead.

[coredump]

This thread makes me think that it might be fun to have a Fiendlock/Necromancer with Armor of Agathys and Fire Shield running. Anytime someone hits him, they take 34 points of damage until Armor of Agathys is depleted. Furthermore, every time he scores a kill with Fire Shield he gets (Warlock level) + CHA bonus temp HP back (thanks to Dark One's Blessing) and 8 real HP back (thanks to Grim Harvest). And he still has his concentration free for something like Blur.

You could tank an awful lot of orcs with that PC.Remember that you can only have Temp Hit points from one source at a time, so if you 'accept' the THP from Dark Ones Blessing then you automatically lose the THP from AoA, and thus lose AoA.
Also, if this is working right, you have not started to lose your 'real' HP, so Grim Harvest doesn't work as well.

This is why the Abjuration ward works much better. You get the THP from AoA *and* the protection of the Abjuration Ward.... and you can recharge the ward without sacrificing the AoA.


You power your ward outside of combat.

At 9th level your ward holds 19 hit points and your armor holds 20 (and deals 20). Blade ward or stone skin halve incoming damage. Even getting clobbered for 15 damage a hit means you'll get 6 x 20 damage hits back before your real hit points are touched.
Not quite, the resistance only works if you are getting damaged. So it helps with Hit points ('real' and temporary), but has no effect on the Abj ward.



If you decide to do something like this... you need to make sure you are a big enough threat.... I am running an Abj/lock and at low levels, the bad guys just ignore me and attack others... its kind of frustrating.

[TheDonger]

So a third level spell that saved 15 damage and dealt 45? Once per short rest? I'll take that no problems.

Once it's down you can switch to sucking around 10 temp hit points from fiend pact back with each kill for pretty awesome tankiness.

Even in a duel with a long sword weilding duelist fighter, you can expect it to absorb 2 hits for 15 damage and deal back 30 in return. If hex is up from earlier in the morning you're dealing 3d6 plus strength twice to the 5th level fighters 2d6 plus strength twice and can rebuke him for 5d10 Fire damage in return to boot. You can kill the fighter even if he goes first and absorb most of the punishment he deals out.

Dip fighter at 1st for full plate, con saves, a fighting style and second wind. It makes a huge difference. Sick with warlock to 6th then dip 2 more in fighter so you're 5/3. Then ride warlock out till 20th for a 3/17 split.

You'll be dealing as much melee DPR as the fighter for much of your career, with all the utility of invocations, back up Eldritch blasts and spell casting to boot.

Blade locks require system mastery to pull off, but they're damn effective when done right.

Sweet, this is getting me so psyched to play a Fighter/Bladelock for the upcoming Rage of the Demons Adventurers League play.

Question - For the darkvision/cast darkness tactic, isn't it more optimal to cast the darkness on yourself (say your pact weapon) and then engage the enemy who can't see in the dark and is disadvantaged, rather than casting it directly on the enemy? By casting it on yourself, you could control the direction of the darkness and probably be less annoying to other party members. Or am I missing something.

[Malifice]

If you decide to do something like this... you need to make sure you are a big enough threat.... I am running an Abj/lock and at low levels, the bad guys just ignore me and attack others... its kind of frustrating.

Sounds like the perfect defence to me.

Feel free to blast them with total impunity.

[MaxWilson]

Also - if you're fighting 200 orcs, you're already dead.

Only if you're relying on Arcane Ward + Armor of Shadows to keep you alive. If you're in close quarters and relying on Grim Harvest + Fire Shield + occasional Armor of Agathys + possible Blur or Vampiric Touch, you will be very much alive. Each time an orc hits you in melee, you lose about 9 HP and so does the orc (Fire Shield). After two hits, you've lost 18 HP, and the orc dies, and you regain 8 real HP and at least 7 temp HP (depends on your warlock level and Cha). You're gradually losing HP over time (while throwing Fireballs or whatever), but if you ever need to recharge you just cast Armor of Agathys V, and the next three orcs to hit you will each die in one hit and give you 10 HP back apiece. By the time you kill half the orcs the others are probably about ready to break and run.

If the orcs are throwing javelins this doesn't work so well, which is why I say "close quarters", but a wizard shouldn't have any difficulty avoiding orcs in open terrain (because of Fly/Phantom Steed/Expeditious Retreat/etc.). Besides, if it's open terrain you'll just murder the orcs in a completely different way using skeleton archers. You're a necromancer after all.

I've run fights with one solo Necromancer 9/Warlock 2 vs. 30 mounted hobgoblins, and it was a massacre in the Necromancer's favor with only 10 skeletons. (Due to range and defensive positions with partial cover.) Orcs are wimps compared to hobgoblins: lower AC, no Martial Advantage, and no effective ranged attack. I don't think an 11th level Necrolock could take on 200 orcs all at once, but he could take a big chunk out of them before retreating, and then he could finish them off the next day. A higher-level prepared Necrolock would undoubtedly massacre all 200 orcs.


Remember that you can only have Temp Hit points from one source at a time, so if you 'accept' the THP from Dark Ones Blessing then you automatically lose the THP from AoA, and thus lose AoA.
Also, if this is working right, you have not started to lose your 'real' HP, so Grim Harvest doesn't work as well.

Sorry if I was unclear. Yes, Dark One's Blessing doesn't kick in until Armor of Agathys starts to run out. (On the final blow, the one that takes down AoA, DOB will give you replacement temp HP.) Grim Harvest + Fire Shield will prevent you from losing very many HP to the orcs, but you'll still lose a few every round, so when you want to pop back up to full you either cast Armor of Agathys V again or else something like Evard's Black Tentacles (which will give you back 8 HP per orc killed, since each orc dies on a separate turn). Otherwise you Acid Splash unwounded orcs to ensure that they'll go down to Fire Shield as soon as they hit you, or Blade Ward, and if too many orcs pile up at once then you Fireball or Evard's Black Tentacles. It's definitely an attrition strategy, designed for someone who enjoys mindless die-rolling combat for hours at a time. Kind of 5E-as-Diablo-II.


This is why the Abjuration ward works much better. You get the THP from AoA *and* the protection of the Abjuration Ward.... and you can recharge the ward without sacrificing the AoA.

And that's great for the first four orcs. But for the next 196 orcs, Arcane Ward is worthless, whereas Grim Harvest is great.

[Malifice]

Only if you're relying on Arcane Ward + Armor of Shadows to keep you alive. If you're in close quarters and relying on Grim Harvest + Fire Shield + occasional Armor of Agathys + possible Blur or Vampiric Touch, you will be very much alive. Each time an orc hits you in melee, you lose about 9 HP and so does the orc (Fire Shield). After two hits, you've lost 18 HP, and the orc dies, and you regain 8 real HP and at least 7 temp HP (depends on your warlock level and Cha). You're gradually losing HP over time (while throwing Fireballs or whatever), but if you ever need to recharge you just cast Armor of Agathys V, and the next three orcs to hit you will each die in one hit and give you 10 HP back apiece. By the time you kill half the orcs the others are probably about ready to break and run.


If the orcs are throwing javelins this doesn't work so well, which is why I say "close quarters", but a wizard shouldn't have any difficulty avoiding orcs in open terrain (because of Fly/Phantom Steed/Expeditious Retreat/etc.). Besides, if it's open terrain you'll just murder the orcs in a completely different way using skeleton archers. You're a necromancer after all.

Assuming the Orcs are equipped as per the MM, lack any leaders or Orog support and so forth. Or scouts. 200 Orcs vs a single 11th level PC is clearly an unbalanced encounter (if ran as such). It wouldnt be placed in front of a party as a challenge.

If you have a permissive DM and he allows you to tow an army of skeletons around with you, thats a different story.


I've run fights with one solo Necromancer 9/Warlock 2 vs. 30 mounted hobgoblins, and it was a massacre in the Necromancer's favor with only 10 skeletons. (Due to range and defensive positions with partial cover.) Orcs are wimps compared to hobgoblins: lower AC, no Martial Advantage, and no effective ranged attack. I don't think an 11th level Necrolock could take on 200 orcs all at once, but he could take a big chunk out of them before retreating, and then he could finish them off the next day. A higher-level prepared Necrolock would undoubtedly massacre all 200 orcs.

You had 10 minions of your own.

I'm sure a Fighter 11 with a dozen mounted thugs/ guards/ bandits/ soldiers/ squires/ mercenaries or whatever would have just as easy a time.

[MaxWilson]

Assuming the Orcs are equipped as per the MM, lack any leaders or Orog support and so forth. Or scouts. 200 Orcs vs a single 11th level PC is clearly an unbalanced encounter (if ran as such). It wouldnt be placed in front of a party as a challenge.

If you have a permissive DM and he allows you to tow an army of skeletons around with you, thats a different story.

You had 10 minions of your own.

I'm sure a Fighter 11 with a dozen mounted thugs/ guards/ bandits/ soldiers/ squires/ mercenaries or whatever would have just as easy a time.

One difference between the Fighter and the Necromancer in this scenario is that the Necromancer can generate his own minions. (E.g. travel behind enemy lines with a Phantom Steed, ambush a handful of orcs with a Fireball, animate them, snowball from there.) The fighter has a much larger logistical tail, trying to smuggle his minions into orc country--obviously he can't generate a dozen Phantom Steeds for everybody--and if things go sour he has to pay for eleven funerals. I'm not saying it's not a fantastic idea to hire minions in 5E, because it is fantastic, but I don't think it's quite fair to pretend like the Necromancer isn't generating his own minions.

If the orcs are equipped in a nonstandard way with bows and such, that just makes it even better for the Necromancer.

Anyway, that's not the main scenario we're discussing here. The main scenario is "orcs in cramped tunnels where tons of minions are not likely to be effective", and "wouldn't Fiendlock + Fire Shield + Grim Harvest be awesome fun?" It's implicit in the scenario that it is a mindless hack-n-slash adventure. There may be Orog support and maybe even a big boss at the end, but it's mostly an excuse to just have a really huge fight, probably in a one-off. As I said above, it's 5E-as-Diablo-II. If the DM goes out of his way to make it "interesting" by giving the orcs a bunch of intelligent commanders who do things like pass out nets and javelins, the scenario loses much of its mindless appeal.

P.S. That's not to say that I wouldn't put 200 orcs in a real adventure as DM though. That's about the size of an overstuffed scro battlewagon, and so it's very plausible as a mobile threat. I can imagine doing this sometime in the next few sessions in fact. The PCs would have to be crazy to try to fight that many orcs in one lump instead of playing divide-and-conquer, but if they did decide to e.g. march onto the deck of the ship and draw weapons on the scro captain, I would sigh and start the combat. Stupid tactics are allowed at my table even when they lead to TPKs.

[Malifice]

One difference between the Fighter and the Necromancer in this scenario is that the Necromancer can generate his own minions. (E.g. travel behind enemy lines with a Phantom Steed, ambush a handful of orcs with a Fireball, animate them, snowball from there.) The fighter has a much larger logistical tail, trying to smuggle his minions into orc country--obviously he can't generate a dozen Phantom Steeds for everybody--and if things go sour he has to pay for eleven funerals. I'm not saying it's not a fantastic idea to hire minions in 5E, because it is fantastic, but I don't think it's quite fair to pretend like the Necromancer isn't generating his own minions.

Im not pretending anything of the sort.

Im just saying that animating undead hordes has its own 'in game' repurcussions; different from the logisitical and morale problems of hirelings, or your own private mymirdion army, but problems nonetheless.


Anyway, that's not the main scenario we're discussing here. The main scenario is "orcs in cramped tunnels where tons of minions are not likely to be effective", and "wouldn't Fiendlock + Fire Shield + Grim Harvest be awesome fun?" It's implicit in the scenario that it is a mindless hack-n-slash adventure. There may be Orog support and maybe even a big boss at the end, but it's mostly an excuse to just have a really huge fight, probably in a one-off. As I said above, it's 5E-as-Diablo-II. If the DM goes out of his way to make it "interesting" by giving the orcs a bunch of intelligent commanders who do things like pass out nets and javelins, the scenario loses much of its mindless appeal.

Of course the DM could permissively allow a Wizard to fly undetected over an Orc encampment and fireball them at will. But that's not exactly an encounter is it? An encounter with Orcs for that Wizard would feature a properly XP budgeted encounter, appropriate environmental effects, and so forth. 200 Orcs is not such an encounter.

The DM could simply rule the Wizard was detected by Orc Scouts, and set up an ambush (resulting in one dead Wizard).


P.S. That's not to say that I wouldn't put 200 orcs in a real adventure as DM though. That's about the size of an overstuffed scro battlewagon, and so it's very plausible as a mobile threat. I can imagine doing this sometime in the next few sessions in fact. The PCs would have to be crazy to try to fight that many orcs in one lump instead of playing divide-and-conquer, but if they did decide to e.g. march onto the deck of the ship and draw weapons on the scro captain, I would sigh and start the combat. Stupid tactics are allowed at my table even when they lead to TPKs.

You only need to TPK them once. Then they learn.

Its much like when I get newbie players trying to play God wizards at my table - they go Nova at the first encounter, then sulk like babies when they have to spend the next half a dozen encounters without a long rest to recover, getting babysat by the rest of the party.

It only happens once, then they learn to conserve spell slots and pull their weight in every encounter.

Same deal with minion-mancers. Havent had the fun of a player rocking up to my table with a dozen undead minions, but after the first visit by a few members of the local Church, and the peasants trying to burn him at the stake, it'll only happen the once. I'm also looking forward to any clown that tries to abuse simulacrum or wish only to discover why messing with singularities like artificial intelligence and reality warping uber magic is generally regarded as a really dangerous thing.

See also: Evil PC's that are played like psychopaths murdering NPC's becuase they dont like them, party Rogues with a habit of stealing anything that isnt bolted down, and fighters with a habit of drawing steel on anyone who looks at them the wrong way. The occasional early smack down is well worth avoiding the sooking from players later on.

[MaxWilson]

Of course the DM could permissively allow a Wizard to fly undetected over an Orc encampment and fireball them at will. But that's not exactly an encounter is it? An encounter with Orcs for that Wizard would feature a properly XP budgeted encounter, appropriate environmental effects, and so forth. 200 Orcs is not such an encounter.

"Properly budgeted encounters" are not a requirement in 5E, and the idea of monsters coming in convenient bite-sized chunks for adventurers to easily slaughter is repugnant to me. There's plenty of fantasy literature out there which features armies of hundreds or thousands of orcs/wargs/werewolves/giants/etc. at a time, and places the responsibility largely on the protagonists to find a way to deal with them appropriately.

Even within the "balanced encounter" paradigm, the latent threats like 200 orcs are a primary tool for maintaining pacing: if the question is "why not take a short rest after every single fight", the answer is probably something like "because there are two hundred orcs not half a mile away, and in a few minutes they're going to realize that we murdered the sentries and come after us."

Therefore, it doesn't pay to dismiss 200 orcs out of hand as a scenario that can never happen. Your party will be safer and happier if you have contingency plans in place.

[Malifice]

"Properly budgeted encounters" are not a requirement in 5E, and the idea of monsters coming in convenient bite-sized chunks for adventurers to easily slaughter is repugnant to me.


Yes, they are. Read the DMG. There is even a chart in there explaining how to budget your encounters, and a whole chapter explaining encounter balance, rest pacing and the adventuring day. There is an entry for each monster in the MM entitled challenge rating. What do you think that is for?

Feel free to ignore challenge rating, encounter xp budgets, rest and encounter pacing and so forth, but dont try and tell me they aren't a fundamental part of the game that everything from spell and class abilities and so forth aren't balanced around.


There's plenty of fantasy literature out there which features armies of hundreds or thousands of orcs/wargs/werewolves/giants/etc. at a time, and places the responsibility largely on the protagonists to find a way to deal with them appropriately.

Yeah. And how often do they wade in the middle of the tens of thousands of Orcs alone and without an army to back them up?


Even within the "balanced encounter" paradigm, the latent threats like 200 orcs are a primary tool for maintaining pacing: if the question is "why not take a short rest after every single fight", the answer is probably something like "because there are two hundred orcs not half a mile away, and in a few minutes they're going to realize that we murdered the sentries and come after us."

Agree; that is exactly how I would use the 'Orc army threat' as a tool to maintain pacing and so forth - not as a challenge to be met head on in a 1 v 200 fight.

[MaxWilson]

Yes, they are. Read the DMG.

No, they're not. Re-read the DMG. At no point is there any kind of requirement that you must adhere to XP budget guidelines when creating content for your world. It's the DM's responsibility to create appropriate content, and the XP budgets are just a tool for him to consider when doing so. But he's free to make whatever decisions are appropriate to the scenario.


Agree; that is exactly how I would use the 'Orc army threat' as a tool to maintain pacing and so forth - not as a challenge to be met head on in a 1 v 200 fight.

I usually wouldn't do the 1 v 200 fight either, because it would be so tedious for the DM to run. It's more CRPG territory than TTRPG territory. But if I were doing a solo adventure and the PC wanted to engage, I wouldn't stop him. It's a challenge; how he meets the challenge is up to him.

But at least we both seem to agree that 1 PC vs. 200 orcs is both a fair obstacle to include, but also one that neither of us is eager to run in detailed combat. That's something.

Pax,
Max

[Malifice]

No, they're not. Re-read the DMG. At no point is there any kind of requirement that you must adhere to XP budget guidelines when creating content for your world. It's the DM's responsibility to create appropriate content, and the XP budgets are just a tool for him to consider when doing so. But he's free to make whatever decisions are appropriate to the scenario.

The DM can make whatever decisions he wants for his world. He can flat out ignore or ban half the classes in the PHB if he so desires.

Thats a different thing from saying that system isnt balanced around the xp budgeting, CR system and encounter/ rest mechanic as outlined in the DMG however.

If you want to throw CR20 Pit Fiends at your 1st level PC's then go for it. It's your game.


I usually wouldn't do the 1 v 200 fight either, because it would be so tedious for the DM to run. It's more CRPG territory than TTRPG territory. But if I were doing a solo adventure and the PC wanted to engage, I wouldn't stop him. It's a challenge; how he meets the challenge is up to him.

Your PC should be savvy enough (based on your DMing so far) to assume or conclude that such a head on challenge is nothing more than a suicide run.

[MaxWilson]

Thats a different thing from saying that system isnt balanced around the xp budgeting, CR system and encounter/ rest mechanic as outlined in the DMG however.

If this were true, you'd think the DMG would at least have some normative guidance in it about the appropriate relative frequencies of Easy/Medium/Hard/Deadly encounters. Something like, "You should have mostly Medium encounters, and Deadly encounters should only occur once every few sessions." It doesn't. All it does is present some math which says, descriptively, "Expect these kinds of encounters to be potentially deadly."

There is no kind of requirement for adherence to XP budgets. You can have every fight be quadruple-Deadly if you want it to be, or you can have it be Easy, or you can just have the fights be what they are (e.g. 2d6 trolls a la AD&D), and the DMG is just fine with any of that as long as you understand the potential consequences (PCs could die). It's not even a house rule, because there is nothing there to house rule--RAW imposes zero requirements.

FWIW, I find that quadruple-Deadly fights (e.g. 4 CR 10s against 4 10th level PCs) are usually pretty tough and could go either way. Anything less than double-Deadly is a cakewalk unless I (the DM) am deliberately playing the enemy like military veterans (e.g. taking full advantage of partial cover, coordinating attacks and focusing fire, exploiting environmental effects). That means there are basically three kinds of fights at my table: "fun" fights for the players (enemy puts up resistance but there is no real doubt about the outcome), fights against disciplined military enemies (e.g. hobgoblins), and fights against powerful creatures (e.g. Purple Worms). Anything which isn't #2 or #3 is #1.

[Corey]

How do Paladin/Bladelock builds work in practice? Which approaches have been tried out to joy or tears as the case may be?

My guesses start:


First level is Paladin (for heavy armor, mainly).
Feat is Polearm Mastery, making the weapon a glaive/halberd.
Race is often V Human, to get the feat early.
Fighting style is either GWF or Defensive.
The build really starts to click at Paladin 5/Warlock 3.
Ideal Oath is Devotion. Ideal Pact is Fiend. Working out the fluff on that takes some creativity. :)
Agonizing Blast is one key invocation, to give you a great ranged weapon as backup. Devil's Sight is another, especially if you pick V Human and hence don't have darkvision.


After that it's hard to guess what people would prefer. There's a lot to be said for:

Warlock 4 (ASI)
Warlock 5 (spells, although perhaps less of an issue if your plan is Hex, Hex, Hex and more Hex)
Paladin 6
Paladin 7
Paladin 8 (ASI)

and so on.

If the Paladin dip is shallower than I'm suggesting, would one be better off just taking Fighter instead?

[Malifice]

If this were true, you'd think the DMG would at least have some normative guidance in it about the appropriate relative frequencies of Easy/Medium/Hard/Deadly encounters. Something like, "You should have mostly Medium encounters, and Deadly encounters should only occur once every few sessions." It doesn't. All it does is present some math which says, descriptively, "Expect these kinds of encounters to be potentially deadly."

But you do agree that a whole chapter is devoted to aiding the DM in creating balanced encounters. Like... this is why we have the CR system and the XP budgeting formula right?

We don't just spin the wheel as DM's when designing encounters for the party. (emphasis intentional).


There is no kind of requirement for adherence to XP budgets.

PC abilities (and monster abilities) - from HP, DPR, save DC's etc are balanced around certain CR's - see also the rules for designing monsters. Modules as written take this into account as well (it's why the 'dungeon' is the standard environment from where the game itself gets its name - convenient enclosed mini arenas that contain discreet challenge appropriate encounters).

This is the assumed play style of the game, and the balance of the whole system is based around it.

Im not saying you cant ignore it, or tinker with it as you see fit as a DM. It's just that when doing so, you play around with the core assumptions that underpin the game (primarily balance and difficulty).


You can have every fight be quadruple-Deadly if you want it to be, or you can have it be Easy, or you can just have the fights be what they are (e.g. 2d6 trolls a la AD&D), and the DMG is just fine with any of that as long as you understand the potential consequences (PCs could die). It's not even a house rule, because there is nothing there to house rule--RAW imposes zero requirements.

I'm not saying its a 'RAW' requirement. I am saying its the core underlying assumption on which the game is built. A band of murder hobos unite together to storm a local conveniently placed ruin, encounter 6-8 challenges appropriate to their 'level' skills and experience, maybe top it off with a confrontation with the BBEG behind it all, gather treasure and return to town. They then rinse and repeat with the monsters growing in challenge as the PC's do.

You can deviate from this assumption (and the DMG gives some tips on how to do so, such as longer rest periods, gritty realism and so forth). But that doesnt mean that it still isnt the core assumption on which the game is balanced.

See also - complaints about the Warlock. It's mostly from players who play in campaigns where the DM either doesnt understand this core assumption, or willfully DMs contrary to it (permitting 5 minute adventuring days at one extreme; to being too heavy handed with rests at the other).

If you intent to DM contrary to it, thats fine. It's one of the few things I ask a new DM prior to commencing his campaign (my three questions are: how do referee the rest/ encounter mechanic, are there any house rules I need to be aware of, and do you allow evil PC's?).


FWIW, I find that quadruple-Deadly fights (e.g. 4 CR 10s against 4 10th level PCs) are usually pretty tough and could go either way. Anything less than double-Deadly is a cakewalk unless I (the DM) am deliberately playing the enemy like military veterans (e.g. taking full advantage of partial cover, coordinating attacks and focusing fire, exploiting environmental effects).

Give me an example of a 'double deadly' fight featuring 5 PC's of 5th level that isnt brutal (even vs a well rested party)?

I have deadly encounter being 5500xp. A 'double deadly' would be 11000xp (4 x CR 4 monsters).

Lets assume the party are advancing down a wide dungeon corridoor (30' wide, 80' long) when false walls burst open at the halfway point, revealing a helmed horror and a banshee in each side room (for a total of 2 horrors and 2 banshees).

For triple deadly, add another horror in each room (6 x CR4's). For quintuple deadly, add a bearded devil emerging from double doors to the end of the corridoor (6 x CR 4's and 1 x CR 3).

Even on 'double deadly' (two banshees and two horrors) the party are facing 2 x DC13 con saves (or die), 6d6 psychic damage even on a success on both saves (remembering they only have 5HD), and then 2 x 60 HP, AC 20, resistant to non magic weapons and spells, 2 x 1d10+5 damage multiattacking behemoths (and corrupting touch 3d6+2) carving any survivors to bits.

Two CR4's is a medium-hard encounter (should deplete resources, possibility one PC may be dropped). A single banshee and it's helmed horror mate would work a treat.

[Malifice]

How do Paladin/Bladelock builds work in practice? Which approaches have been tried out to joy or tears as the case may be?

My guesses start:


First level is Paladin (for heavy armor, mainly).
Feat is Polearm Mastery, making the weapon a glaive/halberd.
Race is often V Human, to get the feat early.
Fighting style is either GWF or Defensive.
The build really starts to click at Paladin 5/Warlock 3.
Ideal Oath is Devotion. Ideal Pact is Fiend. Working out the fluff on that takes some creativity. :)
Agonizing Blast is one key invocation, to give you a great ranged weapon as backup. Devil's Sight is another, especially if you pick V Human and hence don't have darkvision.


The build clicks at 2nd level (Paladin or Fighter 1 and Warlock 1). You have Hex up at will for insane damage to hard targets, and tank as good as anyone against mooks gaining (fiend pact temp HP) per kill. You have (second wind or lay on hands) to fall back on for some self healing, a solid AC and high HP.

At 3rd you pick up your invocations and two spells per rest allowing for Hex+(back up).

It just gets better from there.

I prefer Fighter (action surge allows for fireball+full attack, or full attack twice, or whatever) and the BM dice are a nice way of upping the DPR of the 'lock considerably.

[Corey]

The build clicks at 2nd level (Paladin or Fighter 1 and Warlock 1). You have Hex up at will for insane damage to hard targets, and tank as good as anyone against mooks gaining (fiend pact temp HP) per kill. You have (second wind or lay on hands) to fall back on for some self healing, a solid AC and high HP.

At 3rd you pick up your invocations and two spells per rest allowing for Hex+(back up).

It just gets better from there.

I prefer Fighter (action surge allows for fireball+full attack, or full attack twice, or whatever) and the BM dice are a nice way of upping the DPR of the 'lock considerably.

Thanks. So you're talking high STR along with high CHA, so you're not impatient about getting to the Pact of the Blade?

Another obvious area of concern is delay in getting to multiple attacks per round.

[Malifice]

Thanks. So you're talking high STR along with high CHA, so you're not impatient about getting to the Pact of the Blade?

Another obvious area of concern is delay in getting to multiple attacks per round.

Pimp Cha, Str, Con. Dump Int and Dex to 8. Have a happy 12 for Wisdom. Start Fighter (con saves, heavy armor). Vuman - your choice of polearm master or (if you wanna go all Elric) Great weapon master. I went the latter. Take either defence or GW style (again, I went the latter).

You only need Dex for initiative. Your ranged attacks key off Cha and you use Str for melee. Plus, sticking with strength opens up belts of giant strength later on (but YMMV).

Plays just like a Fighter at this level. Wear heavy armor and hit stuff hard, gaining bonus action attacks from kills and crits. Toggle GWM on when you really need something dead. Use second wind to stay in the fight. Make sure you are getting your short rests every 2-3 encounters.

At 2nd-6th (your next 5 levels) it's Warlock all the way. Grab Fiend (again, Elric/ Stormbringer) for Cha+warlock level temp HP for every thing you kill (and look to kill snipe as often as you can). Hex comes online at 2nd (1/1) level for a great damage spike (youre no different to a Ranger or Paladin now with hunters mark). Only a bonus action to cast, so you can hold it back for when needed, or to drop a different spell.

At 3rd (1/2) grab your two invocations. These are big on flavor. I love mask of many faces for it's amazing OOC versatility (impersonate anyone you want). Agonising blast is great, but not really a priority to you (you like getting in close and smacking stuff). Youre already doing 3d6+13 pretty regularly in combat with your sword, and scoring an extra bonus weapon attack whenever you drop something for another 3d6+13 so look to non combat stuff.

Importantly you now have 2 spells per short rest, so drop hex in the first fight, and keep that second slot in reserve between battles. If you havent used it by the time you short rest, cast armor of agathys for an extra layer of protection should you get bumped as you short rest.

Next level pick up your magical greatsword, and have fun with mirror image and scorching ray.

At 5th (1/4) as fighters get extra attack and casters get 3rd level spells you'll slightly lag behind. Pump charisma or grab either warcaster or GWM if you picked up polearm master at 1st. Warcaster + Con saves will save you warlock slots over your career.

From there, ride Warlock out to 6th (1/5). Grab the extra attack goodness of the martials, and you now have 3rd level spells of the casters including fireball, counterspell and fly (a single casting of hex for your first encounter that morning and it lasts 8 hours - barring failed concentration checks the whole day). So it goes:

Encounter (cast hex) + melee
Encounter (fireball or whatever) + melee
Rest (recover hex spell slot, hex remains up)
Encounter (fireball) + melee
Encounter (fireball) + melee
Rest (recover slots)
etc

Personally I would then dip back into Fighter for levels 7 and 8 (3/5 split) for action surge and superiority dice (precise strike to make those GWM -5/+10 hits land, and menacing strike to add an extra 1d8 damage when they do. Pushing attack to knock dudes flat for advantage first). Stay away from reaction manouvers (thats what hellish rebuke is for).

Youll play exactly like a GW Fighter for these levels - just with a bag of supernatural tricks and the ability to lob the occasional fireball, fly or turn invisible.

Past 8th level, its Warlock all the way. You'll nab dark ones luck for an amazing ability, feindish resilience for your choice of resilience to a damage (pairs well with armor of agathys if you choose well). Your next big break point is 14th level (11/3) when you get 3 spells per short rest, and make your first arcanum choice. Next level it's charisma to damage with your sword, followed by your 7th level arcana, and then the ability to hurl mofos through hell at 14th. Ride Warlock out for your 8th and 9th level arcanas. Your capstone is 9th level spells, and 4 slots per short rest.

Personally I would focus on pumping Charisma with your ASI's, and hold out for gauntlets of ogre power, and then a belt of giant strength (again, YMMV depending on your DM's view on ordering or building magical items). Second priority should be as dangerous a sword as you can get your hands on (Look for Blackrazor if you want to complete the Elric feel and your DM is stupid enough to give it you). You'll get a lot of mileage out of a ring of spell storing as well (youll always have a few short rests that you have a spare slot left over to recharge it, - it basically lets you carry an unused slot over between short rests). The rods of the pact keepers, magical armor etc are also nice to get items.

It plays exactly like a GWM fighter... except it casts 9th level spells.

[Corey]

Got it. Thanks!

My personal view is that Elric literally got his whole world destroyed, so I'm not a big fan. But I get that it's thematic. :)

So you're talking Fighter 3/Warlock 17, to preserve the chance to eventually get to Level 9 spells, e.g. Foresight.

Assuming V Human, you're staying fairly vulnerable to charms and so on. An alternative is Half Elf, who has advantage vs. charms and immunity to sleep. Then the feat doesn't kick in until Level 5, however, and it's a long time before CHA gets all the way up to 20. Whoops. You do get more skills that way, however.

With V Human Witch's Sight is pretty much your first invocation, I imagine.

Without doing the math, I'm guessing Polearm Mastery beats Great Weapon. The idea is that with the extra Hex damage, the to-hit/damage trade-off swings more to the to-hit. Also, Hex adds significantly to the value of the extra 1d4 attack.

I presume you're planning for Hex to take the concentration slot at most times (except, e.g., when Fly is badly needed). Hence Fireball or whatever as opposed to fancy battlefield control.

I imagine in most fights Armor of Agathys runs out before or soon after your first kill, so the conflict w/ the temp HP pools isn't major.

[Malifice]

Got it. Thanks!

My personal view is that Elric literally got his whole world destroyed, so I'm not a big fan. But I get that it's thematic. :)

Elric doomed his world as soon as he decided to save it (Stormbringers curse). But he's the eternal champion for a reason.


So you're talking Fighter 3/Warlock 17, to preserve the chance to eventually get to Level 9 spells, e.g. Foresight.

Warlock 17 nets you 9th level spells AND 4 slots per SR.

Fighter 3 opens up all sorts of nova options (action surge and sup dice) in addition to heavy armor, second wind, fighting style and con saves (and a few extra HP).

You'll play like a Fighter, but will have all sorts of tricks via invocations and spells up your sleeve. Dropping a counterspell, forcecage, true polymorph, dominate monster, create undead, contact other plane etc while smashing things in the face for a ton of damage is impressive.

If you can score a flametounge youre looking at (5d6+1d8+20)x5 plus 10d10 hurl through hell.

If you have a 'by the book' DM (short rests every 2-3 encounters) it'll play amazingly.


Assuming V Human, you're staying fairly vulnerable to charms and so on. An alternative is Half Elf, who has advantage vs. charms and immunity to sleep. Then the feat doesn't kick in until Level 5, however, and it's a long time before CHA gets all the way up to 20. Whoops. You do get more skills that way, however.

You get to add 1d10 to a single save once per short rest with dark ones luck and that will help (it's better than indomitable in my view)

I prefer human (particularly if youre going polearm+GWM). I take GWM and then spam Cha with every ASI. I then take feats (Alert, Lucky, Resilient (wisdom) and warcaster being right up there).

I leave Str at 16 and wait for the belt of giant strength.


With V Human Witch's Sight is pretty much your first invocation, I imagine.

Yep. Darkness+devils sight is a massive thing that comes online at low level.


Without doing the math, I'm guessing Polearm Mastery beats Great Weapon. The idea is that with the extra Hex damage, the to-hit/damage trade-off swings more to the to-hit. Also, Hex adds significantly to the value of the extra 1d4 attack.

Its great damage. GWM gives a higher 'top end' for damage but is much more swingy; polearm master is more reliable.

I prefer the sword. Both for the Elric vibe and because magic swords are more common. Also the swingyness of GWM can be ameliorated with the precise strike manouver at which point it wins out. I also cant justify having both feats on anything other than a fighter.


I presume you're planning for Hex to take the concentration slot at most times (except, e.g., when Fly is badly needed). Hence Fireball or whatever as opposed to fancy battlefield control.

Yep, hex is your go-to. Particularly at low level. It lasts all day after 3rd level. Drop it when you need to fly. There arent that many concentraion spells on the warlock list that vie for that concentration slot.

I sometimes almost feel it's worth a 5 level dip into Sorcerer for Haste, shield and a bit of metamagic (extend spell can make your AoA last 2 hours so precast prior to short rests etc), but its a huge investment. I avoid it.


I imagine in most fights Armor of Agathys runs out before or soon after your first kill, so the conflict w/ the temp HP pools isn't major.

Yep. AoA bounces between being amazing at mook clearance (or on solo BBEG's with lots of low damage attacks) to being a bit of a waste of a slot that drops too soon. I get a bit of mileage out of it when we short rest and I still have a slot leftover. It's one hour duration gives me an extra layer of protection to deal with any creatures that might attack us as we rest.

[coredump]

Sounds like the perfect defence to me.

Feel free to blast them with total impunity.
Sure, but a decent chunk of my 'offense' is them hitting me and taking damage. By having to multiclass my spell access is pretty limited at the early levels (currently 2-2). I am hoping this goes away a bit as I level.

[Malifice]

Sure, but a decent chunk of my 'offense' is them hitting me and taking damage. By having to multiclass my spell access is pretty limited at the early levels (currently 2-2). I am hoping this goes away a bit as I level.

You need to pose more of a threat so your DM attacks you :)

[MaxWilson]

But you do agree that a whole chapter is devoted to aiding the DM in creating balanced encounters. Like... this is why we have the CR system and the XP budgeting formula right?

No. Closer to three pages than a whole chapter.


Give me an example of a 'double deadly' fight featuring 5 PC's of 5th level that isnt brutal (even vs a well rested party)?

I have deadly encounter being 5500xp. A 'double deadly' would be 11000xp (4 x CR 4 monsters).

Lets assume the party are advancing down a wide dungeon corridoor (30' wide, 80' long) when false walls burst open at the halfway point, revealing a helmed horror and a banshee in each side room (for a total of 2 horrors and 2 banshees).

Banshees and intellect devourers are the deadliest of the CR 2-4 monsters, and you're cheating by starting in ambush mode (which according to your beloved DMG guidelines raises the difficulty level another step), but even so this battle is pretty straightforward assuming a competent party. Either the walls "burst open" on the scout(s), which means there's a 100' or more separation between them and the bulk of the party, or walls burst open on the bulk of the party, in which case the scouts are 100' away. In either case, any PCs who were surprised can buy themselves at least a round of respite by simply retreating at good speed towards the rest of the party. Meanwhile, the PCs who are not engaged are hitting the Banshee with ranged attacks and spells. If someone goes down to a Banshee wail, they get Healing Worded right back up to 1d4 HP. Meanwhile, the party Moon Druid or Lore Bard's wolves are tearing the Banshees to shreds (ignoring the Helmed Horror for now)--and yes, of course the druid summoned wolves before heading off down a mysterious dark dungeon corridor where spooky hidden doors open at random to vomit Banshees at you.


Even on 'double deadly' (two banshees and two horrors) the party are facing 2 x DC13 con saves (or die), 6d6 psychic damage even on a success on both saves (remembering they only have 5HD), and then 2 x 60 HP, AC 20, resistant to non magic weapons and spells, 2 x 1d10+5 damage multiattacking behemoths (and corrupting touch 3d6+2) carving any survivors to bits.

It's not DC 13 or die, it's DC 13 or get reduced to 0 HP. And the range on the Banshee wail is pathetic--it's only going to hit three PCs at the very most even if the Banshee emerges right next to the main body of troops. Assuming the PCs have good stats (Con 14 average) and the Inspiring Leader feat (+9-ish temp HP), they probably have a grand total of around 220 HP, so a Helmed Horror which inflicts about 10 points of total damage per round isn't particularly scary.

The Banshees are scary, but that's not because it's a "Deadly" encounter. The Banshee would still be scary if it was a single lone Banshee (Trivial encounter, not even Easy).

Banshees and Intellect Devourers are the scariest low-CR monsters in the MM. If it were something more standard, e.g. four Helmed Horrors and two Basilisks it would still be a double-Deadly encounter, but would nonetheless be straightforward. Regroup from the ambush first, then use spells such as Web to discomfit the Helmed Horrors while engaging with melee tanks (Dodging as necessary), and kill everything to death with ranged weaponry.

[Mr Adventurer]

Is there a Bladelock specific handbook or guide somewhere?

[Submortimer]

Is there a Bladelock specific handbook or guide somewhere?

Not really, but it's not really needed.

Stats:
- Charisma first
- Strength or Dex second
- Con third

Multiclass
- Start with one level of fighter (Armor/Shield Proficiency, Con saving throw proficiency, second wind, Fighting style)
- Start with three levels of Rogue, take Assassin

Patron
- Fiend is the most melee-friendly

Race
- Human, Tiefling (dexlock), Dragonborn (STRlock)

Feats
- Either Dual Wielder, GWM or Polearm Master, depending on your weapon(s) of choice.
- Warcaster
- Sentinel (maybe; has great synergy with both Polearm master and Darkness+devil's sight.

Invocations
- Devil's Sight, Agonizing blast, Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker; after that, whatever else you want.

Spells
- 1st level: Hex, Armor of Agythys
- 2nd level: Darkness

Everything else is pretty much your choice, this is all the core stuff. The dip into either Rogue or Fighter opens up the Bladelock so much, making it a much more viable option.

[Mara]

Ah yes the bladelock. Why would anyone want to play a full caster that can use any magic weapon she ever finds?

Oh sorry that your Cantrip is so effective that you either have to use a great sword or a magic weapon to keep up with it. "but if I'm not dexterity based then my ac suffers!" - Gee sorry that you can't do more damage and have higher defenses than a fighter on top of your full casting.

Still not satisfied? Try going variant human and get heavy armor prof by 4. Your stats take a hit but your strength is still 18 at 4. I would then max cha before taking Stength to 20 at level 16. Make sure to play heavy metal music during your turns.

[JellyPooga]

Make sure to play heavy metal music during your turns.

Heh. So here's a potentially controversial question; ignoring the fluff (as binding as it might be with Fiend Pacts etc.), can anyone suggest a Bladelock that fits a truly heroic archetype? Personally, I'm struggling. You've got the heavy armoured "Doomknight", the cagey anti-hero (you know the type; permanent 5 o'clock shadow, dark clothes, probably some degree of criminal background and so forth), heck, you've probably even got the "for the greater good" guy that has fallen beyond his original high ideals, but I'm kinda stumped to imagine a Bladelock (moreso than any other type of Warlock) that really fits into the Hero niche. Throw me some inspiration, guys!

[Corey]

Race
- Human, Tiefling (dexlock), Dragonborn (STRlock)


I presume Half-Elf as well.

And yeah, I made a typo above of Witch's Sight when I meant Devil's Sight.

[mephnick]

Heh. So here's a potentially controversial question; ignoring the fluff (as binding as it might be with Fiend Pacts etc.), can anyone suggest a Bladelock that fits a truly heroic archetype? Personally, I'm struggling. You've got the heavy armoured "Doomknight", the cagey anti-hero (you know the type; permanent 5 o'clock shadow, dark clothes, probably some degree of criminal background and so forth), heck, you've probably even got the "for the greater good" guy that has fallen beyond his original high ideals, but I'm kinda stumped to imagine a Bladelock (moreso than any other type of Warlock) that really fits into the Hero niche. Throw me some inspiration, guys!

Honestly if we're ignoring fluff, the Bladelock makes a pretty good holy champion if you just describe the spells differently. There's no reason warlock powers have to consists of dark, brooding black energy or whatever. The warlocks in my campaign can be granted powers from any powerful patron, angels included.

[Corey]

Heh. So here's a potentially controversial question; ignoring the fluff (as binding as it might be with Fiend Pacts etc.), can anyone suggest a Bladelock that fits a truly heroic archetype? Personally, I'm struggling. You've got the heavy armoured "Doomknight", the cagey anti-hero (you know the type; permanent 5 o'clock shadow, dark clothes, probably some degree of criminal background and so forth), heck, you've probably even got the "for the greater good" guy that has fallen beyond his original high ideals, but I'm kinda stumped to imagine a Bladelock (moreso than any other type of Warlock) that really fits into the Hero niche. Throw me some inspiration, guys!

Emerging from the wreckage of a country/civilization justifiably brought low. The "justifiably" pushes off all the non-heroic stuff on his forebears; he's just using every tool at his disposal.

[JellyPooga]

Honestly if we're ignoring fluff, the Bladelock makes a pretty good holy champion if you just describe the spells differently. There's no reason warlock powers have to consists of dark, brooding black energy or whatever. The warlocks in my campaign can be granted powers from any powerful patron, angels included.

I like it. It's not something I'd considered, to be honest. I'd always thought of the Warlock as being such a dark-themed Class, but as you say, just a little re-fluffing could make for a very "light-side" character. Nice.


Emerging from the wreckage of a country/civilization justifiably brought low. The "justifiably" pushes off all the non-heroic stuff on his forebears; he's just using every tool at his disposal.

That I would see as the "guy who starts off with high ideals, but has started down the slippery slope" sort of character. Although he might have honourable intentions, he's dealing with darker forces and that makes him inherently a dark character.

[Sigreid]

Heh. So here's a potentially controversial question; ignoring the fluff (as binding as it might be with Fiend Pacts etc.), can anyone suggest a Bladelock that fits a truly heroic archetype? Personally, I'm struggling. You've got the heavy armoured "Doomknight", the cagey anti-hero (you know the type; permanent 5 o'clock shadow, dark clothes, probably some degree of criminal background and so forth), heck, you've probably even got the "for the greater good" guy that has fallen beyond his original high ideals, but I'm kinda stumped to imagine a Bladelock (moreso than any other type of Warlock) that really fits into the Hero niche. Throw me some inspiration, guys!

There doesn't have to be anything at all dark or foreboding about a fey pact warlock. Really, a fey pact warlock could be identical to a OA paladin in temperament and goals.

[Submortimer]

There doesn't have to be anything at all dark or foreboding about a fey pact warlock. Really, a fey pact warlock could be identical to a OA paladin in temperament and goals.

That was what I was going to say. Fey pact is certainly not inherently evil. That being said, one of the best uses for warlock is to refluff it as inborn power like a sorcerer. That's how I did my Gambit build: eldritch blast as exploding cards, pact blade as him charging a weapon, all kinds of natural charm, resistance to psychic damage, etc.

[Hawkstar]

Honestly if we're ignoring fluff, the Bladelock makes a pretty good holy champion if you just describe the spells differently. There's no reason warlock powers have to consists of dark, brooding black energy or whatever. The warlocks in my campaign can be granted powers from any powerful patron, angels included.
I've been thinking about how to homebrew a "Saint" Patron warlock subclass. I can find good spells... but beyond "All spells and invocations deal radiant damage", I can't think of other class features.

[Malifice]

No. Closer to three pages than a whole chapter.



Banshees and intellect devourers are the deadliest of the CR 2-4 monsters, and you're cheating by starting in ambush mode (which according to your beloved DMG guidelines raises the difficulty level another step), but even so this battle is pretty straightforward assuming a competent party. Either the walls "burst open" on the scout(s), which means there's a 100' or more separation between them and the bulk of the party, or walls burst open on the bulk of the party, in which case the scouts are 100' away. In either case, any PCs who were surprised can buy themselves at least a round of respite by simply retreating at good speed towards the rest of the party. Meanwhile, the PCs who are not engaged are hitting the Banshee with ranged attacks and spells. If someone goes down to a Banshee wail, they get Healing Worded right back up to 1d4 HP. Meanwhile, the party Moon Druid or Lore Bard's wolves are tearing the Banshees to shreds (ignoring the Helmed Horror for now)--and yes, of course the druid summoned wolves before heading off down a mysterious dark dungeon corridor where spooky hidden doors open at random to vomit Banshees at you.



It's not DC 13 or die, it's DC 13 or get reduced to 0 HP. And the range on the Banshee wail is pathetic--it's only going to hit three PCs at the very most even if the Banshee emerges right next to the main body of troops. Assuming the PCs have good stats (Con 14 average) and the Inspiring Leader feat (+9-ish temp HP), they probably have a grand total of around 220 HP, so a Helmed Horror which inflicts about 10 points of total damage per round isn't particularly scary.

The Banshees are scary, but that's not because it's a "Deadly" encounter. The Banshee would still be scary if it was a single lone Banshee (Trivial encounter, not even Easy).

Banshees and Intellect Devourers are the scariest low-CR monsters in the MM. If it were something more standard, e.g. four Helmed Horrors and two Basilisks it would still be a double-Deadly encounter, but would nonetheless be straightforward. Regroup from the ambush first, then use spells such as Web to discomfit the Helmed Horrors while engaging with melee tanks (Dodging as necessary), and kill everything to death with ranged weaponry.

It's not an ambush. No-one is surprised.

220hp at 5th level? Come again? A party spaced out with 'scouts' isolated from the main body in dungeons?

Also, don't forget you get at least six of these double deadly encounters before a long rest, and at least 2 before you get a short rest more often than not.

[charcoalninja]

Late to the party but wanted to throw my hat in the ring anway:
If you're human and start with Tempest or War Cleric you can rock Heavy Armour and Heavy Armour mastery for your Fiend Bladelock and enjoy being one of the most durable characters in the game.

At level 4 (Cleric 1 / Warlock 3) You're boasting False life at will which is starting every fight with 8 temp (temp hp don't stack they overlap so you use false life until you're full), gain 6-7 more temp whenever you drop someone, have heavy armour and a shield if you want (I did this while I waited for Warlock 4 for Warcaster so I could cast) and DR 3/-. Additionally if by some miracle they do manage to hurt you enough, you can cast healing spells out of your short rest slots, and have all of the utility of 1st level cleric spells and WIS mod free Hellish Rebukes (well 2d8 reactive damage, but it's close) not to mention AOE that targets CON rather than DEX.

Bladelock is amazing for a lot of reasons, and it really comes to life with a quick dip in something that gives you some decent armour.

[Submortimer]

I've been thinking about how to homebrew a "Saint" Patron warlock subclass. I can find good spells... but beyond "All spells and invocations deal radiant damage", I can't think of other class features.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?395720-Celestial-Warlock-Patron&p=18740019#post18740019

I've been using this one in a recent game, seems to work out quite well.

[Corey]

WIS mod free Hellish Rebukes

You mean Spiritual Weapon?

[JellyPooga]

There doesn't have to be anything at all dark or foreboding about a fey pact warlock.

That was what I was going to say. Fey pact is certainly not inherently evil.

I'll agree that Fey Pact is not inherently evil, but the nature of having a Pact with anything except that which has the highest of ideals has inextricably sinister connotations. Even the guy who appeals to a good deity or angel for a Pact, or even just accepts one if offered, has a certain amount of "edginess" for his power-grab without having, necessarily, to earn it.

Take the Paladin; he's essentially taken a sort of Angel Pact. He gets divine aid with the cost of largely unspecified future obedience to a set of ideals or a deity. The very fact that this is a guy in debt to a higher power gives him an edge in his personality; he hasn't really achieved his power through training or physical effort, like a Fighter or Rogue, it's been given. He has more than he should have and now must "pay the tax-man" through his deeds. The unspecified nature of how that debt might be paid makes his motivations slightly suspect.

Now apply that to the Warlock. If the Paladin, who is supposed to be dedicated to the highest of ideals, is a slightly edgy character, how much more so the Warlock with a Fey Pact? Whether the Fey he has a pact with is benign or malevolent, the very nature of a Pact is on the dodgy side of the personality scale (if not the alignment one).

[Xetheral]

This is the assumed play style of the game, and the balance of the whole system is based around it.

...

I'm not saying its a 'RAW' requirement. I am saying its the core underlying assumption on which the game is built. A band of murder hobos unite together to storm a local conveniently placed ruin, encounter 6-8 challenges appropriate to their 'level' skills and experience, maybe top it off with a confrontation with the BBEG behind it all, gather treasure and return to town. They then rinse and repeat with the monsters growing in challenge as the PC's do.

You can deviate from this assumption (and the DMG gives some tips on how to do so, such as longer rest periods, gritty realism and so forth). But that doesnt mean that it still isnt the core assumption on which the game is balanced.

If the game isn't robust enough to handle anything other than rigidly following the encounter design advice in the DMG, then that's a weakness of the system. I like 5e, and very much hope you are wrong that the designers built the game on the assumption that encounters would be built primarily using the guidelines in the DMG.

Encounter--design guidelines, like all DMing advice, are useful tools for those who need or want them. They shouldn't be used as a way to shoehorn tables into playing a tightly-circumscribed game just so that it's easier to balance. The "core assumption" on which the game is balanced should be that everyone's going to do things differently, a fact that forum discussions provide ample evidence for.

[Mara]

If the game isn't robust enough to handle anything other than rigidly following the encounter design advice in the DMG, then that's a weakness of the system. I like 5e, and very much hope you are wrong that the designers built the game on the assumption that encounters would be built primarily using the guidelines in the DMG.

Encounter--design guidelines, like all DMing advice, are useful tools for those who need or want them. They shouldn't be used as a way to shoehorn tables into playing a tightly-circumscribed game just so that it's easier to balance. The "core assumption" on which the game is balanced should be that everyone's going to do things differently, a fact that forum discussions provide ample evidence for. idk what he is getting at, but large numbers of low cr creatures is always a threat.

Single high cr creatures can be brought low by good tactics. This isn't 4e or 3.5 no one safe regardless of level.

[MaxWilson]

It's not an ambush. No-one is surprised.

220hp at 5th level? Come again? A party spaced out with 'scouts' isolated from the main body in dungeons?

Also, don't forget you get at least six of these double deadly encounters before a long rest, and at least 2 before you get a short rest more often than not.

Yeah, you said there are 5 5th level characters. E.g. a fighter with 14 Con will have 44 real HP and 9 temp HP (Inspired Leader) = 53 HP. If there were five fighters that would be 265 HP. Five Clerics/Warlocks would be 235 HP. 220 HP is probably on the low side as an estimate, but eh, whatever. The point is that the Helmed Horrors aren't chewing through the whole party anytime soon.

Yes, of course scouts or pickets are SOP. It's 5E, remember? Ranged/mobile rules. If you keep everybody in a clump, they won't have any opportunity to exercise ranged power freely because they'll be too busy Dashing.

RE: "don't forget you get at least six of these"... nice job changing the goalposts. We're talking about whether a double-Deadly encounter is brutal "even vs a well rested party" (your words, post #85). Finish that discussion about combat difficulty, and then we can talk about adventuring pacing, but you don't get to change the subject in the middle of the discussion.

[Corey]

I wasn't aware that Inspiring Leader was a common feat by Level 5.

[tieren]

I'll agree that Fey Pact is not inherently evil, but the nature of having a Pact with anything except that which has the highest of ideals has inextricably sinister connotations. Even the guy who appeals to a good deity or angel for a Pact, or even just accepts one if offered, has a certain amount of "edginess" for his power-grab without having, necessarily, to earn it.

Take the Paladin; he's essentially taken a sort of Angel Pact. He gets divine aid with the cost of largely unspecified future obedience to a set of ideals or a deity. The very fact that this is a guy in debt to a higher power gives him an edge in his personality; he hasn't really achieved his power through training or physical effort, like a Fighter or Rogue, it's been given. He has more than he should have and now must "pay the tax-man" through his deeds. The unspecified nature of how that debt might be paid makes his motivations slightly suspect.

Now apply that to the Warlock. If the Paladin, who is supposed to be dedicated to the highest of ideals, is a slightly edgy character, how much more so the Warlock with a Fey Pact? Whether the Fey he has a pact with is benign or malevolent, the very nature of a Pact is on the dodgy side of the personality scale (if not the alignment one).

Consider an oath of the ancients paladin. Living up to the ideals of embracing and spreading the light. Lets say he is chaotic good and has been enjoying the life in and around an enchanted wood where he befriends some fey. At a time of great need he performs some service for the fey lord of the forest and they become friends. The fey lord then makes an offer to bestow additional power upon the paladin if he will make a pact to aid the forest in times of need.

Paladin then multiclasses into fey-pact warlock with no inherent dark broodiness at all.

I am actually considering a paladin 7/warlock 13 build based on this very premise.

[MaxWilson]

I wasn't aware that Inspiring Leader was a common feat by Level 5.

You should strongly consider it as a feat for variant humans. Especially at level 1, having an extra 4-5 temp HP for everyone in the party, per short rest, is a real boon to survivability. And it doesn't lose steam later on, it continues to be good forever.

Goes well with hirelings too. Those Guards you hired? They don't have 11 HP now, they have 27.

[charcoalninja]

You mean Spiritual Weapon?

Wrath of the Storm, Tempest cleric level 1 Domain feature I think it's called. Wis mod times per day you can use your reaction to deal 2d8 thunder or lightning damage. basically a ghetto Hellish Rebuke.

[Hawkstar]

I'll agree that Fey Pact is not inherently evil, but the nature of having a Pact with anything except that which has the highest of ideals has inextricably sinister connotations. Even the guy who appeals to a good deity or angel for a Pact, or even just accepts one if offered, has a certain amount of "edginess" for his power-grab without having, necessarily, to earn it.

Take the Paladin; he's essentially taken a sort of Angel Pact. He gets divine aid with the cost of largely unspecified future obedience to a set of ideals or a deity. The very fact that this is a guy in debt to a higher power gives him an edge in his personality; he hasn't really achieved his power through training or physical effort, like a Fighter or Rogue, it's been given. He has more than he should have and now must "pay the tax-man" through his deeds. The unspecified nature of how that debt might be paid makes his motivations slightly suspect.

Now apply that to the Warlock. If the Paladin, who is supposed to be dedicated to the highest of ideals, is a slightly edgy character, how much more so the Warlock with a Fey Pact? Whether the Fey he has a pact with is benign or malevolent, the very nature of a Pact is on the dodgy side of the personality scale (if not the alignment one).
Since when have edge and privilege been synonymous? There is absolutely nothing 'edgy' about... whatever you're going on about. Unless ultrarich businessmen are the edgiest people in the world?

[Malifice]

Yeah, you said there are 5 5th level characters. E.g. a fighter with 14 Con will have 44 real HP and 9 temp HP (Inspired Leader) = 53 HP.

4 Helmed horrors have 240HP and take half damage from non magic weapons (so most likely at this level 480HP). They have an AC of 20 and deal around 8 damage a hit twice per round at +6.

Theyre also immune to tons of stuff including a few spells (fireball, lightning bolt, heat metal) and force, necrotic and poison and a bucketload of conditions.

They also fly.

Im sorry if you think that this would be a cake walk for a party of 5 PC's.

Swap them out for 4 flameskulls and open the combat with 4 x fireballs. Against 5th level PC's, or 4 banshees and 4 x DC 13 con saves for everyone.

It should amount to a TPK barring some extremely lucky rolls.

Or for something different how about an Orc war chief, 4 Orogs, 9 Orcs. Your standard party of 5 PC's should be extremely hard pressed against that kind of assault. Flight and Fireball could clear out most of the mooks, but I wouldnt want to be the fighters left dealing with the orogs and the chief.


Yes, of course scouts or pickets are SOP. It's 5E, remember? Ranged/mobile rules. If you keep everybody in a clump, they won't have any opportunity to exercise ranged power freely because they'll be too busy Dashing.

Get used to losing a lot of scouts. One failed perception check and youre surrounded by a horde of monsters.


RE: "don't forget you get at least six of these"... nice job changing the goalposts. We're talking about whether a double-Deadly encounter is brutal "even vs a well rested party" (your words, post #85). Finish that discussion about combat difficulty, and then we can talk about adventuring pacing, but you don't get to change the subject in the middle of the discussion.

The two directly tie into one another. The point of encounters is not to push the party to the brink of death each ecounter - you'll only wind up with a TPK that way due to the swingy nature of DnD combat - it's to drain resources. Medium encounters drain a portion of the parties resources (spell slots, short and long rest recharge abilities, hit dice and HP etc). The goal isnt to throw one single brutal encounter at the party per day, but 6 or so moderate ones in a row with short rests paced out among them.

Try to throw 2-3 moderate - hard encounters at your party. Then allow them to short rest. Then repeat this and allow another short rest. Then throw 2-3 more at them and allow a long rest.

Single encounter days need to be harder as the parties options for nova strikes are far more plentiful. If they want to nova on your first encounter for the AD, then fine. Throw another wave at them. Then again. And again. They'll get the picture, conserve abilities and you wont find your medium difficulty encounters getting steamrolled all the time.

Dont do this all the time. If you maintain around a 50 percent adherance to the 6-7 encounter AD, your party will naturally conserve resorces (they wont know if it's a 6 encounter day, or a single encounter for the day). They'll pace themselves and you wont have to do a thing to maintain it.

It's a balancing act.

[Ziegander]

I don't understand Malifice, clearly you love the Bladelock and think it's a great addition to any party, able to kick a ton of ass in melee combat and still be a full-caster.

Doesn't it... not work that way? Okay, sure, you can cast Hex in the morning and then, once you're a 5th level Warlock, keep it up for most of the day (if not all of it) even after you recover the spell slot. But you still only have two spell slots. In the morning you've got only one left. And according to you, that's Armor of Agathys.

Okay, so if we assume an 8 hour adventuring day with 6 encounters and two short rests, that means roughly two encounters, then a rest, then two encounters, then a rest, then two more encounters. Let's assume two three-hour blocks and a final two-hour block. That means, before your first rest, you've got Hex up, good, and you've cast Armor of Agathys. Now for two hours you have no spell slots. :smallannoyed:

Alright, but then you get a rest in! So, now you've got Hex and two spell slots. So that's only one hour with no spell slots. Oh, well, ****. :smallconfused:

So, okay, that final block's only two hours. Get that last rest in, keep that Hex up, and now you've got two spell slots again. For these last two hours, the ones you're likely to face the BBEG in, right, you've got Hex and Armor of Agathys up the whole time! Great! Only... you still aren't casting any other spells. Where are your fireballs and hellish rebukes? They're gone, that's where, because you are using all of your spells to try and replace a fighter. When do you get that 3rd spell slot to use on crap like Fireball and Hellish Rebuke (or for keeping Armor of Agathys up during long adventure blocks)? Not until six levels from now!

See, it seems to me that you're falling into that same Schroedinger's Wizard argument that perverted so many 3e discussions, only applying it to the Warlock in 5e. Explain to me where I'm wrong, because I'm just not understanding how you can say the Bladelock is great because he's always got Hex and AoA and Hellish Rebuke and 9th level spells. He doesn't have all that. He has some of that some of the time. Right? Am I taking crazy pills?

[Z3ro]

I don't understand Malifice, clearly you love the Bladelock and think it's a great addition to any party, able to kick a ton of ass in melee combat and still be a full-caster.

Doesn't it... not work that way?

I can only speak for my own experiences, obviously, but I've found that in playing the bladelock, you're much more effective as a switch hitter than a pure melee build. If you're looking for pure melee spell power, paladin is a much more effective option. Bladelock is more versatile by virtue of being able to melee, but also being able to fight at range.

When I played one (levels 3-9), I actually spent most of my spell slots on AoE damage spells, fireball being my favorite. if you can get 4-5 guys in that fireball, it does far more damage than having hex up, for example. I also used EB a lot, often in the first round or two before I closed to melee (indicentally, Hex is much better with EB). Then, depending on the situation, I'd close and TWF (my DM made the feat also grant the fight style, but a 1 level fighter dip would have done that too).

Now, was I the strongest fighter? No, but it gave me some options I wouldn't otherwise have had, and it was a lot of fun. In a party with a barbarian, a ranger, and a rogue, I didn't feel out of place or useless at all (in addition to the melee, I was also the party face).

[Mara]

I don't particularly like Hex on a bladelock. You aren't prof in Con nor do you likely have warcaster AND there are better things to use the slot on.

I figure that a bladelock does this kind of damage without finding a magic weapon:

At lvl 3: 2d6+3 vs 1d10+3

At lvl 4: 2d6+4 vs 1d10+3

At lvl 5: 4d6+8 vs 2d10+6

At lvl 8: 4d6+8 vs 2d10+8

At lvl 11: 4d6+8 vs 3d10+12

At lvl 12: 4d6+18 vs 3d10+15

At lvl 16: 4d6+20 vs 3d10+15

At lvl 17: 4d6+20 vs 4d10+20

I would save spells for encounter changers or mook clears. Darkness + Devil's Sight seems like the first really stand out combo.

[Ziegander]

So let's consider actual builds and (admittedly) theoretical play. Let's go with two level 8 Warlocks (because it's going to take months of IRL game time to even reach that level) and one level 8 Fighter.

Our Warlocks will be one "classic blastlock" with the Tome boon and one "bladelock" of the dual-wielding variety. Our Fighter will be a "classic" greatsworder with Great Weapon Master. Everyone gets 27 point buy, everyone gets one uncommon magic item of their choice.

Blastlock stats - Half-Elf; Str 8 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 12 Cha 20, HP 59, AC 14; EB +8 to hit; 2d10+10; magic item - Broom of Flying
With the Tome Pact, Shillelagh allows the "Blastlock" to swing a staff around at +8 to hit; 1d8+5 damage at the cost of 1 bonus action per minute.

Bladelock stats - Tiefling; Str 10 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 9 Wis 10 Cha 18, HP 59, AC 14; EB +7 to hit; 2d10+8; +1 Shortsword/Shortsword +7/+7/+6 to hit (w/bonus action); 2d6+8/1d6 (w/bonus action); magic item - +1 Shortsword

Great Weapon Master stats - VHuman; Str 20 Dex 10 Con 16 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 9, HP 75, AC 17 (w/ease); Greatsword +9/+9 to hit; 4d6+12; magic item - +1 Greatsword

The Bladelock is forced to hybridize, and his stats, attack bonus, and damage all suffer for it. For his extra melee "option" he loses a lot. Meanwhile the Fighter has an extra ASI he hasn't even used, and moar damage (champion crits), spells, or superiority dice (for moaarr moar damage), and the Tome Blastlock has out-of-combat utility from rituals and keeps up with the fighter's damage without ever casting spells all while flying and knocking foes back. If the Bladelock wants to keep up in damage, he has to cast his spells, killing his actual versatility, something the blastlock doesn't have to worry about.

So, from where I'm sitting, at 8th level, the Bladelock is clearly the weakest out of the bunch, losing both the raw combat numbers game and the utility game. I don't see how the bladelock is ever able to catch up.

[weaseldust]

Heh. So here's a potentially controversial question; ignoring the fluff (as binding as it might be with Fiend Pacts etc.), can anyone suggest a Bladelock that fits a truly heroic archetype? Personally, I'm struggling. You've got the heavy armoured "Doomknight", the cagey anti-hero (you know the type; permanent 5 o'clock shadow, dark clothes, probably some degree of criminal background and so forth), heck, you've probably even got the "for the greater good" guy that has fallen beyond his original high ideals, but I'm kinda stumped to imagine a Bladelock (moreso than any other type of Warlock) that really fits into the Hero niche. Throw me some inspiration, guys!

It's easier if you take into account that the patron doesn't have to be a willing participant, or aware of the pact, or able to make a good deal even if they are. The following are some ideas:


The fey have an interest in working together with mortals to defend the land against demons or necromancers or somesuch. They give the human king a magic sword, which amplifies his purity of heart to grant him certain magical abilities to help defend the land. (Isn't this sort of King Arthur?)

A psychic researcher has her mind invaded by elder beings, unintentionally creating a persistent astral thread linking it to their court in the outer realms. She can't rid herself of the constant, faint sound of unnatural flutes and what have you, but using her strength of mind she can venture across the connection and defeat the minor aberrations that dwell there, squeezing them dry of their eldritch power and funneling it into useful spells.

A street urchin stumbles across a sorcerer summoning a demon. She sneaks in, cuts off the demon's piglike tail while he isn't looking, and runs off. He's never been able to track her down to get it back, which is a matter of great anguish for him because having the tail grants the thief a share of his power, which she is slowly learning to use. She uses it to do good deeds, protect the weak, and so on.

A child is kidnapped by the fey and raised as one of their own. He is empowered with magic by a faerie court as one of its defenders. He later sickens of the inhumanity of these fey, who like to hunt and torment the local peasantry, and he sets off in search of his birth family. He tries to spend as much time as possible with common people to learn how to live among them, and consequently ends up defending them against his former comrades and other dangers.

A gnomish inventor devises a machine that can capture the fiends that besiege his community, keep them in suspended animation, and milk their power to use himself. He employs it to heroically defend his gnomish village against those same fiends and various other terrors.

An ordinary farmer stumbles across an archon locked in battle with a devil. He bravely distracts the devil with a jab from his pitchfork, allowing the archon to overcome it. The archon extracts some of the defeated devil's essence and uses it to grant the farmer a share its power to use for good.

The queen of the fey is looking to educate her wayward daughter. She turns the daughter into a sprite and chooses the bravest and kindest human woman she can find to act as her guide and teacher. Said woman hardly finds this convenient and has no idea how to go about tutoring a fey princess, but the queen figures that following around a genuinely good person will be a good formative experience in itself. The woman is granted magical ability to help her, though at first the fey queen forgets to tell her much about how to use it. [EDIT: I suppose this requires her to be a chain-pact Warlock instead.]

A lawyer with an interest in the arcane sells his soul to devils in exchange for power. The loophole he thought would keep his soul from actually passing in their hands turns out to have been craftily plugged somewhere in their 300-page contract, but he does manage to have the magic classified as part of his estate without the devils realizing, so that his eldest child inherits his Warlock abilities when he dies. She's not too happy about it, but she decides to try to use them to heroically rescue her father from his afterlife in the hands of devils.

[Mara]

So let's consider actual builds and (admittedly) theoretical play. Let's go with two level 8 Warlocks (because it's going to take months of IRL game time to even reach that level) and one level 8 Fighter.

Our Warlocks will be one "classic blastlock" with the Tome boon and one "bladelock" of the dual-wielding variety. Our Fighter will be a "classic" greatsworder with Great Weapon Master. Everyone gets 27 point buy, everyone gets one uncommon magic item of their choice.

Blastlock stats - Half-Elf; Str 8 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 12 Cha 20, HP 59, AC 14; EB +8 to hit; 2d10+10; magic item - Broom of Flying
With the Tome Pact, Shillelagh allows the "Blastlock" to swing a staff around at +8 to hit; 1d8+5 damage at the cost of 1 bonus action per minute.

Bladelock stats - Tiefling; Str 10 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 9 Wis 10 Cha 18, HP 59, AC 14; EB +7 to hit; 2d10+8; +1 Shortsword/Shortsword +7/+7/+6 to hit (w/bonus action); 2d6+8/1d6 (w/bonus action); magic item - +1 Shortsword

Great Weapon Master stats - VHuman; Str 20 Dex 10 Con 16 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 9, HP 75, AC 17 (w/ease); Greatsword +9/+9 to hit; 4d6+12; magic item - +1 Greatsword

The Bladelock is forced to hybridize, and his stats, attack bonus, and damage all suffer for it. For his extra melee "option" he loses a lot. Meanwhile the Fighter has an extra ASI he hasn't even used, and moar damage (champion crits), spells, or superiority dice (for moaarr moar damage), and the Tome Blastlock has out-of-combat utility from rituals and keeps up with the fighter's damage without ever casting spells all while flying and knocking foes back. If the Bladelock wants to keep up in damage, he has to cast his spells, killing his actual versatility, something the blastlock doesn't have to worry about.

So, from where I'm sitting, at 8th level, the Bladelock is clearly the weakest out of the bunch, losing both the raw combat numbers game and the utility game. I don't see how the bladelock is ever able to catch up.

Variant human bladelock. Feats: moderately armored, heavily armored.
Stats 18 str 8 dex 14 con 8 int 10 wis 18 cha.
AC 18. 59 HP. EB +7 to hit 2d10+8 damage. +1 Greatsword +8 to hit 4d6+10 damage

Making a poor bladelock does not make bladelocks bad.

[Ziegander]

Variant human bladelock. Feats: moderately armored, heavily armored.
Stats 18 str 8 dex 14 con 8 int 10 wis 18 cha.
AC 18. 59 HP. EB +7 to hit 2d10+8 damage. +1 Greatsword +8 to hit 4d6+10 damage

Making a poor bladelock does not make bladelocks bad.

VHuman Bladelock with 27 point buy starts with Str 16 (for 9 pts) Dex 8 (for 0 pts) Con 14 (for 7 pts) Int 8 (for 0 pts) Wis 10 (for 2 pts) and Cha 16 (for 9 pts). At 1st level he takes the Moderately Armored feat raising his Strength to 17, allowing him up to 17 AC (only he can't actually afford that for a level or two). At 4th level he takes the Heavy Armored feat raising his Strength to 18, and bumping his AC up to 18 if he can afford Plate (probably not for another level or two). At 8th he finally takes +2 to Cha.

Okay, sure, your bladelock is certainly better than mine, but what have you proven? That an 8th level bladelock can compete against a blastlock in terms of raw damage per round. It still loses out on out-of-combat utility for the dubious benefit of being ever-so-slightly more damaging in melee combat than the blastlock is at range while flying.

[Mara]

VHuman Bladelock with 27 point buy starts with Str 16 (for 9 pts) Dex 8 (for 0 pts) Con 14 (for 7 pts) Int 8 (for 0 pts) Wis 10 (for 2 pts) and Cha 16 (for 9 pts). At 1st level he takes the Moderately Armored feat raising his Strength to 17, allowing him up to 17 AC (only he can't actually afford that for a level or two). At 4th level he takes the Heavy Armored feat raising his Strength to 18, and bumping his AC up to 18 if he can afford Plate (probably not for another level or two). At 8th he finally takes +2 to Cha.

Okay, sure, your bladelock is certainly better than mine, but what have you proven? That an 8th level bladelock can compete against a blastlock in terms of raw damage per round. It still loses out on out-of-combat utility for the dubious benefit of being ever-so-slightly more damaging in melee combat than the blastlock is at range while flying.
You have better AC than a blastlock and you don't have to run from enemies. Ranged enemies take EB which outpaces fighter range damage.

Blastlock has more utility but is squishy-er.
EK either deals more damage or is more tanky. But has less utility and aoe.

For an EK switch my bladelocks int and cha. Grab ritual caster(wizard) at 1 and war caster at 6. Strength increase at 4 and 8. Use firebolt for range attack. Grab enlarge person at 8. For two combats the EK with a +1 longsword does 2d8+2d4+12 with 21 ac and 68 hp. Can boost to 26 ac 4 rounds per day.. But range damage is only 2d10.

Meanwhile the bladelock can do two fireballs at 9d6 or a wall of fire or many other things per short rest. While filling the party beatstick role and gaining 12 temp hp per kill.

[Ziegander]

You have better AC than a blastlock and you don't have to run from enemies. Ranged enemies take EB which outpaces fighter range damage.

Blastlock has more utility but is squishy-er.
EK either deals more damage or is more tanky. But has less utility and aoe.

For an EK switch my bladelocks int and cha. Grab ritual caster(wizard) at 1 and war caster at 6. Strength increase at 4 and 8. Use firebolt for range attack. Grab enlarge person at 8. For two combats the EK with a +1 longsword does 2d8+2d4+12 with 21 ac and 68 hp. Can boost to 26 ac 4 rounds per day.. But range damage is only 2d10.

Meanwhile the bladelock can do two fireballs at 9d6 or a wall of fire or many other things per short rest. While filling the party beatstick role and gaining 12 temp hp per kill.

Hmm. Fair enough, but really, to be effective at "bladelocking" you really need to play as a Variant Human, pick up the proficiencies, and be a greatsword guy. Not so much an indictment of the warlock (though it could be better designed/less complicated), but dang if I'm not getting tired of these great weapon fighters... The only way to be effective at Strength-based melee is to wear heavy armor and throw a greatsword around. Your points stand. Well argued.

[Corey]

See, it seems to me that you're falling into that same Schroedinger's Wizard argument that perverted so many 3e discussions, only applying it to the Warlock in 5e. Explain to me where I'm wrong, because I'm just not understanding how you can say the Bladelock is great because he's always got Hex and AoA and Hellish Rebuke and 9th level spells. He doesn't have all that. He has some of that some of the time. Right? Am I taking crazy pills?

It probably depends on level.

If you're high enough level to get 6th level spells or higher (once per day, no chance to vary the spell), that doesn't compete for slots with 1st through 5th level spells at all. They aren't even called spell slots.

If you're high enough level to get 3 slots per short rest, that adds something even if two slots are automatically spent on Hex/AoA.

From the time you get 3rd level spells onward, it's realistic to hope that Hex will survive short rests.


It also depends on the style of non-combat opportunities. Can you cast a couple of spells to scout, then find the time to go back to camp and take a short rest before launch an assault?


And by the way -- in downtime/RP, a powerful Warlock could manage a spy or trade network across the whole globe, with the help of frequent short rests during the day (and night -- Dream is the best communication spell I know of in the game, and pretty much the only one with advantages over computers and cell phones).

[Submortimer]

*snip*

For one, your bladelock stats are awful. Why would you max charisma before dex? That makes zero sense. a better stat selection would be:
Str 8, Dex 20, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 10, Cha 16
This assumes variant human, taking Dual Wielder at level 1, and then two consecutive dex boosts.

Invocations are:
Devils sight
Armor of shadows
Thirsting blade
Agonizing blast

Magic item: +1 rapier.
Attacks are two rapiers, +9/+9/+8, for 3d8+12 damage, only .5 avg damage less than the fighter.

Adding hex makes that another 3d6 higher, trumping your fighter. Alternately, my build can use darkness to give himself (almost)permanent advantage against anyone, which again trumps the fighter. Additionally, his AC is 19, and if in darkness you have disadvantage to hit him.

The bladelock resists your paltry attempts to polymorph him into a straw man.

[Malifice]

I don't understand Malifice, clearly you love the Bladelock and think it's a great addition to any party, able to kick a ton of ass in melee combat and still be a full-caster.

Doesn't it... not work that way? Okay, sure, you can cast Hex in the morning and then, once you're a 5th level Warlock, keep it up for most of the day (if not all of it) even after you recover the spell slot. But you still only have two spell slots. In the morning you've got only one left. And according to you, that's Armor of Agathys.

Okay, so if we assume an 8 hour adventuring day with 6 encounters and two short rests, that means roughly two encounters, then a rest, then two encounters, then a rest, then two more encounters. Let's assume two three-hour blocks and a final two-hour block. That means, before your first rest, you've got Hex up, good, and you've cast Armor of Agathys. Now for two hours you have no spell slots. :smallannoyed:

No you dont. You have 2 slots per short rest. Even with only 2 short rests per day, that's 6 slots per AD. With 3 short rests it's 8 slots per day.

Add cantrips, and at will invocations and youre pumping out the same spell casting as a full caster.

Look at a Wizard 5 v a Warlock 5. A standard AD has 6 encounters and 2 short rests.

The Wizard gets: 4/3/2 (plus an extra 3rd with Arcane recovery) for 4 x 1sts, 3 x 2nds and 3 x 3rds. Thats three encounters to blow a 3rd level slot; for the other 3 encounters he gets to blow a 2nd level slot, and he has 4 1'st level slots to spread out among those same 6 encounters.

It goes (Wizard):
Encounter 1 (Uses 2nd and 1st level spell (mage armor), cantrips)
Encounter 2 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips)
Short rest
Encounter 3 (Uses 2nd level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 4 (uses 3rd level spell, 1st level spell, cantrips)
Short rest
Encounter 5 (Uses 2nd level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 6 BBEG - (Uses 3rd level spell, 2 x 1st level spells, cantrips)
Long rest

The Warlock gets: 6 x 3rd level slots.

It goes (Warlock):
Encounter 1 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 2 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Short rest
Encounter 3 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 4 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Short rest
Encounter 5 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 6 BBEG - (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Long rest

Spaced out over a longer (9/3) AD:

It goes (Wizard):
Encounter 1 (Uses 1st level spell (mage armor), cantrips)
Encounter 2 (Uses 2nd level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 3 (Uses 3nd level spell, cantrips)
Short rest
Encounter 4 (Uses 1st level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 5 (Uses 2nd level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 6 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips)
Short rest
Encounter 7 (Uses 1st level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 8 (uses 2nd level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 9 (uses 3rd level spell, 1st level spell, cantrips)

The Warlock:

Encounter 1 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 2 (cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 3 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Short rest
Encounter 4 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 5 (antrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 6 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, mele)
Short rest
Encounter 7 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 8 (antrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 9 (Uses 3rd level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)

Now look at Warlock 11 v Wizard 11 (4/3/3/3/2/1+1) over the same 9/3 AD:

It goes (Wizard):
Encounter 1 (Uses 3rd level spell. 1st level spell (mage armor), cantrips)
Encounter 2 (Uses 3rd level spell, 2nd level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 3 (Uses 3nd level spell, 2nd level spell, 1st level spell, cantrips)
Short rest
Encounter 4 (Uses 4th level spell, 1st level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 5 (Uses 4th level spell, 1st level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 6 (Uses 4th level spell, 2nd level spell, cantrips)
Short rest
Encounter 7 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 8 (uses 6th level spell, cantrips)
Encounter 9 (uses 6th level spell, 5th level spell, cantrips)

The Warlock:

Encounter 1 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 2 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 3 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Short rest
Encounter 4 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 5 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 6 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Short rest
Encounter 7 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 8 (Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)
Encounter 9 (Uses 6th level spell (arcanum), Uses 5th level spell, cantrips, invocations, melee)

Over your standard AD, the classes are directly comparable. The wizard has a smattering of lower level slots to burn over the AD, but the Warlock makes up for that with 'at will' utility invocations, a better 'at will' cantrip, his spells always getting pumped out at maximum power, and the fact he has more HD and HP and is a much more capable melee combatant.

[Malifice]

Note the balance is based around the 'default' 6/2 or 9/3 split the game is balanced around.

If your DM (for some reason) restricts short rests in a draconian manner, then your mileage out of the Warlock will suffer (compared to other full casters). If your DM is overly permissive with short rests, then Warlock is your 'go-to' full caster.

Same deal with shorter AD's. You generally wont suffer from 5 minute AD's (a Warlock can nova in 'single encounter AD's' along with the best full caster). You can be caught out if more unexpected encounters follow though (i.e. if it is not a 5 minute AD and you blow your load on the first encounter). A high level Wizard will struggle to blow all his high level slots in a single encounter. You can burn through them (when dishing out a Nova) in a few rounds. On the flip side, you can recover them pretty quickly with a short rest.

Generally, if your DM sticks to the (rest/ encounter) meta-paradigm that DnD is built around, you should be getting one spell (at maximum level) off per encounter. Sometimes two or three; sometimes you'll be totally out. Like any caster you need to get a feel for the situation, and marshal your resources accordingly. You need to anticipate your short rests with the 'lock and know when to pull the trigger with a spell - which while similar to other full casters, works on a shorter cycle (those guys have to play the long game and use their foresight to anticipate and manage spell resources between long rests - they can really get caught out and reduced to robe wearing d6 HD commoners with sticks).

Get a feel for your DM's knowledge of the (rest/encounter) meta. If he either doesn't understand it, or intends to DM against it, this affects the balance and effectiveness of many of the classes.

[TrollCapAmerica]

We just have to be willing to acknowledge that despite pretty good balance there are some weaker archtypes. The Bladelock (Along with Berserker Champ E-Monk and Beastmaster) are subpar.options

[Sigreid]

We just have to be willing to acknowledge that despite pretty good balance there are some weaker archtypes. The Bladelock (Along with Berserker Champ E-Monk and Beastmaster) are subpar.options

I have to disagree with you here. A bladelock is a fully functional warlock with all the bells and whistles. Your pact is the what else are you.

Want a spy/long range communication device? You're also pact of chain
Want a couple more cantrips and some ritual ability? You're also a Pact of tome
You want to be able to throw down when your magic fails you? You're also pact of blade

In each of these cases you are fully functional as a warlock with powerful spells, reliable at will damage, the potential for great crowd control or other utility things. The pacts are almost unimportant enough to be ribbons, but the do provide real benefits.

[Malifice]

So let's consider actual builds and (admittedly) theoretical play. Let's go with two level 8 Warlocks (because it's going to take months of IRL game time to even reach that level) and one level 8 Fighter.

Our Warlocks will be one "classic blastlock" with the Tome boon and one "bladelock" of the dual-wielding variety. Our Fighter will be a "classic" greatsworder with Great Weapon Master. Everyone gets 27 point buy, everyone gets one uncommon magic item of their choice.

Blastlock stats - Half-Elf; Str 8 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 12 Cha 20, HP 59, AC 14; EB +8 to hit; 2d10+10; magic item - Broom of Flying
With the Tome Pact, Shillelagh allows the "Blastlock" to swing a staff around at +8 to hit; 1d8+5 damage at the cost of 1 bonus action per minute.

Bladelock stats - Tiefling; Str 10 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 9 Wis 10 Cha 18, HP 59, AC 14; EB +7 to hit; 2d10+8; +1 Shortsword/Shortsword +7/+7/+6 to hit (w/bonus action); 2d6+8/1d6 (w/bonus action); magic item - +1 Shortsword

Great Weapon Master stats - VHuman; Str 20 Dex 10 Con 16 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 9, HP 75, AC 17 (w/ease); Greatsword +9/+9 to hit; 4d6+12; magic item - +1 Greatsword

The Bladelock is forced to hybridize, and his stats, attack bonus, and damage all suffer for it. For his extra melee "option" he loses a lot. Meanwhile the Fighter has an extra ASI he hasn't even used, and moar damage (champion crits), spells, or superiority dice (for moaarr moar damage), and the Tome Blastlock has out-of-combat utility from rituals and keeps up with the fighter's damage without ever casting spells all while flying and knocking foes back. If the Bladelock wants to keep up in damage, he has to cast his spells, killing his actual versatility, something the blastlock doesn't have to worry about.

So, from where I'm sitting, at 8th level, the Bladelock is clearly the weakest out of the bunch, losing both the raw combat numbers game and the utility game. I don't see how the bladelock is ever able to catch up.

Whoa there.

AFB, but from memory here is my Vuman bladelock 8: (Actually a Fighter 3/ Warlock 5):
S 16
D 8
C 14
I 8
W 14
Ch 14
Feats: GWM, HAM
Key spells known: Eldritch blast, Hex, Fireball, Hellish rebuke, Fly, Mirror image, Armor of Agathys, Scorching ray (2 spells at 3rd level per SR)
Invocations: Agonizing blast, mask of many faces, thirsting blade
Class features: Heavy armor, all weapons, F/S (GW), Second wind (1d10+3), Action surge, Maneuvers (precise strike, pushing strike, riposte; 4 x d8), Dark ones blessing, Pact boon (Greatsword)
Key Gear: Plate, +1 greatsword, gauntlets of ogre power
AC 18, HP 63
Saves: Con +5, Str +7

Melee routine: Cast (or lay on if already pre-cast) Hex - if not already on target. Approach target. Activate GWM feat. Swing pact Greatsword. If I miss, use (precise strike) to convert to a hit. If I hit, use knockdown attack to deal extra damage on particularly hard targets. Damage on a hit (3d6+15) Add an extra d8 for 'hard targets' (and force a str save). Re-roll 1's and 2's. Repeat attack thanks to thirsting blade (with advantage if I knocked them down). DPR is usually in the 30-60 range. If needed, action surge for two more attacks (or a fireball) but only if the target is particularly hard or mook clearance needed or a short rest is imminent. Suck back 7 temp HP per kill.

When not my turn rely on HAM to reduce incoming damage by 3, and my 7 temp HP (or AoA) to soak any remaining damage. Make concentration save. If Armor of Agathys is up, use that to inflict 15 damage back. Otherwise use either a (hellish rebuke if I am hit, or a riposte if I am missed) on extremely hard targets (or if a short rest is imminent) to deal another 30 odd damage out of turn.

With short rests every 2-3 encounters on average, this bad boy is spamming around 50-80ish damage a turn just in melee; occasionally I'll miss with both attacks, sometimes I'll clobber with both and get an extra GWM attack in (and maybe a rebuke or riposte).

A fair few nova turns have generated well over 100 damage, and I had a recent round (Used action surge, blew all 4 sup dice, all 4 attacks hit with GWM (two thanks to precise strike, the other two were knockdown hits), one was a critical hit triggering a 5th attack from GWM, and then I got a 5d10 hellish rebuke in out of turn) that inflicted a touch over 200 points of damage. Laughably I still had a spell slot left afterwards.

Admittedly the Fighter levels have added a lot here. But (in my view) thats the skill of playing a bladelock. It requires a bit of system mastery to pull off, but the results can be amazing.

[TrollCapAmerica]

I have to disagree with you here. A bladelock is a fully functional warlock with all the bells and whistles. Your pact is the what else are you.

Want a spy/long range communication device? You're also pact of chain
Want a couple more cantrips and some ritual ability? You're also a Pact of tome
You want to be able to throw down when your magic fails you? You're also pact of blade

In each of these cases you are fully functional as a warlock with powerful spells, reliable at will damage, the potential for great crowd control or other utility things. The pacts are almost unimportant enough to be ribbons, but the do provide real benefits.

You dump 2 invocations that could be something else in exchange for melee about as good as just eldiritch blasting without spending invocations

You exchange a limited level based respurce to become a passable melee combatant about on par with a Cleric. You do this instead of getting a familiar with something ludicrous like magic resistance or access to every ritual in the game.

Ok granted your not complete ass but its not that good compared to the other options and thus is one of the eeaker options

[Sigreid]

You dump 2 invocations that could be something else in exchange for melee about as good as just eldiritch blasting without spending invocations

You exchange a limited level based respurce to become a passable melee combatant about on par with a Cleric. You do this instead of getting a familiar with something ludicrous like magic resistance or access to every ritual in the game.

Ok granted your not complete ass but its not that good compared to the other options and thus is one of the eeaker options

And again, except for a bladelock if you encounter something like a rakasha, you're gonna have a bad time. It's all about trade offs.

And you should be considerably better than a cleric in melee. With +5 from your stat, and +5 from your invocation and 2 attacks, you should be just behind the real martial characters in full contact adventuring with the added advantage that your weapon can be just the right one for the moment without carrying a bunch of extra weight.

[Malifice]

We just have to be willing to acknowledge that despite pretty good balance there are some weaker archtypes. The Bladelock (Along with Berserker Champ E-Monk and Beastmaster) are subpar.options


Actually, the Berserker is pretty bloody amazing against big hard targets. It loses out to the totems when you factor in the extra attack from GWM feat triggers on killing a mook (making the frenzy attack redundant).

Once you have a high hit point enemy that needs to die now, the Frenzy path barb deals some serious pain.

Champions are also really great in longer adventuring days, or when resting is hard to come by. After about 3-4 encounters without a short rest, they start to pull away from BM's. Also great for those that like 'simple/ point and click' options.

Cant say I am a fan of the beast-master though. I do hope wizards does something decent with it.

E-monk I am undecided on. Im not persuaded that the mook clearance abilities it gains, are worth the BBEG lock down ability it sacrifices.

[Malifice]

You exchange a limited level based respurce to become a passable melee combatant about on par with a Cleric.

What? You really havent seen a properly kitted out bladelock in your campaigns I take it.

[TrollCapAmerica]

And again, except for a bladelock if you encounter something like a rakasha, you're gonna have a bad time. It's all about trade offs.

And you should be considerably better than a cleric in melee. With +5 from your stat, and +5 from your invocation and 2 attacks, you should be just behind the real martial characters in full contact adventuring with the added advantage that your weapon can be just the right one for the moment without carrying a bunch of extra weight.

Its a trade off thats not worth it 95% of the time. I hope you understand what I mean because I hate making long posts and ive had autistic jackass sheldon wannabes drag me into overly long arguments about things like Savage attacker or the Champion being awesome before

The added damage you get from your one invocation barely makes meleeing worth it and only from lv 12 and up. You require two invocations and 12 levels just make your bladelock mediocre at what he set out to do. Its no different than feat taxes in third

I will say it isnt the worst thing ever though. You get a fair number of Invocations and in the long run it just cuts into your versatility and forces some MAD. It just pales in comparison to the alternative

Chain gives you completely out of the box familiar based super powers. Voice invocation lets you perceive through your familiar without shutting your iwn senses down and CoC is an extra Mystic Arcanum basically

Tome is all about getting every ritual spell for a single invocation and especially those sweet sweet divination spells to know everything forever

[Malifice]

Its a trade off thats not worth it 95% of the time. I hope you understand what I mean because I hate making long posts and ive had autistic jackass sheldon wannabes drag me into overly long arguments about things like Savage attacker or the Champion being awesome before

The added damage you get from your one invocation barely makes meleeing worth it and only from lv 12 and up. You require two invocations and 12 levels just make your bladelock mediocre at what he set out to do. Its no different than feat taxes in third

I will say it isnt the worst thing ever though. You get a fair number of Invocations and in the long run it just cuts into your versatility and forces some MAD. It just pales in comparison to the alternative

Chain gives you completely out of the box familiar based super powers. Voice invocation gives you perceive through your familiar without shutting your iwn senses down and CoC is an extra Mystic Arcanum basically

Tome is all about getting every ritual spell for a single invocation and especially those sweet sweet divination spells to know everything forever

The DPR increase for a bladelock is massive though. You just need to build it right.

[DivisibleByZero]

You dump 2 invocations that could be something else in exchange for melee about as good as just eldiritch blasting without spending invocations

You exchange a limited level based respurce to become a passable melee combatant about on par with a Cleric. You do this instead of getting a familiar with something ludicrous like magic resistance or access to every ritual in the game.

Ok granted your not complete ass but its not that good compared to the other options and thus is one of the eeaker options

I'll just post this again.
It addresses every one of the comments you just made, and then some.




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.

[TrollCapAmerica]

I'll just post this again.
It addresses every one of the comments you just made, and then some.






Yeah ive seen this before and I even tried to acknowledge it in my post. Its also very well done and significantly better thought out than a lot of people ive seen argue points on here

I am simply of the opinion that dipping ahead periodically in melee damage isnt worth it for a D8 HP class wirh light armor to just EBing all the things and being more versitile in general

Still not bad as the champ and such which are actually bad and not "Meh probably a little better off doing X"

[Malifice]

Yeah ive seen this before and I even tried to acknowledge it in my post. Its also very well done and significantly better thought out than a lot of people ive seen argue points on here

I am simply of the opinion that dipping ahead periodically in melee damage isnt worth it for a D8 HP class wirh light armor to just EBing all the things and being more versitile in general

Still not bad as the champ and such which are actually bad and not "Meh probably a little better off doing X"

Dipping ahead periodically on melee damage?

At 5th level you're doing up to 8d6+40 odd damage with a great-sword many rounds.. without crits!

VS AC 15 Blade deals around 18 DPR. Blast deals around 12 DPR.

Thats a baseline 50 percent leap in DPR before magic swords etc are factored in.

[MeeposFire]

The one thing I am not seeing is anybody saying exactly what are you really giving up by going blade.

For instance going blade gives you the ability to have a potential decent melee presence that is unheard of using any other warlock without mulitclassing (shillelagh does not count since all it does is give you on ok attack which is not enough offense). The cost to that is losing access to 3 cantrips or an improved familiar. Both of those are nice but not exactly earth shattering so I do not see any real loss there.

No invocations what exactly are we missing that is so important? It isn't the standard combo of agonizing blast or repelling as you can have both of those before you even pick up blade. There is no reason to avoid the standard boosts to EB since it is so effective in many situations. Later on there are two invocations you would probably take but what is the cost there? How many of the other invocations are you dying for at least right now? Many are not that great or are useful but probably not better than getting access to improved melee ability that you can use as needed (or with enough work as a primary attack).

I think people are getting to hung up on how strong it is without considering how small the cost actually is and if the cost is small how can we expect the payoff to be so large?

[Malifice]

The one thing I am not seeing is anybody saying exactly what are you really giving up by going blade.

There are 2 invocations, a pact and a feat or two to make it work. Also a stat investment.

The big loss is the pact boon (tome for rituals and chain for the familiar). So you really are sacrificing the utility of rituals or a familiar, in exchange for a massive boost in your damage output.

Some people are OK with that.

[Corey]

Dipping ahead periodically on melee damage?

At 5th level you're doing up to 8d6+40 odd damage with a great-sword many rounds.. without crits!

VS AC 15 Blade deals around 18 DPR. Blast deals around 12 DPR.

Thats a baseline 50 percent leap in DPR before magic swords etc are factored in.

1. Do those figures assume stat is already at +5 in both cases? Did you adjust for the fact that the Blade needs a feat to get to your figures and Blast doesn't?


2. In general, how does theoretical damage for melee and ranged related to real? I mean for any builds that mimic the Warlock ones we're talking about; I'm thinking of cover against ranged, difficulties reaching opponents against melee, AoOs in melee, etc.


3. Finally, take Polearm Mastery, and a glaive/halberd with Hex is at 2d10 + 2d4 + 4d6 + 4*stat, unless I'm misunderstanding the rules. With the same 65% hit chance against AC 15 you seem to be assuming for Blast, and stat at +5, which you also seem to be assuming, that's 32-33 DPR.

[Malifice]

1. Do those figures assume stat is already at +5 in both cases? Did you adjust for the fact that the Blade needs a feat to get to your figures and Blast doesn't?

No to Q1 and yes to Q2. They also roughly take into account the effects of GWM feat, and the fact that ranged DPR from EB will suffer from cover and shooting at an adjacent target around 50 percent of the time, whereas a melee fighter rarely needs to deal with those factors.


2. In general, how does theoretical damage for melee and ranged related to real? I mean for any builds that mimic the Warlock ones we're talking about; I'm thinking of cover against ranged, difficulties reaching opponents against melee, AoOs in melee, etc.

Ranged 'Lock 6 with EB and Cha 18 (includes ASI at 4th) makes 2 attacks at +7 dealing 1d10+1d6+4 (13 damage) each (assuming hex is up). Cover and shooting into adjacent enemies big variables.

Melee 'Lock 6 with +1 Greatsword and Str 16 (GWM feat at 4th) makes 2 attacks at +2 dealing 3d6+14 (24.5 damage) each, and gains an extra attack on a kill or crit (at least 50 percent of rounds in practice).

In practice I find that melee locks deal considerably more damage per round in melee than their ranged counterparts. Add a splash of Fighter for (action surge, GWS, heavy armor, con saves, second wind, precise strike to ensure landing those GWM hits, and pushing attack to add to the damage and gain advantage for all attacks that round) and the consistent damage spikes even higher.

My current melee 'lock (Bladelock 5 Fighter 3) deals a consistent 60ish damage per round at 8th level. His best effort was around 200 points of damage v a dragon (action surge, sup dice, GWM, bonus action attack thanks to a crit and a hellish rebuke).

It went: Lay on Hex, move to target, take dodge action. (Riposte and Hellish rebuke in store in case I got hit). Rely on HAM feat and temp HP to soak anything that got through. As it turns out I didnt get attacked (dragon breathed on my companions).

Following round: Attack with GWM (hit), expend sup dice to knock prone and increase damage, attack again (with advantage) miss but expend precise strike dice to turn into a hit, action surge, attack again (miss) use sup dice to turn into a hit, attack again (critical hit) burn sup dice to knock down again (not that it mattered), gain extra bonus weapon attack, swing and hit again. That alone generated about 150 points of damage (18d6+3d8+75).

On the dragons turn it got up and attacked me, hitting and dealing around 15 damage. 3 was absorbed by HAM, and my temp HP absorbed 7 points (I took 5 damage). Passed my concentration check then I blew a spell slot to hit it back with a hellish rebuke as a reaction dealing another 40 odd damage and it died.

Was quite hilarious. No way a ranged blast lock could come close to that damage at 8th level (or even 18th level)

[JoeJ]

Tome is all about getting every ritual spell for a single invocation and especially those sweet sweet divination spells to know everything forever

Tome doesn't give you every ritual spell for a single invocation. That invocation gives you two ritual spells. The others you have to somehow find on your own. Getting them all, or even the ones you most want, can take a considerable amount of time and effort.

If having lots of rituals is a big part of your character concept you're better off playing a wizard.

[georgie_leech]

Tome doesn't give you every ritual spell for a single invocation. That invocation gives you two ritual spells. The others you have to somehow find on your own. Getting them all, or even the ones you most want, can take a considerable amount of time and effort.

If having lots of rituals is a big part of your character concept you're better off playing a wizard.

AFB at the moment and might be misremembering, but Tome Warlocks have access to rituals beyond those on the Wizard list, no?

[TrollCapAmerica]

Tome doesn't give you every ritual spell for a single invocation. That invocation gives you two ritual spells. The others you have to somehow find on your own. Getting them all, or even the ones you most want, can take a considerable amount of time and effort.

If having lots of rituals is a big part of your character concept you're better off playing a wizard.

Thank you Sheldon for that riviting display of the conditions I specifically mentioned earlier

I seen less of that hanging on /tg/ and least they can figure out Bladelock is a subpar option you can dedicate a lot of resources to making servicable

[Hawkstar]

We just have to be willing to acknowledge that despite pretty good balance there are some weaker archtypes. The Bladelock (Along with Berserker Champ E-Monk and Beastmaster) are subpar.optionsBladelock isn't an Archetype any more than Protectadin is (Paladin with Protection fighting style).

[Corey]

There was a mistake in my praise for Polearm Mastery -- even when you have multiple attacks, the 1d4 + 1d6 (for Hex) is a bonus attack, and hence happens only once per round.

Another mistake -- I was thinking that a Bladelock could use CHA in place of STR or DEX for the weapon stat. Whoops.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure why the Bladelock/Blastlock comparison doesn't give the Blastlock +6 better to hit rather than +5, given that he uses an ASI on stat while the Bladelock uses it on a feat. Also, the Blastlock doesn't need to pump STR, which is nice for his other attributes.

[Mara]

Bladelocks can solo better. Blastlocks will have to run away from enemies or take disadvantage until the first repelling blast hits. On up side Blastlocks will get either ritual spells or a kickass familiar.

[DivisibleByZero]

Bladelocks can solo better. Blastlocks will have to run away from enemies or take disadvantage until the first repelling blast hits. On up side Blastlocks will get either ritual spells or a kickass familiar.

Once again I'd like to point out that there is nothing stopping a Bladelock from being a Blastlock, and to be perfectly honest here, any Bladelock that doen't invest in his EB is frankly doing it wrong. I would also like to once again point out that nothing is stopping a Blasting Bladelock from taking the Ritual Caster feat and getting a large portion of those rituals available, one of which gives him a familiar if he wants it.
One feat. All of the potential melee benefits of a Bladelock that other Warlocks can't get, and most of the benefits that the Chainlock and Tomelock have.

[Corey]

Do Bladelocks with 8-hour Hex casts really keep one casting up through a bunch of encounters? Or do they fail concentration checks faster than that?



One feat. All of the potential melee benefits of a Bladelock that other Warlocks can't get, and most of the benefits that the Chainlock and Tomelock have.

I'd been thinking Guidance is a major benefit to being a Tomelock, because of 1d4 to initiative plus the OOC uses. But that doesn't work if you're keeping concentration on a single cast of Hex all day long ...

[Z3ro]

Quick question for people building/playing STR bladelocks (I've only played DEX); why go variant human, rather than mountain dwarf? Both can get you medium armor proficiency, but dwarf gives a bunch of benefits besides. I've been thinking of making a STR bladelock, but my assumption was to go dwarf and I want to make sure I'm not missing something obvious.

[Malifice]

Do Bladelocks with 8-hour Hex casts really keep one casting up through a bunch of encounters? Or do they fail concentration checks faster than that?



I'd been thinking Guidance is a major benefit to being a Tomelock, because of 1d4 to initiative plus the OOC uses. But that doesn't work if you're keeping concentration on a single cast of Hex all day long ...

There are few spells on the lock list that compete with concentration.

I rarely fail concentration checks but have proficiency in con saves, a con of 14 and Heavy armor master.

[Hawkstar]

Quick question for people building/playing STR bladelocks (I've only played DEX); why go variant human, rather than mountain dwarf? Both can get you medium armor proficiency, but dwarf gives a bunch of benefits besides. I've been thinking of making a STR bladelock, but my assumption was to go dwarf and I want to make sure I'm not missing something obvious.
Favorable stat boosts. also, non terribad speed.

[DivisibleByZero]

Off topic, but at my table I houserule that all non-proficient saves get half the proficiency bonus, rounded down (and monsters/enemies do as well).
So at level one, every player has +2 to two saves and +1 to the other four. At level five, the two proficient saves are at +3, while the other four remain at +1. At level twenty, the two proficient saves are at +6, while the other four are at +3.
It makes Resilient much less "mandatory" and it means casters (or anyone else forcing a save) can't dump their main stat and still have a good chance of success simply by targeting an enemy's weak save.
It works well.

[TheDonger]

This was buried earlier in the thread, but my question is for the darkvision/cast Darkvision trick, is it better to cast Darkness on yourself (say on your pact weapon) or on the enemy you intend to attack?

[Z3ro]

Favorable stat boosts. also, non terribad speed.

I swear I'm not being obtuse, I just want to make sure I have it correctly. That being said, I still don't understand. Dwarves get bigger stat boosts (to two of the three stats you'll need) and are five feet faster in heavy armor. Am I missing something?

[Hawkstar]

I swear I'm not being obtuse, I just want to make sure I have it correctly. That being said, I still don't understand. Dwarves get bigger stat boosts (to two of the three stats you'll need) and are five feet faster in heavy armor. Am I missing something?I will admit, I missed the "Strength" part... but I think they start as Fighter 1 for heavy armor proficiency, and use Vhuman for Polearm Master or GWM.

Also - dwarves are Five feet slower, not faster, in Heavy Armor. No speed penalty for heavy armor if you have the strength. Dwarves always have terrible speed.

[Z3ro]

I will admit, I missed the "Strength" part... but I think they start as Fighter 1 for heavy armor proficiency, and use Vhuman for Polearm Master or GWM.

Also - dwarves are Five feet slower, not faster, in Heavy Armor. No speed penalty for heavy armor if you have the strength. Dwarves always have terrible speed.

Fighter 1 is always a great dip for melee warlock, and solves many problems. I'm talking pure warlock, should multiclassing not be allowed/discouraged.

I must have misread that armor penalty, you are correct. Still only 5 feet though.

[Hawkstar]

Honestly, I'm kind of lost with all the assumptions in this thread. Where is my Fey Warlock getting room for Armor of Agathys and Hex and that weird darkvision stuff? I'm having too much fun with Charm Person and Faerie Fire and the Mask of Many Faces and Eldritch Sight invocations.

[Z3ro]

Honestly, I'm kind of lost with all the assumptions in this thread. Where is my Fey Warlock getting room for Armor of Agathys and Hex and that weird darkvision stuff? I'm having too much fun with Charm Person and Faerie Fire and the Mask of Many Faces and Eldritch Sight invocations.

That's a whole different kind of warlock. Warlock in general is great, as it is a very versatile class, but yes, if you devote too many resources to combat, there will be fewer for non-combat. Not none, because warlock is awesome, but fewer.


Because it would defeat the argument and hard autists cant be wrong that Bladelockis marginally underpowered and should have been put together better

Hasn't been my experience with the class at all.

[TrollCapAmerica]

That's a whole different kind of warlock. Warlock in general is great, as it is a very versatile class, but yes, if you devote too many resources to combat, there will be fewer for non-combat. Not none, because warlock is awesome, but fewer.



Hasn't been my experience with the class at all.

Im playing a TomeLock right now. A guy joined the game with a Bladelock.

His CHA was lower because of MAD and his spell selection had to be tailored around lower save DCs. He use a heavy weapon for damage and marginally better damage than my naked EB if he hits while in melee with mediocre AC and HP. Hes at risk more often than me hitting less than my CHA Pact rod boosted EB with built ibn free irresistible knockback he couldnt get because he NEEDS a second attack. I could use my feats on stuff to make me a better caster then I snagged Alert he needs feats to make his melee more effective and is still two lower on CHA than I am

Thats my experience

[Z3ro]

Im playing a TomeLock right now. A guy joined the game with a Bladelock.

His CHA was lower because of MAD and his spell selection had to be tailored around lower save DCs. He use a heavy weapon for damage and marginally better damage than my naked EB if he hits while in melee with mediocre AC and HP. Hes at risk more often than me hitting less than my CHA Pact rod boosted EB with built ibn free irresistible knockback he couldnt get because he NEEDS a second attack. I could use my feats on stuff to make me a better caster then I snagged Alert he needs feats to make his melee more effective and is still two lower on CHA than I am

Thats my experience

I won't contradict your experiences, or tell you they're wrong. They're your experiences. But I will point out one thing:

There's no reason the bladelock at your table had to have a higher STR than CHA. I played a DEX lock, and my CHA was higher than my DEX. The difference was that I was primarily a spellcaster; I threw lots of fireballs, still did plenty of EB. But after a few rounds of spells, I'd close to melee, because I like closing to melee. My AC and save DC would have been exactly the same, regardless of which pact I chose.

[TrollCapAmerica]

I won't contradict your experiences, or tell you they're wrong. They're your experiences. But I will point out one thing:

There's no reason the bladelock at your table had to have a higher STR than CHA. I played a DEX lock, and my CHA was higher than my DEX. The difference was that I was primarily a spellcaster; I threw lots of fireballs, still did plenty of EB. But after a few rounds of spells, I'd close to melee, because I like closing to melee. My AC and save DC would have been exactly the same, regardless of which pact I chose.

I appreciate that post more than you know. Ive been in way too many conversations like this where I have been strung along by ludicrous arguments ("Savage Attacker is one of the best feats") that you can never tell where your being trolled or dealing with an ass that refuses to be even marginally wrong

I will also conceed that you really wont suffer playing a Bladelock. Your at worst a little behind a more dedicated caster. Things like stat rolls or magic items can also skew it in either direction

[DivisibleByZero]

I won't contradict your experiences, or tell you they're wrong. They're your experiences. But I will point out one thing:

There's no reason the bladelock at your table had to have a higher STR than CHA. I played a DEX lock, and my CHA was higher than my DEX. The difference was that I was primarily a spellcaster; I threw lots of fireballs, still did plenty of EB. But after a few rounds of spells, I'd close to melee, because I like closing to melee. My AC and save DC would have been exactly the same, regardless of which pact I chose.

And this is exactly the problem that most people have with the Bladelock. You do not have this problem.
The problem is that they assume that a full caster with 9th level spell power suddenly becomes a melee-centric character. This is not true. You are still a primary caster, you just also have a decent-to-good melee option available for when it becomes required or desired.
The people that assume a level 3 Pact Boon choice is going to be the difference between a commoner in melee and friggin' Conan are the ones that are disappointed with the Bladelock.

[georgie_leech]

And this is exactly the problem that most people have with the Bladelock. You do not have this problem.
The problem is that they assume that a full caster with 9th level spell power suddenly becomes a melee-centric character. This is not true. You are still a primary caster, you just also have a decent-to-good melee option available for when it becomes required or desired.
The people that assume a level 3 Pact Boon choice is going to be the difference between a commoner in melee and friggin' Conan are the ones that are disappointed with the Bladelock.

In other words, despite coming onlie at the same time as other classes get their subclasses, Pact of whatever isn't their subclass. Their Patron is.

[MaxWilson]

I'll just post this again.
It addresses every one of the comments you just made, and then some.*snip*

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.*snip*


That's not true. Yes, a Bladelock can replicate part of Tomelock by taking the Ritual Caster feat (ideally twice, once for wizard rituals like Find Familiar and once for Cleric rituals like Augury--the Cleric rituals are better though). But the Bladelock's melee capability can be just as easily replicated by a Tomelock who takes the Crossbow Expert feat and then relies on Eldritch Blast. Cleric Rituals are more useful, plus the Tomelock saves on two invocations that can buy him stuff like Repelling Blast or Mask of Many Faces.

[DivisibleByZero]

plus the Tomelock saves on two invocations that can buy him stuff like Repelling Blast or Mask of Many Faces.

That's not true.
He saves on nothing, as I have shown in the post that you quoted.

[Giant2005]

And this is exactly the problem that most people have with the Bladelock. You do not have this problem.
The problem is that they assume that a full caster with 9th level spell power suddenly becomes a melee-centric character. This is not true. You are still a primary caster, you just also have a decent-to-good melee option available for when it becomes required or desired.
The people that assume a level 3 Pact Boon choice is going to be the difference between a commoner in melee and friggin' Conan are the ones that are disappointed with the Bladelock.

I don't think that is the problem at all. I think the problem is that most people seem to have no idea about how to actually play a Bladelock and this thread has plenty of evidence to support that theory.
People seem to be complaining about a Str-based Bladelock's survivability due to being Str-based and only having Light Armor. That particular complaint is indicative that people genuinely have no idea what they are doing and is akin to saying that level 20 Druids are squishy because when Wildshaped they have terrible AC - it completely ignores the fact that they can constantly replenish their HP pool by Wildshaping infinitely.
There are plenty of ways to tank and Warlocks are particularly good at it, they just don't do it by having a high AC like Fighters do.
Fighters tank by having a high AC, Barbarians tank by having high HP coupled with resistance, Druids tank by getting extra HP pools via Wildshape and Warlocks tank by constantly using spells and effects that bestow temporary HP on themselves and they are exceptionally good at it - having a high AC is actually a disadvantage when the enemy hitting you inflicts more damage to your enemy than it does to you.

[MaxWilson]

plus the Tomelock saves on two invocations that can buy him stuff like Repelling Blast or Mask of Many Faces.That's not true.
He saves on nothing, as I have shown in the post that you quoted.

1.) The main point is that Tomelocks can acquire a melee capability via feat just as easily as Bladelocks can acquire ritual capability via feat. Net advantage: nobody.
2.) I forgot to account for the ritual magic invocation. So yeah, "saves on one invocation and gets better rituals" would be more accurate than "saves on two invocations."
3.) "Saves on nothing"? Your post doesn't prove any such thing.

In your own words,


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.

That's what I said--the Tomelock has an extra invocation to spend on stuff like Repelling Blast, or Eldritch Spear if he preferred. That's not nothing.

So far, what this thread has succeeded in doing is mostly to prove that Bladelocks are weak, but low-level BattlemasterGWMBladeLocks are almost as good as fighters at melee nova damage with all the goodness of Warlocks on top. Ergo, don't play a pure Bladelock, ever.

[Corey]

There are few spells on the lock list that compete with concentration.

I rarely fail concentration checks but have proficiency in con saves, a con of 14 and Heavy armor master.

Oh, right. You start with Fighter. :)

Still, is that more like "rarely per save" or "rarely per encounter"?

[DivisibleByZero]

Still, is that more like "rarely per save" or "rarely per encounter"?

They're one and the same.
You have to take more then 20 points of damage from a single attack before the DC raises above the base 10. So Even with a paltry 12 Con and non-proficiency, with zero houserules, you successfully save more than 50% of the time and keep concentration. As your Con gets better, so do your chances of success. It isn't until you get BLASTED by something that it really becomes a concern. And by the time things start regularly blasting you for that kind of damage, you have had an ASI or two to spend on Resilient if you choose to.
People cry about casters in melee, but the truth is that it isn't all that bad. Sure, they fail sometimes. But they succeed more often than they fail, and usually by a fairly wide margin.

[Corey]

If you play Bladelock, you miss out on benefits others Pacts would have. Duh. So what do you miss out on?


You miss out on the other Pacts' core benefit (rituals/cantrips or super familiar).
From Level 12 onward, you miss out on 1 other invocation opportunity.
If frontline vs. backline makes the difference in whether or not you cast Armor of Agathys, you miss out on other uses of the spell slots.
If, contrary to Malefice's experience, you lose concentration on Hex often enough to matter, but then always recast it, you miss out on those spell slots as well.
You may miss out on a feat or two, or maybe not. Here the "maybe not" is when we offset one feat for melee with one feat for Spell Sniper.
Feats aside, you likely miss out on some CHA (save DC, social skills) because you need to put more points into STR.



Is that about rightt?

[JellyPooga]

The following are some ideas:

Good ideas all, but...


The fey have an interest in working together with mortals to defend the land against demons or necromancers or somesuch. They give the human king a magic sword, which amplifies his purity of heart to grant him certain magical abilities to help defend the land. (Isn't this sort of King Arthur?)

What happens when the demons/necromancer/what-have-you have been defeated? Do the Fey come calling, asking for recompense for their aid? Does the King decide that if the Fey can help him, they might also help his enemies and wage war on his benefactors? What is the Fey interest in this King that they willingly grant him aid? Is it really altruism, or do they have their own agenda? Is there some consequence for the King using this sword; how will it change him?


A psychic researcher has her mind invaded by elder beings

Someone that might not be in full control of their own actions due to outside influence? Are you really going to trust them?


A street urchin stumbles across a sorcerer summoning a demon. She sneaks in, cuts off the demon's piglike tail while he isn't looking, and runs off.

Good deeds/intentions or not, the power was gained through theft and is granted by a demonic source. How might this influence the child in the future? Small beginnings often escalate into bigger ends and if those ends are being fueled by dark influence...


A child is kidnapped by the fey and raised as one of their own. [snip] He later sickens of the inhumanity of these fey

Revenge, vengeance and righteousness are powerful, but suspect motivations.


A gnomish inventor devises a machine that can capture the fiends that besiege his community, keep them in suspended animation, and milk their power to use himself.

As with the urchin, perhaps even more so, theft of power is still theft and the influence of the nature of that power is even more suspect.


An ordinary farmer stumbles across an archon locked in battle with a devil. He bravely distracts the devil with a jab from his pitchfork, allowing the archon to overcome it. The archon extracts some of the defeated devil's essence and uses it to grant the farmer a share its power to use for good.

One good deed does not a good man make. An Archon that is harnessing evil power to grant it to his "ally" has also got to be scrutinised for his motivation in this. How might this power affect the farmer? One day he's just some schmo-farmer, the next he has these eldritch powers; that's going to change him. For the better? Perhaps, perhaps not, but the question of whether he is makes him suspect.


The queen of the fey is looking to educate her wayward daughter. [snip] The woman is granted magical ability to help her, though at first the fey queen forgets to tell her much about how to use it.

Haphazard use of unknown magical power from an unwanted patron? No idea of the consequences, no idea of the cost...not exactly fitting the heroic ideal.


A lawyer with an interest in the arcane sells his soul to devils in exchange for power.

Any background with this in it somewhere has instant "edge"! The benefactor (the son/daughter PC that inherited the power), might not have done the deal, but is reaping the benefits regardless. Rescuing the father might be an altruistic goal, but what's going to happen when he's saved? Are they going to give up the power? Will it be taken? How reliable will this person be in the future? How reliable will this person be now, if forced to choose between completing the quest or saving their father?


I'm not saying you can't have good motivations, just that the nature of a Pact, however it manifests, is suspect. No deal is without cost. What that cost is, is fairly irrelevant; that there is a cost at all is enough to make anyone suspicious if they know the source of the power.

Now, this can make for some very heroic tales of self-sacrifice, the greater good and so forth, but the characters involved are so often corrupted by their power or tempted by the alternatives, because that's what power bargained for, stolen, given or inherited, rather than earned does.

Take, as a fairly extreme example, the Lord of the Rings. Frodo gains power just from carrying the Ring, let alone wearing it. When it finally comes to "crunch-time" he fails the test and if not for Gollum (and Sam), Sauron would have claimed the Ring and dominion over Middle Earth. You might say that Frodo had all the best intentions, but by utilising the stolen power of The Enemy, even in a quest to destroy that power, he fell to its influence in the end.

A lot of what I'm saying could be applied to characters of other Classes, of course, but it's very much intrinsically tied into the Warlock Class. The question of what the cost of power is, is what makes a Warlock "edgy" "dark" or at least "suspect". Their deeds and intentions are largely irrelevant to this aspect of their personality.

[Sigreid]

Why doe there have to be a cost? I kinda like the blade lock as a EK that focuses on magic more than martial. If the classes are even close to balanced you don't need eternal damnation to balance it out.

[DivisibleByZero]

Why doe there have to be a cost?

There isn't any cost. They're inventing it.
If you have a choice between A, B and C, the cost is nonexistent. It doesn't cost you anything to choose B, or C, or A.
It's a choice, not a cost.

[BootStrapTommy]

Thoughts on the homebrewing of a return of Hideous Blow? The fix a Bladelock needs? Broken?

[Giant2005]

There isn't any cost. They're inventing it.
If you have a choice between A, B and C, the cost is nonexistent. It doesn't cost you anything to choose B, or C, or A.
It's a choice, not a cost.

Opportunity Cost is an actual thing. The cost of choosing A, is the stuff that options B or C would have given you.
Although personally, I think you get a lot more out of choosing option A (Pact of the Blade) than either of the other two options bring to the table.

[Giant2005]

Thoughts on the homebrewing of a return of Hideous Blow? The fix a Bladelock needs? Broken?

I have seen some fairly decent Warlock Homebrews that already do that same thing, although I am using the term decent a little bit liberally. Basically those homebrewers resisted the urge to make it brokenly OP which is something I will always admire, but as a consequence the end result ended up being a little too underwhelming; and that right there is pretty much the biggest issue with any attempt at homebrewing Hideous Blow: The end result will either be brokenly OP, or basically pointless. I at least can't think of any kind of middle ground.

[georgie_leech]

Opportunity Cost is an actual thing. The cost of choosing A, is the stuff that options B or C would have given you.
Although personally, I think you get a lot more out of choosing option A (Pact of the Blade) than either of the other two options bring to the table.

The context is a literal cost though. As in, an actual negative consequence or requirement beyond that of not getting to pick something else.

[Giant2005]

The context is w literal cost though. As in, an actual negative consequence or requirement beyond that of not getting to pick something else.

Well that would be pretty hard to justify.
I can't even think of any character options in the game that come with a literal cost. The only things I can think of are spells with expended monetary components but considering them a character option is a bit of a stretch.

[Mara]

Thoughts on the homebrewing of a return of Hideous Blow? The fix a Bladelock needs? Broken?

I will admit that bladelock is undertuned, but I would not say it needs a fix. You need system mastery to make it shine or worth the two invocations you may spend on it, but it's not underpowered because it has optimal combos.

The un-op blade lock has 16-dex until 12 because they pumped cha first. No feats. No multiclass. So secondary melee option bladelock has this break down in damage with level compared to EB. Keep in mind that EB in melee has disadvantage.

lvl 5. 2d8+6 vs 2d10+8 AC 15
lvl 12. 2d8+18 vs 3d10+15 AC 16
lvl 17. 2d8+20 vs 4d10+20 AC 17

Compared to EB in melee, the blade does good damage. It is just not your primary option and helps you survive in melee against several enemies.

[BootStrapTommy]

The context is a literal cost though. As in, an actual negative consequence or requirement beyond that of not getting to pick something else.Giant2005 is right. You can't talk about the economics of character options without opportunity cost (take it from an actual economist).

[georgie_leech]

Giant2005 is right. You can't talk about the economics of character options without opportunity cost (take it from an actual economist).

Yes, but the original point was an rp objection for a character being a heroic Warlock based on the idea that the Fey Patron could exact some literal cost down the line. I'm aware of what opportunity costs are, but that's not what was being discussed.

[Sigreid]

There isn't any cost. They're inventing it.
If you have a choice between A, B and C, the cost is nonexistent. It doesn't cost you anything to choose B, or C, or A.
It's a choice, not a cost.

I was referring to the whole sell your soul have a master thing.

[Hawkstar]

One of my Blade warlocks is "Link, but as a Drow" (Still Good, though), and his Archefey patron is pretty much an ersatz of the Great Deku Tree. He shoots Swordbeams (Eldritch blasts) from his fey-powered blade.

The cost extracted from a Fey Patron may very well be "I need you to go be a hero and save the day over here now."

My other warlock character (a fiend chainlock) has a much more intimate relationship with his patron, and the only cost he has to pay is his full and utter devotion and submission to his master (Who is actually pretty cool for a demon), which he was going to do anyway.

[JellyPooga]

Why doe there have to be a cost? I kinda like the blade lock as a EK that focuses on magic more than martial. If the classes are even close to balanced you don't need eternal damnation to balance it out.

It's nothing to do with character balance, it's to do with character fluff. A Patron grants power. No Patron would do so without some recompense. What does the Patron want in return? Some deed or service? A soul (or more than one)? An artefact? And so on. Whatever it is, it's something and without knowing the motivations of the Patron, you cannot know the motivations of the character.

Remove the Patron fluff and yes, you could fluff it as a kind of EK, Wizard, Sorcerer or whatever you like. However, much like the Paladin or Druid, the Warlock is a Class designed around a specific fluff. A Rogue can be anything from an artisan to a courtesan to an assassin to a duelist to a copper to a great many other things. It's fluff is easily mutable to fit many concepts. The Warlock, on the other hand, has its hands a little more tied. Inborn power? There's the Sorcerer for that kind of magic. Learned magic? There's the Wizard staring you in the face. Magic/Music Fusion? Bard. Natural magic? Druid. Power granted by an outside force? That's the Warlock.

You can alter the power-granting force, just as you can alter the Bloodline of a Sorcerer or the way a Wizard learned magic, whether it be from a Master-Apprentice relationship, at a College, from a library or whatever. What is more difficult to alter, though, is the basis of the magic.

You can interchange Fighter and Rogue and Ranger because they all learn their abilities the same way; through practice. If you say a Warlock learned magic from textbooks and justify it by pointing out the Pact of the Tome, why does he use Charisma and not Intelligence for his casting ability score and what's with the Patron thing? Why is he limited to the somewhat limited Warlock spell list and why can't he learn from scrolls?

You might be able to answer these questions, but the way the game is set up is for the Warlock to be the "magic granted by external force" Class. Stray too far from that and the mechanics start to lose any meaning beyond "roll a dice to produce an effect".

[georgie_leech]

It's nothing to do with character balance, it's to do with character fluff. A Patron grants power. No Patron would do so without some recompense. What does the Patron want in return? Some deed or service? A soul (or more than one)? An artefact? And so on. Whatever it is, it's something and without knowing the motivations of the Patron, you cannot know the motivations of the character.

Remove the Patron fluff and yes, you could fluff it as a kind of EK, Wizard, Sorcerer or whatever you like. However, much like the Paladin or Druid, the Warlock is a Class designed around a specific fluff. A Rogue can be anything from an artisan to a courtesan to an assassin to a duelist to a copper to a great many other things. It's fluff is easily mutable to fit many concepts. The Warlock, on the other hand, has its hands a little more tied. Inborn power? There's the Sorcerer for that kind of magic. Learned magic? There's the Wizard staring you in the face. Magic/Music Fusion? Bard. Natural magic? Druid. Power granted by an outside force? That's the Warlock.

You can alter the power-granting force, just as you can alter the Bloodline of a Sorcerer or the way a Wizard learned magic, whether it be from a Master-Apprentice relationship, at a College, from a library or whatever. What is more difficult to alter, though, is the basis of the magic.

You can interchange Fighter and Rogue and Ranger because they all learn their abilities the same way; through practice. If you say a Warlock learned magic from textbooks and justify it by pointing out the Pact of the Tome, why does he use Charisma and not Intelligence for his casting ability score and what's with the Patron thing? Why is he limited to the somewhat limited Warlock spell list and why can't he learn from scrolls?

You might be able to answer these questions, but the way the game is set up is for the Warlock to be the "magic granted by external force" Class. Stray too far from that and the mechanics start to lose any meaning beyond "roll a dice to produce an effect".

Okay, but what about a future cost of some sort prevents the character from being heroic in the mean time? For that matter, why does the cost have to be evil? Maybe the cost is agreeing to at some point act as a more literal servant for the patron fey.

Incidentally... 'The elf Tyrel is a servant of the Fey, just as his father and his father before him. Supernaturally endowed with unusual powers and a portion of their beguiling magics, he weaves blade and spell in combat to protect the Feywild and hunt down those that would despoil the forest that his clan has called home for centuries.' Did I just describe a Fey Patron Warlock, or an Oath of Ancients Paladin?

[Giant2005]

the way the game is set up is for the Warlock to be the "magic granted by external force" Class.

It doesn't have to be granted, it can be taken - the Great Old One patron even suggests that as a cause for the power. I don't see why the same could not apply to any other pact and the ability to forcibly take the power of a higher being could very well be derived from some book learning. You simply find an ancient tome that explains a forgotten ritual which you use to siphon power off some unknowing demon. You aren't owing that demon any more recompense than a battery owes an electrical appliance.

[JellyPooga]

Okay, but what about a future cost of some sort prevents the character from being heroic in the mean time? For that matter, why does the cost have to be evil? Maybe the cost is agreeing to at some point act as a more literal servant for the patron fey at some point.

I've already mentioned that the "cost" I've been talking about doesn't necessarily have to be evil, per se. Just that the ulterior motives of someone under the obligation of having been granted power, whatever is wanted in return, intrinsically make a character have a darker side; not in the sense of "dark and evil", but of holding something back or hiding something, or of an obligation that must come first. A character with secrets or a driving passion is a character with edge.


Incidentally... 'The elf Tyrel is a servant of the Fey, just as his father and his father before him. Supernaturally endowed with unusual powers and a portion of their beguiling magics, he weaves blade and spell in combat to protect the Feywild and hunt down those that would despoil the forest that his clan has called home for centuries.' Did I just describe a Fey Patron Warlock, or an Oath of Ancients Paladin?

Either one or both together!

It's a good background, no doubt. I'd still say this character has a kind of debt to pay and an edge. If the quest to save the world required despoiling the borders of the Feywild, what would this character do? Would he choose his ancestral home or the world he's pledged to save? On a smaller scale, the party encounters an aggressive Satyr (for whatever reason) that this character recognises as being from a Clan under his families protection; does he leap to the defence of the Satyr or his companions? If the Satyr is knocked out, banished or otherwise "not killed" at this characters request or deeds, what will the party think about him acting the way he did?

I'm not saying it's a bad thing to have edge (and I think Paladins are also characters with intrinsic edge...I wouldn't trust someone that puts so much blind faith in another, no matter how benevolent), just that I have difficulty envisioning a Warlock without it, whilst I can see most other Classes as either having it or not; your choice.


It doesn't have to be granted, it can be taken - the Great Old One patron even suggests that as a cause for the power. I don't see why the same could not apply to any other pact and the ability to forcibly take the power of a higher being could very well be derived from some book learning. You simply find an ancient tome that explains a forgotten ritual which you use to siphon power off some unknowing demon. You aren't owing that demon any more recompense than a battery owes an electrical appliance.

You're talking about a character that literally steals power. Theft is not exactly heroic. Then you need to consider the nature of the power being stolen; demonic, fey, eldritch...these are things not of the mortal realm; what is this stolen otherworldly power going to do to a mortal psyche? Maybe nothing. Would you gamble on it? If it was a friend or companion that was using this unknowable power? This idea has "dark" and "edgy" and "untrustworthy" written all over it.

[Mara]

There is little difference between a warlock and a divine caster. A warlock is bargaining for their power while A divine is being rewarded for greater understanding.

[Sindeloke]

(and I think Paladins are also characters with intrinsic edge...I wouldn't trust someone that puts so much blind faith in another, no matter how benevolent)

For the record, you keep saying this, and it's wrong. If a paladin of Pelor who's spent her life climbing the church hierarchy and spreading the Sunny Scripture to the masses suddenly finds out that Pelor is, in fact, actually the Burning Hate, that paladin will turn on Pelor, climb to epic levels, hoof it to Celestia and smite His fiery arse into the ground in order to remove a great evil from the world, and she will at no time during this journey hesitate, consider turning back, or so much as lose a point of Lay on Hands due to Pelor's disapproval. Paladins answer to a moral call higher than any deity, and their power is solely theirs, a natural consequence of their innate virtue. That is, they are guided and empowered by their own conscience alone, and there is nothing in the universe, neither friend nor king nor god, that can cause them to make a choice against that conscience. No character is less likely to follow some idiot third party into a morally dubious act than a paladin.

[Malifice]

Meh.

A Fighter 3/ Lock 17 is still the best Gish going around in my view.

Its right up there with the Paladin + (Sorcerer/Bard), and its about the only full 9th level caster that still packs a mighty melee punch (Paladin 3/Bard 17 being the other).

[Ziegander]

Meh.

A Fighter 3/ Lock 17 is still the best Gish going around in my view.

Its right up there with the Paladin + (Sorcerer/Bard), and its about the only full 9th level caster that still packs a mighty melee punch (Paladin 3/Bard 17 being the other).

I don't think anyone's arguing with you on that, but a Tomelock or a Chainlock can both stand strong on their own merits, where many people feel that, often (if not always), a Bladelock doesn't work as well as it maybe should without a dip or two into another class(es).

[Giant2005]

I don't think anyone's arguing with you on that, but a Tomelock or a Chainlock can both stand strong on their own merits, where many people feel that, often (if not always), a Bladelock doesn't work as well as it maybe should without a dip or two into another class(es).

Both a Tomelock and Chainlock are far superior by "dipping" into Sorcerer. The main difference is that the Bladelock is better off staying mostly pure and the Tomelock/Chainlock are better off moving off into Sorcerer at level 2, before they even get the ability to be a Tomelock/Chainlock.

[Corey]

Meh.

A Fighter 3/ Lock 17 is still the best Gish going around in my view.

Its right up there with the Paladin + (Sorcerer/Bard), and its about the only full 9th level caster that still packs a mighty melee punch (Paladin 3/Bard 17 being the other).

I assume Valor for the second attack, and picking up Hex and perhaps Armor of Agathys with Magical Secrets. So given that Bard will never get to 18, that's pretty sparse on other Magical Secrets, eh?

Fortunately, Bard on its own has a pretty cool spell list.

Actually, Bard's spell list is so cool that using concentration slots on Hex seems a bit dubious. E.g., when your -5 to-hit takes the probability of hit to 35 or 40%, Advantage from Faerie Fire is a huge boost to DPR, and that's just for you. Even if to-hit is 50% it's a huge boost. Of course, that's just for enemies who miss their save on Faerie Fire, which has a DEX save ...

[Ziegander]

Both a Tomelock and Chainlock are far superior by "dipping" into Sorcerer. The main difference is that the Bladelock is better off staying mostly pure and the Tomelock/Chainlock are better off moving off into Sorcerer at level 2, before they even get the ability to be a Tomelock/Chainlock.

Okay, that's WAAAAY more debatable than what I was saying. If we accept what you're saying as true, then we must all agree that the Warlock is just a really ****ing poorly designed class, because nothing it does is worth taking all 20 levels for, and every character that takes any Warlock levels is always better served by taking some levels in another class.

I don't think that's what you're trying to say, but that's the logical conclusion your comment leads to.

What I think you mean is that Sorcerer is far superior by dipping into Warlock. Tomelocks and Chainlocks don't need any level dips into Sorcerer or Paladin or Bard (though a Paladin dip especially can make them nearly as good in melee as a Bladelock might be) to function as most people expect them to. But for many players, a Bladelock needs a dip, or otherwise feats and other optimization that just doesn't feel obvious, in order to do what they think they should be able to do.

[MaxWilson]

Incidentally... 'The elf Tyrel is a servant of the Fey, just as his father and his father before him. Supernaturally endowed with unusual powers and a portion of their beguiling magics, he weaves blade and spell in combat to protect the Feywild and hunt down those that would despoil the forest that his clan has called home for centuries.' Did I just describe a Fey Patron Warlock, or an Oath of Ancients Paladin?

Fey Patrol Warlock, or maybe a Paladin of Vengeance. Clearly not Oath of the Ancients though. They're all about fierce joy and goodness, not nature and the Fey per se.

[Giant2005]

Okay, that's WAAAAY more debatable than what I was saying. If we accept what you're saying as true, then we must all agree that the Warlock is just a really ****ing poorly designed class, because nothing it does is worth taking all 20 levels for, and every character that takes any Warlock levels is always better served by taking some levels in another class.

I don't think that's what you're trying to say, but that's the logical conclusion your comment leads to.

What I think you mean is that Sorcerer is far superior by dipping into Warlock. Tomelocks and Chainlocks don't need any level dips into Sorcerer or Paladin or Bard (though a Paladin dip especially can make them nearly as good in melee as a Bladelock might be) to function as most people expect them to. But for many players, a Bladelock needs a dip, or otherwise feats and other optimization that just doesn't feel obvious, in order to do what they think they should be able to do.

Actually that first sentence up there pretty much is what I was trying to say and the same applies for most classes - very few classes are optimized by staying pure until level 20. Even if it is just a single level dip to replace their crappy capstones with another class's decent level 1 abilities.

As for that last bit, I guess you kind of misinterpreted me. Warlocks of all varieties (including the Bladelock) are perfectly viable staying pure, they will just never be optimal while doing so. What I will say though is that the more blaster-ey Warlocks (Chainlock/Tomelock) have a lot more to gain from multiclassing and thus a lot more incentive to do so, than the Bladelock does.

[Corey]

As for that last bit, I guess you kind of misinterpreted me. Warlocks of all varieties (including the Bladelock) are perfectly viable staying pure, they will just never be optimal while doing so. What I will say though is that the more blaster-ey Warlocks (Chainlock/Tomelock) have a lot more to gain from multiclassing and thus a lot more incentive to do so, than the Bladelock does.

Could you please explain? It's not obvious to me at all.

Bladelocks need armor more than Blastlocks do.
Blastlocks probably care a little more about spell progression than Bladelocks, so lose more by multiclassing.


I don't think the difference between Warlock 17 and Warlock 20 is good enough to be worth staying pure, but I can see going to Warlock 17 before deviating (probably to Sorcerer, for two of Heighten, Extend, and Quicken).

Now, it might be that you think a Sorcerer with a dip into Warlock is stronger than a serious Warlock, but that's a different subject.

[georgie_leech]

Fey Patrol Warlock, or maybe a Paladin of Vengeance. Clearly not Oath of the Ancients though. They're all about fierce joy and goodness, not nature and the Fey per se.

It was a two sentence blurb to point out the similarities between a Paladin and Warlock to show that a patron of some sort doesn't mean they can't be heroic (though aparently he doesn't feel like the classic Knight in Shining Armour doesn't count as heroic so I have no idea what to suggest :smalltongue:). He could very much be either sort; the important bit was the Paladin, and to me Oath of the Ancients seems to have the strongest ties to the Fey, even if it's not a guaranteed link. In my mind Tyrel is primarily motivated by tradition, a joy for life, and the belief that all creatures should be able to free to have that same joy. The nature bit is incidental to the home and Fey bits; I don't know many legends where the Fey are particularly urban.

[Malifice]

I assume Valor for the second attack, and picking up Hex and perhaps Armor of Agathys with Magical Secrets. So given that Bard will never get to 18, that's pretty sparse on other Magical Secrets, eh?

Fortunately, Bard on its own has a pretty cool spell list.

Actually, Bard's spell list is so cool that using concentration slots on Hex seems a bit dubious. E.g., when your -5 to-hit takes the probability of hit to 35 or 40%, Advantage from Faerie Fire is a huge boost to DPR, and that's just for you. Even if to-hit is 50% it's a huge boost. Of course, that's just for enemies who miss their save on Faerie Fire, which has a DEX save ...

You probably just want Paladin 2/ Bard 18 (if you want Wish).

You get 2 attacks from Bard, plus haste. Spam divine smites on all thee attacks. Damage is respectable. TWF is also good for 4 x smite attack novas.

I still like the 'lock 17/ Fighter 3


I don't think anyone's arguing with you on that, but a Tomelock or a Chainlock can both stand strong on their own merits, where many people feel that, often (if not always), a Bladelock doesn't work as well as it maybe should without a dip or two into another class(es).

I agree. It's much harder with straight 'lock. Id probably go human (w moderately armored feat) stick with sword and board till 4th then pick up GWM feat. Bump Cha and Str from then on.

Alternatively I would start with a polearm and rely on Polearm master + Armor of agathys to make it a bad idea to attack me (approach me - you get clobbered. Hit me and you cop an AoA and hellish rebuke in the face) and just walk around with a ****ty AC till I could jump in medium armor at 4th.

Strength locks are the way to go (with either GWM or Polearm master). I really dont rate Dex locks at all. They look like a good idea at cutting down MAD, and do alright damage (TWF+Hex) at low levels, but then rapidly drop off.

[Giant2005]

Could you please explain? It's not obvious to me at all.

Bladelocks need armor more than Blastlocks do.
Blastlocks probably care a little more about spell progression than Bladelocks, so lose more by multiclassing.


I don't think the difference between Warlock 17 and Warlock 20 is good enough to be worth staying pure, but I can see going to Warlock 17 before deviating (probably to Sorcerer, for two of Heighten, Extend, and Quicken).

Now, it might be that you think a Sorcerer with a dip into Warlock is stronger than a serious Warlock, but that's a different subject.

Bladelocks do not need armour and they are probably better off without it. If they increase their armour, they decrease their damage output by quite a serious degree. Bladelocks have less incentive to multiclass because their defenses are already set and there isn't actually a lot of options out there for a melee combatant to increase their damage output.
Blastlocks don't really gain anything defensively by multiclassing either but they can increase their offensive potential by a far greater degree than the Bladelock by multiclassing into Sorcerer (Doubling it via Quicken Spell). Also as you said, Blastlocks tend to be more focused on spellcasting and can really benefit from picking up some real spell slots for an emergency supply rather than relying on 1-4 spells per rest.
But yeah, I personally think a heavier investment in Sorc is better and at that point the Warlock isn't really considered a Warlock at all.

[Malifice]

Bladelocks do not need armour and they are probably better off without it. If they increase their armour, they decrease their damage output by quite a serious degree. Bladelocks have less incentive to multiclass because their defenses are already set and there isn't actually a lot of options out there for a melee combatant to increase their damage output.
Blastlocks don't really gain anything defensively by multiclassing either but they can increase their offensive potential by a far greater degree than the Bladelock by multiclassing into Sorcerer (Doubling it via Quicken Spell). Also as you said, Blastlocks tend to be more focused on spellcasting and can really benefit from picking up some real spell slots for an emergency supply rather than relying on 1-4 spells per rest.
But yeah, I personally think a heavier investment in Sorc is better and at that point the Warlock isn't really considered a Warlock at all.

I kind of agree. You can (as a feindlock) rely on your temp HP to protect you and keep you in the fight. A lot of your DPR comes from out of turn stuff that relies on you getting hit (Hellish rebuke, Armor of Agathys) so having a low AC isnt really that much of a drag.

I like the heavy armor to increase my tanking and save the AoA spell slot to sling a fireball or something.

[MaxWilson]

Bladelocks do not need armour and they are probably better off without it. If they increase their armour, they decrease their damage output by quite a serious degree.

That's a great way to die to anything but a swarm of mooks, i.e. endless temp HP. Remember that the objective of combat is not to inflict high damage in little time; it is to inflict much more damage (as a party) than you receive (as a party) with minimal resource expenditure. Good AC cannot be counterproductive here but poor AC can. Even if you're relying on Armor of Agathys, good AC will ensure that it lasts for longer while still doing the same eventual damage over its lifespan.

There are probably tables where bladelocks (actually fiendlocks) can eschew armor, but that's a table issue. In the general case you are never better off without good AC.

[Giant2005]

That's a great way to die to anything but a swarm of mooks, i.e. endless temp HP. Remember that the objective of combat is not to inflict high damage in little time; it is to inflict much more damage (as a party) than you receive (as a party) with minimal resource expenditure. Good AC cannot be counterproductive here but poor AC can. Even if you're relying on Armor of Agathys, good AC will ensure that it lasts for longer while still doing the same eventual damage over its lifespan.

You have essentially described exactly why Bladelocks are great and also why having a low AC is a pretty good idea. You said it to yourself - the key to victory is inflicting more damage to the enemy than you receive. With that in mind, having the enemy hit you and inflict no damage to you but plenty to himself feels like activating the game's cheat mode.
If the enemy insists on beating himself up by attacking you, then let him - you just go ahead and keep renewing that Armor of Agathys. If he smartens up and finds himself a new target, then go ahead and let him do that too, you will then be attacking him with impunity and your AC is now rendered irrelevant anyway.
I played a game where the DM gave us stupidly high rolls for our stats (I think it was something ridiculous like roll 5D6, drop 2 and re-roll any 1s and 2s). I took Armor of Shadows due to similar thoughts such as your own (More AC = better) and with a high Dex, my AC was pretty decent with it active. I only used the invocation twice because the extra AC was hindering my capabilities too much and even after abandoning the use of it, I found myself cursing my stupidly high Dexterity that rendered my unarmoured AC too high for comfort.

[MaxWilson]

You have essentially described exactly why Bladelocks are great and also why having a low AC is a pretty good idea. You said it to yourself - the key to victory is inflicting more damage to the enemy than you receive.

"...with minimal resource expenditure." Loss ratios matter more than DPR.


With that in mind, having the enemy hit you and inflict no damage to you but plenty to himself feels like activating the game's cheat mode.
If the enemy insists on beating himself up by attacking you, then let him - you just go ahead and keep renewing that Armor of Agathys.

And every time he hits you, you lose a big chunk of your spell slot allotment. Let's say you're a solo FiendBladelock 8 (for simplicity) against a Medium encounter of 5 orcs. You cast Armor of Agathys at level 4, so any orc who hits you is guaranteed to die, inflicting 9-ish points of damage to you in the process. You will kill 2 or 3 orcs with your Armor of Agathys before it is depleted, but you also get your own attacks on top of that. If you have good AC (Fighter 1/Warlock 7 = AC 20 or 21, depending on what fighting style you took) you will get hit by about 1 orc per round, so you'll get 3ish rounds of attacks before your Armor of Agathys is depleted. In all likelihood all the orcs will be dead first and you'll have some AoE left over for the next fight. If you have poor AC (Warlock 8 = AC 10 to maybe 12), you will get hit by three orcs per turn, so your armor will all blow out in the first round and you'll only get one round of attacks in, instead of three. Sure, it will look like you're doing great damage because it all occurs in a single round, but in reality you're only outputting 1/3 the active damage of the high-AC guy, while holding the AoA damage constant. You (Warlock 8) blow your whole AoA on this fight for no gain relative to high-AC guy (Fighter 1/Warlock 7).

In a non-solo fight, your allies' attacks get added to your own, so the ratio of AoA damage : active damage is even worse, and so active damage dominates the damage equation. Reducing active damage via low AC becomes an even worse choice in a party.

Low AC is not a benefit.

[Giant2005]

And every time he hits you, you lose a big chunk of your spell slot allotment. Let's say you're a solo FiendBladelock 8 (for simplicity) against a Medium encounter of 5 orcs. You cast Armor of Agathys at level 4, so any orc who hits you is guaranteed to die, inflicting 9-ish points of damage to you in the process. You will kill 2 or 3 orcs with your Armor of Agathys before it is depleted, but you also get your own attacks on top of that. If you have good AC (Fighter 1/Warlock 7 = AC 20 or 21, depending on what fighting style you took) you will get hit by about 1 orc per round, so you'll get 3ish rounds of attacks before your Armor of Agathys is depleted. In all likelihood all the orcs will be dead first and you'll have some AoE left over for the next fight. If you have poor AC (Warlock 8 = AC 10 to maybe 12), you will get hit by three orcs per turn, so your armor will all blow out in the first round and you'll only get one round of attacks in, instead of three. Sure, it will look like you're doing great damage because it all occurs in a single round, but in reality you're only outputting 1/3 the active damage of the high-AC guy, while holding the AoA damage constant. You (Warlock 8) blow your whole AoA on this fight for no gain relative to high-AC guy (Fighter 1/Warlock 7).

That is great in a solo fight, but you have buddies at your side too. If the Orcs aren't able to commit suicide against your Armor of Agathys, then those Orcs are alive and well enough to harm your allies. Dead Orcs don't do damage, but living Orcs can - killing things faster mitigates more damage than you give it credit for.

[JellyPooga]

For the record, you keep saying this, and it's wrong. If a paladin of Pelor who's spent her life climbing the church hierarchy and spreading the Sunny Scripture to the masses suddenly finds out that Pelor is, in fact, actually the Burning Hate, that paladin will turn on Pelor, climb to epic levels, hoof it to Celestia and smite His fiery arse into the ground in order to remove a great evil from the world

- "Hi, I'm Paladin McPelorson, a devout follower of Pelor all my life. He's the best!"
- "Hey, Paladin, did you know that Pelor is a total douchebag? His nickname is the Burning Hate and everything"
- "What?!? MUST SMITE!" *runs off waving his sword*
- "Hey, what gives? We've got a quest to do...you know, save the world?"
- [in the distance] "Sorry, got biz with the man upstairs, laters!"

What about this scenario doesn't make the Paladin an inherently untrustworthy character? Whether he's opposing or supporting a deity, or an ideal or an alignment or a Fey or Fiend Patron, he's got a higher agenda than your petty mortal concerns, such that as a contemporary, you simply can't rely on that character to act in the best interests of whatever you are trying to achieve at any given time. Call it "higher ideals" or "obedience" or whatever you want...I call that "edge".


(though aparently he doesn't feel like the classic Knight in Shining Armour doesn't count as heroic so I have no idea what to suggest :smalltongue:)

The "classic" Knight in Shining Armour isn't, typically, that heroic. He's self-serving, up his own behind and only in it for the glory and reward. Sure, he performs heroic deeds like killing dragons, thwarting evil plots and such, but his motivations are usually material; a rich reward, marrying the princess, half the kingdom and so on.

To use the Lord of the Rings again; Samwise Gamgee is a Hero in the truest sense. He goes to the ends of the earth, where the mighty of the realm fear to tread, to destroy evil for good. Why does he do this, against all sense and reason, this gardener from the Shire? He doesn't really care about the greater good, he doesn't care about the realms of men or elves or dwarves and he doesn't give a thought to reward or gain...just that his best friend gets home ok. How does he go about this? Does he ask Elrond for a magic sword? Galadriel for magic powers? No. He accepts their aid and that of others because their interests intersect with his own, but he relies only on his own abilities and gifts, though they may be few.

To counterpoint Sam as the Hero; what happens when they get to the falls of Rauros? Aragorn decides that his own destiny, as King of Gondor, takes precedence over Sam and Frodos quest to get to Mordor.

Think about it, Aragorn is a high ideal of mankind in that setting, almost the classic knight; he's altruistic, brave, strong and so on, but instead of getting Frodo as near as possible to, or even in and across Mordor (which he totally could have done), he thinks "Hey, he'll be ok to cross the Dead Marshes, get past the Black Gate and across the Gorgoroth Plains to Mount friggin' Doom on his lonesome. Right, where's my crown?"...seriously, for a "knight in shining armour" type, he's kind of a douche-bag at that moment. His ulterior motives, as worthy as they may have been, took him away from what he probably should have been doing. He's not an anti-hero, but he's definitely got "edge" and not just because of the way he was introduced as a shady kind of guy in a pub or that he's been in hiding all his life.

[Hawkstar]

What is with all the talk of dipping? Do people LIKE gimping their spell progression?

[Giant2005]

What is with all the talk of dipping? Do people LIKE gimping their spell progression?

I sure do!

[Z3ro]

What is with all the talk of dipping? Do people LIKE gimping their spell progression?

I'm going to agree with Giant2005; I really like dipping in this edition in general. I think it's one of the most multiclass friendly editions, despite the common forum wisdom. Most capstones aren't worth it, and even with a slowed spell progression, characters can still generally contribute.

That being said, pure Warlock is one of the few that I really like, like pure Ranger.

[Corey]

you just go ahead and keep renewing that Armor of Agathys.

With which spell slots? :)

Also, if you're getting hit that much, Hex probably isn't staying up continually, which is another drain on spell slots. That, however, can be addressed by low-level slots you get from any multiclassing.

[georgie_leech]

-snip-

Or, the Paladin could be like O-chul instead of Miko, steadfast, loyal, and will never abandon someone in need if his actions can help prevent them harm. A paladin doesn't have to be played as an obsessive nut job, and they are fully capable of balancing their ideals with the present concerns.

Incidentally, that's a rather gross mischaracterisation of Aragorn. He didn't just go 'oh I'm going to abandon you now,' Frodo told him to leave. He wanted to go alone from that point on, because both he and Aragorn knew that the ring was powerful and would tempt him just as it had Boromir. Aragorn wanted to go with him, but respected Frodo wishes because he understood he wasn't perfect: 'I would have gone with you to the end.' It's only after Frodo leaves that he does something different, which isn't carting off to Gondor to be crowned, but to run for days across the plains with Gimli and Legolas hunting the orcs that had taken Merry and Pippin. Then when he meets the newly resurrected Gandalf, the Wizard then sets him on the path to being King (with a side stop to defend a people not his own from an invading army). Not because Aragorn just really wanted it, but because Man had to stand united against Sauron to survive, and the Heir of Isildur was the best choice for that. When they finally saved Minas Tirith, Denethor was dead, and Aragorn was the nominal leader even if he hadn't been crowned yet, he doesn't sit back and relax. He immediately takes every soldier he can gather to assault the Black Gates of Mordor, on the chance that it would draw Sauron eye. The second he had an opportunity to do something to help Frodo, he took it. Everyone that marched on the Black Gates fully expected to die.

In short, yes, Sam is the most heroic of characters, the ordinary fellow who never abandoned his friend in the face of terrible evil. That doesn't mean he has a monopoly on heroism.

[Mara]

What is with all the talk of dipping? Do people LIKE gimping their spell progression? a 1 fighter dip gives you heavy armor and makes strength bladelocks possible to non-variant humans/mountain dwarves.

I disagree with the idea you want low ac. Or wasting slots on defensive spells. One fireball wipes out a party of orcs.

[Ziegander]

With which spell slots? :)

Also, if you're getting hit that much, Hex probably isn't staying up continually, which is another drain on spell slots. That, however, can be addressed by low-level slots you get from any multiclassing.

Oh, ye of little faith. I'm sure Malifice will be quick to correct you that Warlocks have infinite spell slots to burn on Hellish Rebuke as soon as 3rd level. I brought up the spell slots limitation once before and Mal and Divideby didn't even read my post before shouting me down. I mean, you're a multiclass Fighter with 14 Constitution. That's like +5 to your check, man! 80% of the time, it works every time!

[DivisibleByZero]

Oh, ye of little faith. I'm sure Malifice will be quick to correct you that Warlocks have infinite spell slots to burn on Hellish Rebuke as soon as 3rd level. I brought up the spell slots limitation once before and Mal and Divideby didn't even read my post before shouting me down. I mean, you're a multiclass Fighter with 14 Constitution. That's like +5 to your check, man! 80% of the time, it works every time!

Nice try.
Except for the fact that I was never a part of any discussion regarding spell slots in any way, except to point out that the warlock is essentially on the variant spell point system and can only create slots of their highest level available.
So you can bring it up all you want to, but don't include me in your little passive aggressive rant.

[Ziegander]

Except for the fact that I was never a part of any discussion regarding spell slots in any way, except to point out that the warlock is essentially on the variant spell point system and can only create slots of their highest level available.
So you can bring it up all you want to, but don't include me in your little passive aggressive rant.

Right, which you copy/paste every chance you get. Anytime someone (which includes me) brings up that their spell slots per short rest is actually a meaningful limitation you love to bring that up to "prove" that it's not. But it doesn't actually prove anything. I made a post discussing the practical limits of those slots in play and Malifice didn't even read it, but said I was wrong anyway, and you copy/paste'd your math on spell points.

[DivisibleByZero]

Anytime someone (which includes me) brings up that their spell slots per short rest is actually a meaningful limitation you love to bring that up to "prove" that it's not.

Wrong again.
I never said it wasn't a meaningful limitation. I simply disagree with the assertion that they are in any way less powerful because of that limitation. All the apparent opponents of that style seem to be of the opinion that this limitation makes them less powerful.
It doesn't.
It forces them along a set path of how many spells can be cast in any given pair of encounters, but they are no less powerful because of it.
It just means that they can't nova with spell slots and blow their daily load like other casters can if they wish, but they are no less powerful because of it.

So yes, I ignored what you were trying to say, because I fundamentally disagree with it, and the math is all that I need to show why I disagree with it. As long as people keep claiming that the warlock's spell system somehow makes them less powerful, I will continue to simply show that math proves them wrong.
As far as I'm concerned, nothing more needs to be said on it, so I don't feel the need to say anything more.
The numbers don't lie.

edit:
I'll even go one better here, and say that now that I think about it, I do not in fact consider it a meaningful limitation.
It is instead a meaningful TRADE that they make.
Instead of getting all of their spells for the day available, they instead only get a few per short rest.
In trade for this, every single spell that they cast throughout the entire day is always the most powerful spell they could have potentially cast. Every. Single. One.
Not a limitation on the number of spells they can cast.
Instead, a trade of the number of spells they can cast in exchange for those spells being more powerful than they would otherwise be from another caster.
Calling it a limitation makes it sound as if you aren't getting anything in return, but you are.
Not a limitation. A trade.

[JellyPooga]

Or, the Paladin could be like O-chul instead of Miko, steadfast, loyal, and will never abandon someone in need if his actions can help prevent them harm. A paladin doesn't have to be played as an obsessive nut job, and they are fully capable of balancing their ideals with the present concerns.

Indeed I agree. Regardless of whether they're an impulsive nut-job or a compassionate compromiser, though, they still have a compulsion to hold true to an Oath (at least in 5ed). Break that Oath and their house of cards comes tumbling down the slippery slope. Much as a Warlock is bound by his Pact; if his Patron tells him to jump, the next words out of his mouth had better be "how high?" or he's going to be suffering some consequences.

Having that "threat" hanging over your head means that in some situations, those characters are bound by their contract to act in a certain way. Sometimes this will be easy, other times it will not. Heck, it might never come up that the character is forced to "make the choice" and live out his career as a noble, trustworthy and heroic kind of guy. This does not preclude the possibility of such a situation arising. There are reasonable grounds for doubt as to whether such a character will act in a rational or expected manner in any given situation without knowing the "terms" of that characters contract.

That doubt is what makes such a character have "edge".


Incidentally, that's a rather gross mischaracterisation of Aragorn.

I abbreviated! :smallwink:

You're not wrong in what you say; Aragorn respected Frodos desire to go it alone, he tried to save the other Hobbits and helped the Rohirrim defend Helms Deep before he went after his crown. Once he had it, he led the suicide charge to go help Frodo. Heroic deeds, all. What you fail to mention is that his reason for joining the fellowship in the first place was to go become King of Gondor. The Fellowship just happened to be going in the right direction. He had no intention of going the distance with Frodo; as far as he was concerned, that was Gandalfs job. Once he (pretty much) had the crown in hand, only then did he give a thought to helping Frodo and saving the world. Going to help Gondor was a delaying action, at best, in the grand scheme of things.

When the mantle of leadership fell upon his shoulders after Gandalf fell with the Balrog, what was his response? Was it to step up to the challenge and take Gandalfs place as Frodos guide and protector? No. He copped out, took the "easy excuse" of saying that he'd be corrupted by the Ring and stuck to his original plan to go claim his throne (he just took a roundabout route to get there and did some stuff on the way). He didn't have to heed Frodos wishes; he probably shouldn't have. Frodos plan was nuts. For all anyone knew, Aragorn might well have resisted the lure of the Ring. Sam did and he even wore it for a short time. Aragorn may have been a mighty warrior and doer of great deeds, for all the right perceived reasons, but a Hero he was not.


In short, yes, Sam is the most heroic of characters, the ordinary fellow who never abandoned his friend in the face of terrible evil. That doesn't mean he has a monopoly on heroism.

Quite right and I'm exaggerating about Aragorn; I personally think he's definitely Heroic (with a capital "H") material, just as you portray him. A suspicious character, however, such as Denethor (insane and corrupted as he might have been), could well use the same reasoning as myself to discredit or mistrust a character like Aragorn. He's got chinks in his Hero-armour that can be exploited; more than a few.

In much the same way, a Paladin or Warlock could come under such scrutiny and any Oath or Pact is a potential "chink" for anyone who would look to trust them.

[georgie_leech]

If your definition of heroic is incorruptible or having no chinks in their metaphorical armour, I don't know what to tell you. Even Sam was tempted by the ring, and he held it just a short time. It seems like such a strict requirement renders the concept of hero impossible to fulfill.

[JellyPooga]

If your definition of heroic is incorruptible or having no chinks in their metaphorical armour, I don't know what to tell you. Even Sam was tempted by the ring, and he held it just a short time. It seems like such a strict requirement renders the concept of hero almost impossible to fulfill.

Corrected for you :smallwink:

Yes, I do think that the concept of a truly heroic character is almost impossible to fulfill. It's possible and a few characters in myths and tales meet my criteria, but only a small few. Others may have heroic qualities or perform heroic deeds, but the flaws in their character usually give them that certain something that detracts from true Heroism. Maybe it's a small distinction, but for me it's an important one, if only so I can avoid playing a True Hero in an RPG! I dislike flawless characters.

[Hawkstar]

Corrected for you :smallwink:

Yes, I do think that the concept of a truly heroic character is almost impossible to fulfill. It's possible and a few characters in myths and tales meet my criteria, but only a small few. Others may have heroic qualities or perform heroic deeds, but the flaws in their character usually give them that certain something that detracts from true Heroism. Maybe it's a small distinction, but for me it's an important one, if only so I can avoid playing a True Hero in an RPG! I dislike flawless characters.
But you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.

[georgie_leech]

Corrected for you :smallwink:

Yes, I do think that the concept of a truly heroic character is almost impossible to fulfill. It's possible and a few characters in myths and tales meet my criteria, but only a small few. Others may have heroic qualities or perform heroic deeds, but the flaws in their character usually give them that certain something that detracts from true Heroism. Maybe it's a small distinction, but for me it's an important one, if only so I can avoid playing a True Hero in an RPG! I dislike flawless characters.

Could you give an example then? I'm having a hard time reconciling the idea that there can't be anything bad to say about them with... well, anyone, really. Like I said, even Sam was tempted by the ring, and knew he had to give the ring back to a Frodo, because he himself wouldn't be able to carry it up Mt. Doom.

[JellyPooga]

Like I said, even Sam was tempted by the ring, and knew he had to give the ring back to a Frodo, because he himself wouldn't be able to carry it up Mt. Doom.

I'll dispute that (as off-topic as this conversation is getting); Sam didn't give the ring back because he knew he wouldn't be able to carry it. He only picked it up in the first place because he was the only one there (when he thought Frodo dead) to continue the mission, not because he'd succumbed to its lure. If he'd known he couldn't do it, he probably wouldn't have even tried. He gave it back for no greater reason than because Frodo asked for it back (to protect him from its influence). It's another demonstration of Sams heroic quality that he gave The Ring back just for the asking. Tempted he may have been, but it's the nature of the Ring to tempt. It's the nature of a Hero to refuse (under these circumstances).

As you might have guessed, Samwise Gamgee fits my Hero model. His flaws are those of a physical nature and education, but his character is beyond reproach (at least as I interpret what's written about him).

As a counterpoint to Sam, I also consider Conan the Cimmerian a Hero. Odd choice, perhaps; he's a thief and a pirate and a conqueror, certainly, but he's entirely predictable. He's a Hero because there's no doubt about the way he'll act. If you attack him, he'll attack back. If you pay him to steal something for you, you know he won't keep it. If you put a woman within 10ft of him, her clothes will inexplicably fall off (seriously, have you read any Conan stories? Conan + Woman = (semi-)nekkid Woman...every. single. time). He might not do heroic deeds (mighty deeds is another matter...), but he's got honour in spades; not because of some code or oath or law, but because that's what makes him Conan (that and his mighty thews).

If Conan was in Aragorns place, he'd have taken The Ring (forcibly if need be), ignored its siren call through sheer willpower and thrown it into Mt.Doom himself, then gone and kicked down the doors of Barad Dur, slaughtered the inhabitants, shrugged off the evil magic of Sauron because he doesn't believe in it and punched him in the face, before looting every scrap of treasure he could, lugging it back to Osgiliath and using his new-found lucre to rebuild his capital city, whilst elf-maidens swooned at his feet. That's a Hero. There's no doubt of his motivation; the ConAragorn amalgam wants to be King of Gondor. However, there's no point in being King if the world's about to end, so put paid to the world-ender first (you know, because you've got the means to do so right there in front of you), then go claim your kingdom. It's the no-nonsense, practical approach to Heroism. He's not nice, he's not particularly moral, but at least you know where you stand with him.

[MaxWilson]

Instead of getting all of their spells for the day available, they instead only get a few per short rest.
In trade for this, every single spell that they cast throughout the entire day is always the most powerful spell they could have potentially cast. Every. Single. One.
Not a limitation on the number of spells they can cast.
Instead, a trade of the number of spells they can cast in exchange for those spells being more powerful than they would otherwise be from another caster.
Calling it a limitation makes it sound as if you aren't getting anything in return, but you are.
Not a limitation. A trade.

In what way is Mist Step V better than Misty Step II?

Even Fireball V is only a marginal improvement over Fireball III. There are relatively few spells that see worthwhile improvement from casting them in a fifth-level slot. Hold Person, Blindness/Deafness, Invisibility, Fly, Vampiric Touch yes. Darkness, Hypnotic Pattern, Dimension Door, Suggestion, Misty Step, Hunger of Hadar, Evard's Black Tentacles, Expeditious Retreat no. Dispel Magic, Counterspell sometimes. Much of the time, the extra power is wasted.

It's a trade but it's a relatively poor trade, essentially narrowing the warlock's already-narrow spell list even further.

Totally random comment: Druids and Sorcerers get Polymorph but not True Polymorph. Warlocks get True Polymorph but not Polymorph. How odd is that?

[JellyPooga]

Totally random comment: Druids and Sorcerers get Polymorph but not True Polymorph. Warlocks get True Polymorph but not Polymorph. How odd is that?

Not so odd when you consider there's an Invocation for Polymorph 1/day using a Warlock spell slot.

[Sigreid]

In what way is Mist Step V better than Misty Step II?

Even Fireball V is only a marginal improvement over Fireball III. There are relatively few spells that see worthwhile improvement from casting them in a fifth-level slot. Hold Person, Blindness/Deafness, Invisibility, Fly, Vampiric Touch yes. Darkness, Hypnotic Pattern, Dimension Door, Suggestion, Misty Step, Hunger of Hadar, Evard's Black Tentacles, Expeditious Retreat no. Dispel Magic, Counterspell sometimes. Much of the time, the extra power is wasted.

It's a trade but it's a relatively poor trade, essentially narrowing the warlock's already-narrow spell list even further.

Totally random comment: Druids and Sorcerers get Polymorph but not True Polymorph. Warlocks get True Polymorph but not Polymorph. How odd is that?

Druid not having True Polymorph makes sense to me as if anything is an affront to the natural order, changing one thing to another at it's essence would be.

[TrollCapAmerica]

Oh, ye of little faith. I'm sure Malifice will be quick to correct you that Warlocks have infinite spell slots to burn on Hellish Rebuke as soon as 3rd level. I brought up the spell slots limitation once before and Mal and Divideby didn't even read my post before shouting me down. I mean, you're a multiclass Fighter with 14 Constitution. That's like +5 to your check, man! 80% of the time, it works every time!

Heck most of the time im not even willing to burn slots on Hex to upmy EB damage. Maybe when I gain a third slot and can keep it going eight hours by targeting my familiar when nobody is around but otherwise...

[Malifice]

Oh, ye of little faith. I'm sure Malifice will be quick to correct you that Warlocks have infinite spell slots to burn on Hellish Rebuke as soon as 3rd level.

I believe I said [paraphrasing] 'It depends on your short rest meta at your table'.

If you're getting the standard assumed short rest every two - three encounters you should be either lobbing a [highest level slot] around in each battle you find yourself in, or enjoying the benefit of a [highest level spell] still up and running via concentration.

We get a SR every 2-3 and I certainly don't find myself always out of slots. At a guesstimate, around 20 percent of encounters I enter out of slots, and I enter around 20 percent of short rests with a slot left over [that I personally like to blow on Armor of Agathys to coat myself in frost while I rest].


I brought up the spell slots limitation once before and Mal and Divideby didn't even read my post before shouting me down.

Im not shouting you down bro. It's not a limitation (well.. it can be a limitation if your DM deviates from the rest/encounter meta either willfully or by virtue of not understanding it).


I mean, you're a multiclass Fighter with 14 Constitution. That's like +5 to your check, man! 80% of the time, it works every time!

I also took HAM, so reduce incoming damage by 3; the only time I had to make a Concentration check with a DC of over 10 was a Crit that did like 30 damage (and dropped me to 0 anyways).

I have an AC of 18 (and thanks to temp HP, Hellish Rebuke, Riposte and AoA, find that I don't get attacked that often anyways - but that's largely meta). Combats don't last more than 3 rounds in my experience. I find that I can survive the whole of most AD's (probably around 75 percent of encounters) with Hex still up from the first casting in the day (rolling a 5+ on the Con save isn't too hard).

[georgie_leech]

I have an AC of 18 (and thanks to temp HP, Hellish Rebuke, Riposte and AoA, find that I don't get attacked that often anyways - but that's largely meta). Combats don't last more than 3 rounds in my experience. I find that I can survive the whole of most AD's (probably around 75 percent of encounters) with Hex still up from the first casting in the day (rolling a 5+ on the Con save isn't too hard).

Okay... with that concentration modifier, getting hit three times is about 50/50 odds of failing at least one concentration check. 5 is close to 75%, and by 7 you're at nearly 85% odds of failing at least one check. That's a bit like claiming the a Fighter's Action Rush is useless because they'll probably miss all of their attacks, or that proficiency in saving throws doesn't matter because you'll just make all your saves anyway. I'm a fan of Warlocks, but your experience seems rather... unlikely to be shared by others.

[Malifice]

Okay... with that concentration modifier, getting hit three times is about 50/50 odds of failing at least one concentration check. 5 is close to 75%, and by 7 you're at nearly 85% odds of failing at least one check. That's a bit like claiming the a Fighter's Action Rush is useless because they'll probably miss all of their attacks, or that proficiency in saving throws doesn't matter because you'll just make all your saves anyway. I'm a fan of Warlocks, but your experience seems rather... unlikely to be shared by others.

Its an 80 percent chance (I need a 5+). I don't know what the actual odds are but I can generally survive around 75 percent of my average AD with it remaining 'up'. I've never (from memory) had to cast it more than twice in a single AD.

We normally get around 6 encounters between LR's, and about 2-3 encounters per SR.

[georgie_leech]

Its an 80 percent chance (I need a 5+). I don't know what the actual odds are but I can generally survive around 75 percent of my average AD with it remaining 'up'. I've never (from memory) had to cast it more than twice in a single AD.

We normally get around 6 encounters between LR's, and about 2-3 encounters per SR.

Right, 80% chance of making the first check. The chance of making the second check is also 80%, so the odds of making both checks is 64%. In other words, the chance of failing one or both checks is 36%. Just multiply by .8 each time. By 5 hits, the odds of making all 5 of the checks is a little more than 26%. In my experience, characters tend to get hit more than 5 times between short rests. Assuming 5 hits before the first, and another 5 before the second, you're at nearly 5% odds of successfully making all of the checks. In other words, the odds of Hex even lasting most of (not all) the day are about the same as getting a critical. I think you'd agree that even though the odd critical/all day hex happens, the vast majority of dice rolls/adventuring days don't have that happen.

[Malifice]

Right, 80% chance of making the first check. The chance of making the second check is also 80%, so the odds of making both checks is 64%. In other words, the chance of failing one or both checks is 36%. Just multiply by .8 each time. By 5 hits, the odds of making all 5 of the checks is a little more than 26%. In my experience, characters tend to get hit more than 5 times between short rests. Assuming 5 hits before the first, and another 5 before the second, you're at nearly 5% odds of successfully making all of the checks. In other words, the odds of Hex even lasting most of (not all) the day are about the same as getting a critical. I think you'd agree that even though the odd critical/all day hex happens, the vast majority of dice rolls/adventuring days don't have that happen.

I'm probably expending no more than 3-4 slots on Hex castings per two AD, out of around 14-15 slots available over the same 2xAD period. I make fairly liberal use of Mirror image too though, so you might want to factor that into your calculations.

Say 2/7 slots per day expended on Hex per day (and even that sounds excessive). I generally get to blast a single spell slot per encounter, or [have hex running] or both, so I am generally either casting a spell per encounter, or benefiting from one, in addition to melee goodness.

I generally have a spell up my sleeve 75 percent of the time. I rarely nova with 2 spells in the single encounter (my preferred Nova is action surge). Action surge has really helped actually. I view it as another 'spell' giving me 2 slots and 1 action surge every 2-3 encounters (enough to do something 'big' in every single encounter I face).

Main spells cast are [mirror image] for defense [also limits needing to make concentration checks], Fireball [for mook clearance], Hellish Rebuke [for hard target solo or BBEG out of turn damage], Scorching ray [single target ranged striking, when I cant get close enough, and Hex is up].

I can almost always rely on having [one big spell - or action surge - or both] + [melee goodness of GWM + Thirsting blade + a superiority dice or two] in every fight I get in.

I rely on Mask of Many faces for OOC shennanigans. Skills are perception, athletics (it's good to be a Fighter!), insight, deception, arcana

[Corey]

I rely on Mask of Many faces for OOC shennanigans. Skills are perception, athletics (it's good to be a Fighter!), insight, deception, arcana

Using Mask of Many Faces -- i.e. at-will Disguise Self -- brings down Hex, correct?

[Sigreid]

Using Mask of Many Faces -- i.e. at-will Disguise Self -- brings down Hex, correct?

That's a good question, I've never really thought about if invocations require concentration.

[Malifice]

Using Mask of Many Faces -- i.e. at-will Disguise Self -- brings down Hex, correct?

I'm pretty sure it's not concentration.

That said, I've never used it 'in combat'. It's more of a RP tool for infiltration and so forth. Great for walking into Dragon Cultist hide-outs, dealing with NPC's and the such.

Guess it's more social pillar stuff with a splash of the exploration pillar.

[Ziegander]

In what way is Mist Step V better than Misty Step II?

Even Fireball V is only a marginal improvement over Fireball III. There are relatively few spells that see worthwhile improvement from casting them in a fifth-level slot. Hold Person, Blindness/Deafness, Invisibility, Fly, Vampiric Touch yes. Darkness, Hypnotic Pattern, Dimension Door, Suggestion, Misty Step, Hunger of Hadar, Evard's Black Tentacles, Expeditious Retreat no. Dispel Magic, Counterspell sometimes. Much of the time, the extra power is wasted.

It's a trade but it's a relatively poor trade, essentially narrowing the warlock's already-narrow spell list even further.


Right, 80% chance of making the first check. The chance of making the second check is also 80%, so the odds of making both checks is 64%. In other words, the chance of failing one or both checks is 36%. Just multiply by .8 each time. By 5 hits, the odds of making all 5 of the checks is a little more than 26%. In my experience, characters tend to get hit more than 5 times between short rests. Assuming 5 hits before the first, and another 5 before the second, you're at nearly 5% odds of successfully making all of the checks. In other words, the odds of Hex even lasting most of (not all) the day are about the same as getting a critical. I think you'd agree that even though the odd critical/all day hex happens, the vast majority of dice rolls/adventuring days don't have that happen.

Thank god for you both. I was beginning to feel like the Only Sane ManTM.


I believe I said [paraphrasing] 'It depends on your short rest meta at your table'.

If you're getting the standard assumed short rest every two - three encounters you should be either lobbing a [highest level slot] around in each battle you find yourself in, or enjoying the benefit of a [highest level spell] still up and running via concentration.

Yes, which is what the post I'm referring to having made said. The one you didn't actually read and just said was false stating, "no, you have two spell slots per short rest," as if that's somehow not exactly what I said. You keep parading around anecdotes about your multiclassed Fighter/Warlock with even fewer spell slots than normal for the adventuring day who runs around with Hex and Armor of Agathys up all the time while setting spell slots on fire by wasting them on Hellish Rebuke. It's literally not feasible. Before your 11th Warlock level, you've got two slots per short rest. You don't get to have Hex up, punish enemies with Armor of Agathys, and then destroy foes that hit you with Hellish Rebuke, because you won't have the spell slots to do that. For 10 whole class levels.


We get a SR every 2-3 and I certainly don't find myself always out of slots. At a guesstimate, around 20 percent of encounters I enter out of slots, and I enter around 20 percent of short rests with a slot left over [that I personally like to blow on Armor of Agathys to coat myself in frost while I rest].

That doesn't even make sense. Let's break it down. Again. Maybe you'll read my post this time. Let's say you have 6 encounters per day, and you get a short rest after the first two encounters and after the second two encounters. That means you'll get to cast six Warlock spells on any given day before Warlock level 11. Let's even get really nitty gritty here and say that each combat lasts exactly three rounds.

Now then, at the beginning of the day, you cast Hex. You're already down to 1 spell slot to use over the course of the next two encounters. Maybe it's fireball, maybe it's Armor of Agathys, or maybe it's Hellish Rebuke, but it's certainly not all of them. Over the course of those two encounters, let's say you get attacked four times. You've got AC 18, you say, because plate mail. Conversatively, you're facing enemies with an attack bonus of no lower than +5, which gives your foes a 40% to hit you. There's a high chance that you get hit once, and a sporting chance you get hit twice. Regardless, if you've got +5 to your Constitution save, it's likely, so far, you haven't lost Hex. But not guaranteed.

So now you Short Rest. You've still got Hex up! Two more encounters coming at you, so now you can cast Armor of Agathys and Hellish Rebuke. Once each. During those encounters, you definitely totally wreck whatever poor souls decide to attack you, unfortunately for you, your enemy still has to hit you to trigger either, so let's say you're hit two more times. At this point, fielding four successful attacks, you're below a 50/50 shot at keeping Hex up. And that's if you never get hit for more than 20 in a single shot. There's plenty of monsters at CR 4 and above that can smash (or breath fire at you) for greater than 20 without even needing to score a critical hit. After 8 attacks come your way, there's basically a 33.33% chance that one of them was a crit.

Alright, but let's assume you breezed through those last two encounters. You've still got Hex up. The chances you keep it up even through the first of the next two encounters plummets. So now your damage per round drops by 7! If you were level 8 and capable of something like 50dpr, now you're down to 43, which, when using the DMG to create monsters, that's enough of a drop to lose half a Challenge rating by itself. And this was a good day for you. I assume you just don't bother to recast Hex at this point and drop fireballs and/or scorching rays (or nastier status effect spells) on your enemies and stay out of melee, because your melee schtick is a little washed up at this point.

In summation, on three out of every five adventuring days you lose Hex on the third or fourth encounter of the day. At that point you have to decide if you want to spend one of your two (count 'em) spell slots to refresh it, or if you essentially quit meleeing except as a backup plan.


Im not shouting you down bro. It's not a limitation (well.. it can be a limitation if your DM deviates from the rest/encounter meta either willfully or by virtue of not understanding it).

The fact of the matter is, most days, if you're just casting Hex and Armor of Agathys all the time you have literally nothing else to do all day, even with two spell slots per short rest. If that's not a limitation, I don't know what is. I thought these guys were supposed to have the same amount of spellcasting power as a Wizard or Sorcerer. Isn't that what DivisiblebyZero was saying?

[Malifice]

You keep parading around anecdotes about your multiclassed Fighter/Warlock with even fewer spell slots than normal for the adventuring day who runs around with Hex and Armor of Agathys up all the time while setting spell slots on fire by wasting them on Hellish Rebuke.

No, you're not reading my posts. I never made any such claim. In fact I stated three times now I only really used AoA immediately before short resting, if I have a slot left over, as a form of defense if I get attacked during that short rest. It lasts an hour.

I generally cast Hex in my first fight (bonus action) and save the second slot for either a mirror image, fireball, or hellish rebuke (my three 'go to spells') when needed in the remaining 1-2 encounters before my first short rest. I also have an action surge and 4 superiority dice (and second wind) from Fighter to use in those encounters too.

I have (2 x 3rd level spell slots + 1 x action surge + 4 x dice + 1 x second wind) to last me those 2-3 encounters. This gives me either a 3rd level spell or action surge (sometimes both) in every encounter I face in between short rests. Sometimes I have to use that slot to recast Hex. Sometimes I need to go Nova and blow both spells in one encounter for a particularly deadly encounter, and then have no slots left for the next encounter or two. I try and avoid that where possible (my melee DPR is insane enough for me to not have to worry about that all that often).


That doesn't even make sense. Let's break it down. Again. Maybe you'll read my post this time. Let's say you have 6 encounters per day, and you get a short rest after the first two encounters and after the second two encounters. That means you'll get to cast six Warlock spells on any given day before Warlock level 11. Let's even get really nitty gritty here and say that each combat lasts exactly three rounds.

Sounds about right. You get to cast 1 spell per encounter, at its highest level, give or take the occasional encounter where you cast two, or have none. Thats been my experience.


So now you Short Rest. You've still got Hex up! Two more encounters coming at you, so now you can cast Armor of Agathys and Hellish Rebuke. Once each. During those encounters, you definitely totally wreck whatever poor souls decide to attack you, unfortunately for you, your enemy still has to hit you to trigger either, so let's say you're hit two more times. At this point, fielding four successful attacks, you're below a 50/50 shot at keeping Hex up. And that's if you never get hit for more than 20 in a single shot. There's plenty of monsters at CR 4 and above that can smash (or breath fire at you) for greater than 20 without even needing to score a critical hit. After 8 attacks come your way, there's basically a 33.33% chance that one of them was a crit.

Actually I prefer mirror image to AoA.

It helps with concentration and defense, doesnt mess with Hex (in fact helps it stay 'up' for an extra encounter). My DPR is immense without AoA. 2 X GWM + Hex great sword hits (and superiority dice + action surge if needed) gaining a bonus attack if I drop something. I pump out 50 odd a round most rounds - I dont really see the need to add AoA to that damage, in exchange for the amazing benefits of Mirror image.

If Hex is still 'up' following a short rest, I prefer to go with mirror image (extending hex by virtue of its defensive capabilities) and then save slot number 2 for either another mirror image, or a fireball or hellish rebuke.

If I still have a slot left when we SR; THEN I cast Armor of Agathys (I consider it a back-up for short resting). It lasts the whole short rest, and I might as well use that slot for something.


In summation, on three out of every five adventuring days you lose Hex on the third or fourth encounter of the day. At that point you have to decide if you want to spend one of your two (count 'em) spell slots to refresh it, or if you essentially quit meleeing except as a backup plan.

You're not factoring Mirror image in to your calculations. Presumably becuse you are not reading my posts but hey.

I also said that I probably lose Hex around 75 percent of most AD's requiring a second slot (which is close to your calculations above). Ive never had to put it up more than twice.

That leaves me 5-6 (mirror image, fireball, hellish rebukes) for the AD - in addition to having Hex up all day long, and having Mask of many faces and cantrips to fall back on. It amounts to about 1 'big boom' spell per encounter.

Add to that I deal as much frontline tank damage as the Barbarian (he has more HP and damage resistance, but I have Temp HP, have Mirror image 'up' reasonably often, AND have Full plate AND often also have a porcupine defense via either Riposte or Hellish Rebuke) and I basically feel like a front line tank as good as (if not better than) the Barbarian that can also fly, fireball etc as good as the party sorcerer.

Of course I am a Fighter 3/ Lock 5 so the fighter levels skew it a bit towards increased DPR and tankiness (mainly due to armor, action surge and BM manouvers)

[Ziegander]

Shall I quote how many times in this thread you mentioned casting Hex and Armor of Agathys and Hellish Rebuking anything that hits you? Nah. I'll just say that you've mentioned Mirror Image in this last post and in one other post in the entire thread. Maybe because you realized that the "strategy" you "use" that you've been espousing all thread isn't actually a good strategy at all, or maybe because you like shifting goal posts. I don't know. All I know is, before my last post you had mentioned Mirror Image exactly one time (while I was writing it), and before I wrote my other post that you failed to actually read you hadn't mentioned it at all. In any event, Mirror Image lasts you exactly one encounter, so you get to use it in maybe half the encounters of a given day, and then you're still not casting any other spells.

Here's my point: In theory, you can (not really, but this is a whole separate can of worms requiring it's own math and discussion) tank as well as the Barbarian, and you can cast fly and fireball as well as the Sorcerer, but in practice you either do one or do the other. And my insistence is that, in fact, you don't often actually get to do either, because adventures don't often work completely in the favor of your very real, very crucial limitations.

I won't argue that simply having plate armor and the great weapon master feat, those two items right there, barring any other class features at all, make you a credible melee threat for most of the game. If you add in Extra Attack, you essentially need very little else to contribute meaningfully to melee combat. What I will argue, what you seem incapable of admitting, is that Warlock spell slots don't stretch as far as you're suggesting they do. You can't do as much with them as a Wizard that actually has separate spell slots for each spell level. It's a limitation you have to deal with. Sure, you trade up for higher level spells cast, but like Max has said, it's a poor trade, because most of the time those higher spell levels don't benefit you the way you'd like them to. And if you're casting Warlock spells to augment your melee capability you're actually making the very least use out of those spell slots possible.

[Giant2005]

Warlock spell slots don't stretch as far as you're suggesting they do. You can't do as much with them as a Wizard that actually has separate spell slots for each spell level. It's a limitation you have to deal with. Sure, you trade up for higher level spells cast, but like Max has said, it's a poor trade, because most of the time those higher spell levels don't benefit you the way you'd like them to.

I think that statement right there, is undeniable fact.
Even if the math can line up relatively similar when you are lucky enough to have the perfect balance of encounters/short rests/long rests (Which in itself is a logistical impossibility to have occur on any regular basis), in practice it simply cannot happen.
Any caster worth their salt conserves at least 1 or 2 spell slots for emergencies. Even if we take the conservative approach and assume you only need to save 1 spell slot for such instances, that'd mean that the practical limits of a Warlock would have him with only 1 disposable spell slot per rest right up to level 10. There is no way anyone could justify that is enough for him to be comparable to a full spellcaster.
Having said that, the Warlock's spellcasting mechanic works just fine as long as you don't try and treat him as a full spellcaster. If you ignore the out-of-combat utility that spellcasters typically excel at, and willingly blow your spells on lesser encounters to ensure that you aren't wasting your time saving them for a harder fight that probably isn't even going to happen before your short rest; then you can make an excellent combat mage. Still, that excellent combat mage is so very far from a traditional casting class that they aren't even comparable.

[georgie_leech]

I think that statement right there, is undeniable fact.
Even if the math can line up relatively similar when you are lucky enough to have the perfect balance of encounters/short rests/long rests (Which in itself is a logistical impossibility to have occur on any regular basis), in practice it simply cannot happen.
Any caster worth their salt conserves at least 1 or 2 spell slots for emergencies. Even if we take the conservative approach and assume you only need to save 1 spell slot for such instances, that'd mean that the practical limits of a Warlock would have him with only 1 disposable spell slot per rest right up to level 10. There is no way anyone could justify that is enough for him to be comparable to a full spellcaster.
Having said that, the Warlock's spellcasting mechanic works just fine as long as you don't try and treat him as a full spellcaster. If you ignore the out-of-combat utility that spellcasters typically excel at, and willingly blow your spells on lesser encounters to ensure that you aren't wasting your time saving them for a harder fight that probably isn't even going to happen before your short rest; then you can make an excellent combat mage. Still, that excellent combat mage is so very far from a traditional casting class that they aren't even comparable.

In other words, the Warlock is like a caster, but isn't; they are like an archer, but with a different spam strategy; they can be like a melee fighter, but in a non-traditional way. In short, Warlocks are weird. And I expected the class than can draw power from the Great Old Ones to be such a straightforward class:smallbiggrin:

[Corey]

I'm pretty sure it's not concentration.

That said, I've never used it 'in combat'. It's more of a RP tool for infiltration and so forth. Great for walking into Dragon Cultist hide-outs, dealing with NPC's and the such.

Guess it's more social pillar stuff with a splash of the exploration pillar.

My apologies. Disguise Self is NOT a concentration spell. Alter Self is, but not Disguise Self.

[Malifice]

Shall I quote how many times in this thread you mentioned casting Hex and Armor of Agathys and Hellish Rebuking anything that hits you?

Please do.

You'll quickly discover that I didn't, because I don't cast Hex, and AoA and Rebuke anything that hits me. The only time I even have AoA 'up' is during short rests. I've been clear on this from the start. I only cast AoA when short resting, If I have a slot left over.

Learn to read before going off your tits at someone brah.


Here's my point: In theory, you can (not really, but this is a whole separate can of worms requiring it's own math and discussion) tank as well as the Barbarian, and you can cast fly and fireball as well as the Sorcerer, but in practice you either do one or do the other.

I'm telling you what I do in practice. Youre the one theory crafting.



What I will argue, what you seem incapable of admitting, is that Warlock spell slots don't stretch as far as you're suggesting they do. You can't do as much with them as a Wizard that actually has separate spell slots for each spell level.

You're wrong. I play alongside a Sorcerer, and I can assure you that we are about even when it comes to casting power. He's pulled away a bit recently due to my 3 levels in Fighter, but before that, we were on par.

Compare(Warlock 5 vs Sorcerer 8 w 4/3/3/2) in a 6 encounter x 2 SR adventuring day:

Sorcerer:
Enc
1 - 2nd level slot, 1st level slot, cantrips
2 - 3rd level slot, 1st level slot, cantrips
SR
3 - 3rd level slot, 1st level slot, cantrips
4 - 3rd level slot, 1st level slot, cantrips
SR
5 - 4th level slot, 2nd level slot, cantrips
6 - 4th level slot, 2nd level slot, cantrips

Warlock
Enc
1 - 3rd level slot, cantrips
2 - 3rd level slot, cantrips
SR
3 - 3rd level slot, cantrips
4 - 3rd level slot, cantrips
SR
5 - 3rd level slot, cantrips
6 - 3rd level slot, cantrips


Even as a Warlock 5 vs an 8th level Sorcerer, I'm not that far behind. He has enough in his battery for 2 spells per encounter (12 in total) I have enough resources to generally toss the one 3rd level spell per encounter (6 in total). 5 of his slots are 3rd level or higher, and the other 7 are from 1-2nd.

He generally tosses out the one big boom, and a magic missile or scorching ray before falling back on crap cantrip damage and hiding. I tend to wade into melee, and save my ration of a 3rd level spell to end the encounter.

What I can do that he cant is around triple his 'at will' DPR (I go into Fighter mode) - which means I can cruise through the occasional encounters without having to rely on spells at all (action surge + BM dice). The Sorcerer doesn't have that option (and his flame bolt/ at will is piddling damage compared to what I dish out in melee). The Sorcerer however can also burn those lower level slots, and his sorcery points for more higher level slots if needed, making him have less spells, but have them come out much harder. He's also a bit less MAD.

Until I dipped into Fighter, the difference was negligible. The difference is starting to be felt now though as he gets 4th level spells and more slots of higher level to burn (next level he gets 5ths, and I'll still be stuck on 3rds). Thats due to MCing though more than anything else (and Im more than happy with the massive DPR and tanking boost I got from the BM MC).

[Corey]

There's no way that Fighter 3/Warlock 5, using 1-2 of his spell slots per day on Hex and perhaps others on Mirror Image, is in any way as powerful a caster as a Bard or Wizard 8 or whatever. On the other hand, he's doing a lot more damage.

For a potentially more straightforward comparison, let's consider a Tomelock 9 vs. a Wizard/Sorcerer/Lore Bard 9. Being generous, we'll say he spends only 1 slot a day each on Hex and Mirror Image, leaving 4 5th-level slots for other purposes, so long as none of them are concentration.

Actually, unless the Warlock is Fiend Pact, in which case he can do some blasting or else try to Blind 4 enemies at once, I'm not sure what he does with those spell slots, given how large a fraction of the Warlock spell list is concentration.

A traditional caster, if he also casts 1 Mirror Image, also has:

1 5th-level slot
3 4th-level slots
3 3rd-level slots
2 2nd-level slots
4 1st-level slots

Assuming he doesn't ever lose concentration either, he can cast 1 concentration spell each per fight, and have about 7 spell slots left over for other uses during the day. Those concentration slots could be used on Polymorph or Hypnotic Pattern or Fear or Fly or Haste or Faerie Fire or Hold Monster or whatever.

The other 7 slots could be used out of combat, or for in-combat damage, or for in-combat defense/escape, or occasionally for an extra concentration spell (e.g. a low-level one because the fight didn't end when the first Hold Person target died).

The Warlock of course is doing a lot more damage.

At Level 9 the Warlock has 5 invocations. A good list could be Agonizing Blast, Repelling Blast, Book of Ancient Secrets, Devil's Sight and Mask of Many Faces. He also has 2 Pact features. He has a familiar. And his spells known can be construed as ahead of a Sorcerer's and somewhat competitive with a Bard's, but only if the DM is generous with rituals.

After that the comparisons depend a little on exactly which other class we're talking about. Bards have tons of skill proficiencies, inspiration dice, good choice of spells, and otherwise dubious class features. Wizards have potentially cool class features and a few extra spell slots (even after subtracting an expenditure on Mage Armor).

The classes do seem roughly comparable in overall capability ...

[Malifice]

For a potentially more straightforward comparison, let's consider a Tomelock 9 vs. a Wizard/Sorcerer/Lore Bard 9.

Try level 11 onwards.



A traditional caster, if he also casts 1 Mirror Image, also has:

1 5th-level slot
3 4th-level slots
3 3rd-level slots
2 2nd-level slots
4 1st-level slots

Yeah but the slack of those 1st and 2nd level spells is picked up by the warlocks at will invocations, and better at will damage via EB. Your blastlock at this point as at will invisibility, mage armor and minor illusions that cover those 1st and 2nd level slots

Add to that the fact the Warlock has 6 x 5th level slots instead of just the Wizards 1.

In two more levels (11th onwards) the Warlock has 9 x 5th level slots per day.