Blade Pact is the new king of Warlocks

[Giant2005]

Due to the new Sage Advice ruling (Blade Pact works with ranged weapons), a Blade Pact Warlock 12/Fighter 1 can pull out more ranged DPR than an Eldritch Blasting Warlock can hope to achieve (although Warlock/Sorc can still obviously do better with quickened EBs, just much less consistently).

Against AC 18, a level 20, 20 Dex, 20 Cha, Warlock 12/Fighter 4/Anything 4, with Sharpshooter, Crossbow Mastery, Archery Fighting Style, and Darkness/Devil's Sight; pulls off 57.25 DPR. A standard EB spamming Warlock of level 20 inflicts 41 DPR with Hex active, or 54.47 with both Hex and Foresight active.

Interestingly, the Warlock surpasses the Champion's ranged damage too, as the Champion pulls off 44.25 DPR against that same AC with Crossbow Mastery, Sharpshooter, Archery Fighting Style, 18+ crit range, 20 Dex, and 5 attacks.

It even does more damage than the very respected Warlock 2/EK 7/Rogue 11 build. The combination of 4 EB blasts, a sneak attack enhanced Heavy Crossbow, and Hex; add up to 55.2 DPR against AC 18. Although, that same build does prove superior by ditching Hex for the sake of Darkness/Devil's Sight. That brings its DPR up to 57.66 which edges out the Blade Pact Warlock.

The Blade Pact Warlock hasn't received the same level of optimization however. A Warlock 12/Fighter 4/Rogue 4 would pull off 65.2 DPR with Crossbow Mastery, Sharpshooter, and Darkness/Devil's Sight. That calculation was made with the Champion's 19+ crit range for the sake of simplicity, but considering it only adds 1 DPR to this build, the already short-resting Warlock would be far better suited with the much more difficult yo quantify: Battlemaster Fighter.

Something worth mentioning is that the build is very, very tight. It requires a total of 6 ASI/Feats, which means Variant Human is mandatory, and so are classes being taken in multiples of 4 (unless you take Fighter 6 - that would give you 2 levels of wiggle room). It also means that your non-Dex/Cha abilities will be kind of crap (due to needing to start both at 16), and won't get your final (and important) ASI until level 20. Although, that final ASI only brings 2.4 DPR to the table anyway (the same 2.4 DPR that the level 16 ASI brings).

Maybe there is some ranged build that I am missing, but it looks to me that that ruling brought the Warlock to the pinnacle of sustainable ranged DPR, and it also made Eldritch Blast much less desirable for the Warlock (unless you really want your hands on one of the other pacts). Although the Warlock 2/Sorc 18 combo still shames it as much as it shames everything else (as long as it can sustain quicken spell) with an insane 82 DPR with Hex up.

[JoeJ]

I have some questions about that build.

1. At what level are you assuming that the character finds the magic crossbow necessary to make this build work at all?

2. How does it play for all the levels before you get that magic crossbow?

3. What happens if you don't ever get it?

[MaxWilson]

Due to the new Sage Advice ruling (Blade Pact works with ranged weapons), a Blade Pact Warlock 12/Fighter 1 can pull out more ranged DPR than an Eldritch Blasting Warlock can hope to achieve (although Warlock/Sorc can still obviously do better with quickened EBs, just much less consistently).

Against AC 18, a level 20, 20 Dex, 20 Cha, Warlock 12/Fighter 4/Anything 4, with Sharpshooter, Crossbow Mastery, Archery Fighting Style, and Darkness/Devil's Sight; pulls off 57.25 DPR. A standard EB spamming Warlock of level 20 inflicts 41 DPR with Hex active, or 54.47 with both Hex and Foresight active.

Interestingly, the Warlock surpasses the Champion's ranged damage too, as the Champion pulls off 44.25 DPR against that same AC with Crossbow Mastery, Sharpshooter, Archery Fighting Style, 18+ crit range, 20 Dex, and 5 attacks.

It even does more damage than the very respected Warlock 2/EK 7/Rogue 11 build. The combination of 4 EB blasts, a sneak attack enhanced Heavy Crossbow, and Hex; add up to 55.2 DPR against AC 18. Although, that same build does prove superior by ditching Hex for the sake of Darkness/Devil's Sight. That brings its DPR up to 57.66 which edges out the Blade Pact Warlock.

The Blade Pact Warlock hasn't received the same level of optimization however. A Warlock 12/Fighter 4/Rogue 4 would pull off 65.2 DPR with Crossbow Mastery, Sharpshooter, and Darkness/Devil's Sight. That calculation was made with the Champion's 19+ crit range for the sake of simplicity, but considering it only adds 1 DPR to this build, the already short-resting Warlock would be far better suited with the much more difficult yo quantify: Battlemaster Fighter.

Something worth mentioning is that the build is very, very tight. It requires a total of 6 ASI/Feats, which means Variant Human is mandatory, and so are classes being taken in multiples of 4 (unless you take Fighter 6 - that would give you 2 levels of wiggle room). It also means that your non-Dex/Cha abilities will be kind of crap (due to needing to start both at 16), and won't get your final (and important) ASI until level 20. Although, that final ASI only brings 2.4 DPR to the table anyway (the same 2.4 DPR that the level 16 ASI brings).

Maybe there is some ranged build that I am missing, but it looks to me that that ruling brought the Warlock to the pinnacle of sustainable ranged DPR, and it also made Eldritch Blast much less desirable for the Warlock (unless you really want your hands on one of the other pacts). Although the Warlock 2/Sorc 18 combo still shames it as much as it shames everything else (as long as it can sustain quicken spell) with an insane 82 DPR with Hex up.

Meh. All of these builds are pretty much the same except the Champion, and it appears that your math on the Champion might be wrong. At least, when I compute (avg.5.10?d6+15, because he needs a 10 to hit AC 18) I get 51.75 points of damage, and that's without considering the expanded crit range (because calculating that is a pain). If the Champion takes Magic Initiate (Hex), which I'd argue he probably shouldn't, that edges up to 62.25. And Eldritch Knights are better than Champions anyway--an almost-bog-standard EK Sharpshooter with Darkness will be doing 75.48.

Agonizing Eldritch Blast + Hex still does about the same damage as heavy investments in Blade Pact (Lifedrinker + Thirsting Blade + Dex 20 + Crossbow Expert + Sharpshooter) for a whole lot cheaper. Besides, it's more fun to do Agonizing Repelling Blast to knock enemies through a Wall of Fire for d10+CHA+5d8 per hit, which by level 11 would be doing 63.60 damage per round on average, plus whatever damage (avg 22.5) the enemies take in trying to come back through the wall of fire to get at you.

I'm happy for you, really I am. I just don't get so excited about marginal improvements in DPR at the net cost of four ASIs and an invocation, especially when it makes you lose out on Repelling Blast.

[R.Shackleford]

Blade Pacts have always been a top tier choice with warlocks. This doesn't really change much.

Also, if you need to use other classes then it isn't that this class is top notch, just that it multiclasses well.

#shrug

[Connington]

It even does more damage than the very respected Warlock 2/EK 7/Rogue 11 build.

That actually made me laugh out loud. The game "caps out" at level 20 after a series of steady progression. Which means most characters that reach level 20 in actual play (a small subset to begin with) are only going to be around for a few more sessions of the campaign finale. Math not withstanding, any build that "comes online" at that point is too late to matter.

[MaxWilson]

That actually made me laugh out loud. The game "caps out" at level 20 after a series of steady progression. Which means most characters that reach level 20 in actual play (a small subset to begin with) are only going to be around for a few more sessions of the campaign finale. Math not withstanding, any build that "comes online" at that point is too late to matter.

To be fair, EK 7/Warlock 2/Rogue 11 "comes online" way before level 20. All the Rogue levels for example are basically just a way to keep progressing after you hit EK 7/Warlock 2.

[MeeposFire]

That actually made me laugh out loud. The game "caps out" at level 20 after a series of steady progression. Which means most characters that reach level 20 in actual play (a small subset to begin with) are only going to be around for a few more sessions of the campaign finale. Math not withstanding, any build that "comes online" at that point is too late to matter.

That is actually a build that does not have that problem.

From level 1-7 (or 8 if you want the extra ASI) you play as a standard EK ranged fighter which at that point is pretty sweet.

You take two levels of warlock to acquire EB and agonizing blast. No real lost levels there.

You finish up with rogue to get some extra damage from sneak attack along with skills and special defenses (evasion and uncanny dodge).

It works rather well and has no real leveling issues as a multiclass combo. Even in terms of ASIs it works out due to the combo of rogue and fighter levels.

The melee variant ditches the warlock levels and adds booming blade with more rogue levels.

However do we really want to use shaprshooter with such a character? Due to the number of sneak attack dice being added on I could see damage going down with sharpshooter unless you can get advantage potentially.

[JoeJ]

That is actually a build that does not have that problem.

From level 1-7 (or 8 if you want the extra ASI) you play as a standard EK ranged fighter which at that point is pretty sweet.

You take two levels of warlock to acquire EB and agonizing blast. No real lost levels there.

You finish up with rogue to get some extra damage from sneak attack along with skills and special defenses (evasion and uncanny dodge).

It works rather well and has no real leveling issues as a multiclass combo. Even in terms of ASIs it works out due to the combo of rogue and fighter levels.

The melee variant ditches the warlock levels and adds booming blade with more rogue levels.

However do we really want to use shaprshooter with such a character? Due to the number of sneak attack dice being added on I could see damage going down with sharpshooter unless you can get advantage potentially.

The biggest problem I see at low levels is that you can't create a missile weapon as your pact weapon. You have to somehow acquire a magical missile weapon and convert it into your pact weapon. Until that happens, you're limited to melee weapons only.

[R.Shackleford]

That actually made me laugh out loud. The game "caps out" at level 20 after a series of steady progression. Which means most characters that reach level 20 in actual play (a small subset to begin with) are only going to be around for a few more sessions of the campaign finale. Math not withstanding, any build that "comes online" at that point is too late to matter.

My groups generally run high level one shots from time to time. I really suggest other people do the same 1/month and actually see how their white room ideas really play out.

[Giant2005]

Fair call on the whole "requiring a magic crossbow to bond with it" thing, although that rule is pretty stupid (and imo. a bi-product of a failure of imagination - the writers wrongly assumed that being able to create mundane weapons would render bonding with mundane weapons obsolete).
Either way, that drawback is a reality, so it only really works if you are certain that the DM will be providing access to relevant magic weapons, or you have a friendly War Cleric, Paladin, Wizard, or Bard in the party.

[Discord]

Where is the Sage Advice for this ruling? I cannot seem to find it.

[MaxWilson]

My groups generally run high level one shots from time to time. I really suggest other people do the same 1/month and actually see how their white room ideas really play out.

Agreed. I've never yet run a 20th level one shot, but I strongly recommend running one-shots with your players on a regular basis (once a month is good). It gives them the freedom to experiment.

[R.Shackleford]

Agreed. I've never yet run a 20th level one shot, because I strongly recommend running one-shots with your players on a regular basis (once a month is good). It gives them the freedom to experiment.

I think every DM and group should do this. As you said it lets players experiment but it also lets the DM go wild and get out of that low level cliche encounters and stuff.

[Coyote81]

Random thought. If using UA. You could take a few levels in wizard Artifice and make you own magic weapons.

[Theodoxus]

Where is the Sage Advice for this ruling? I cannot seem to find it.

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-answers-april-2016


I don't get the EK build - you're a ranged dude with ranged weapons, why would you pick up a ranged cantrip? To save on bolts? At level 8? What else do you have to save money on? They're mutually exclusive - you make a bunch of crossbow shots, or a bunch of EB shots. Seems a waste...

[MaxWilson]

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-answers-april-2016


I don't get the EK build - you're a ranged dude with ranged weapons, why would you pick up a ranged cantrip? To save on bolts? At level 8? What else do you have to save money on? They're mutually exclusive - you make a bunch of crossbow shots, or a bunch of EB shots. Seems a waste...

It's so you can Eldritch Blast and also (thanks to War Magic) sneak attack with an arrow on the same turn. Can boost your damage output by maybe 30-45%. Expensive though, both in build resources and action economy.

Amusingly, you can also do it with a net instead of an arrow at close range, and still get sneak attack damage and EB while restraining an enemy.

[Giant2005]

It's so you can Eldritch Blast and also (thanks to War Magic) sneak attack with an arrow on the same turn. Can boost your damage output by maybe 30-45%. Expensive though, both in build resources and action economy.

I actually think it is really cheap on build resources and that is why it is so favored (that and the smooth progression curve and overall capabilities). All you need is 13 Cha and 20 Dex - you don't even make use of a feat with the build. You basically have all you need after 2 ASIs, which leaves 3 remaining for whatever you want. It is one of the few mechanically optimized builds that actually allow you to take multiple flavor feats.

[MaxWilson]

I actually think it is really cheap on build resources and that is why it is so favored (that and the smooth progression curve and overall capabilities). All you need is 13 Cha and 20 Dex - you don't even make use of a feat with the build. You basically have all you need after 2 ASIs, which leaves 3 remaining for whatever you want. It is one of the few mechanically optimized builds that actually allow you to take multiple flavor feats.

Since Eldritch Blast is doing the bulk of your damage, leaving Cha at 13 seems like a major mechanical mistake. You might be better off boosting Cha to 20 and leaving Dex at 13, if you could only afford to boost one, since Dex only affects your single bonus action attack for d10+DEX+6d6 instead of your cantrip attack for 4d10+4*CHA.

And if you're doing that, you might as well drop the EK angle entirely and just be a straight-up Warlock 2/Illusionist X (or whatever) so you can abuse Magic Jar and True Polymorph/Shapechange and Malleable Mirage Arcane and all that other fun stuff, while still having competitively good at-will DPR even without the sneak attack bonus damage. Instead of sneak attack, you can use your bonus action for something else like commanding your 600 Unseen Servants (at-will Unseen Servant from Spell Mastery, 1 hour no concentration) to scatter caltrops and get in the way and move couches and fetch you refreshments.

[Giant2005]

Since Eldritch Blast is doing the bulk of your damage, leaving Cha at 13 seems like a major mechanical mistake. You might be better off boosting Cha to 20 and leaving Dex at 13, if you could only afford to boost one, since Dex only affects your single bonus action attack for d10+DEX+6d6 instead of your cantrip attack for 4d10+4*CHA.

You are absolutely right. In my defense I was incredibly tired when I wrote that!

[Tanarii]

Since Eldritch Blast is doing the bulk of your damage, leaving Cha at 13 seems like a major mechanical mistake. You might be better off boosting Cha to 20 and leaving Dex at 13, if you could only afford to boost one, since Dex only affects your single bonus action attack for d10+DEX+6d6 instead of your cantrip attack for 4d10+4*CHA.
That seems like a really good way to miss, doing 0 damage instead of 27.5+1(Dex) damage.

Conversely the original 20 Dex/13 Cha seems like a good way to only miss out on some fraction of 22+1(Cha) damage. Since its 4 attacks instead of 1 you're unlikely to miss them all.

Edit: I'm being kinda lazy here, 'cause obviously it'd be easy enough to compare 20% less damage of one vs the other.

[MaxWilson]

That seems like a really good way to miss, doing 0 damage instead of 27.5+1(Dex) damage.

Conversely the original 20 Dex/13 Cha seems like a good way to only miss out on some fraction of 22+1(Cha) damage. Since its 4 attacks instead of 1 you're unlikely to miss them all.

Edit: I'm being kinda lazy here, 'cause obviously it'd be easy enough to compare 20% less damage of one vs the other.

Decreasing Charisma decreases the to-hit AND the damage, whereas decreasing Dex mostly only decreases the to-hit. Ergo, reductions in Charisma will have roughly quadratic effect, whereas reductions in Dex will be roughly linear.

To make this concrete, Dex 13/Cha 20 vs. AC 19 (with advantage from using your con on Darkness + Devil's Sight, therefore no Hex) would do avg.4.(d20a+11?19:d10+5) (39) average damage from Eldritch Blast and (assuming Archery style and a non-magical heavy crossbow weapon) avg.d20a+9?19:d10+1+5d6 (21.38) average damage with the crossbow (slightly less if you try to headshot for -5/+10) for a total of 61.38 damage. Conversely, Dex 20/Cha 13 would do avg.4.(d20a+7?19:d10+1) (20.28) average damage from Eldritch Blast and avg.d20a+13?19:d10+5+5d6 (28.49) for a total of 48.77 damage. In short, losing that 4 points of Cha damage 4 times over really hurts.

Edit: BTW, it turns out I accidentally picked a best-case scenario for Charisma. Checking two other scenarios, I find that when you're running without any buffs at all (no Hex, no Darkness), the Dex 20 scenario almost catches up to the Cha scenario (Cha does 1% more) as long as sneak attack damage is still getting applied somehow (adjacent ally?). But to find a scenario where Dex is actually better I'd have to look pretty hard at various ACs and combinations of circumstance.

The real point is, you can't really afford to just boost one.

[MeeposFire]

The big advantage is being able to do roughly standard fighter damage at range while being having a number of magical tricks and rogue benefits. It also a way to use an EKs abilities and feel like you have not lost something. As I said earlier you essentially have to use this or utilize this or the weapon cantrips to come out close to your nomrla attack action (and you need to force the extra damage on those weapon cantrips at most levels in order to compete).

Sharpshooter is a very nice boost for normal fighters but the EB guy is getting one more attack in (unless the fighter uses hand crossbows in which case EB does more damage) and gets things like hex potentially. Now we can get more for the fighter if we go battlemaster or the like but then we are not really going for the magical warrior type anymore.

[Tanarii]

Edit: BTW, it turns out I accidentally picked a best-case scenario for Charisma. Checking two other scenarios, I find that when you're running without any buffs at all (no Hex, no Darkness), the Dex 20 scenario almost catches up to the Cha scenario (Cha does 1% more) as long as sneak attack damage is still getting applied somehow (adjacent ally?). But to find a scenario where Dex is actually better I'd have to look pretty hard at various ACs and combinations of circumstance.

/facepalm I totally forgot about hex. Guess I'm too tired to think too

[djreynolds]

Is the ammunition magical, or the bow/crossbow?

If the bow/crossbow is the pact weapon could you not also use lighting arrow or swift quiver and dump hex?

Say you multiclassed with lore bard, what could an 7-8th level lore bard bring to this build with magic secrets, such as lightning arrow. Swift quiver is 5th level spell so it probably out of reach because you need 9 levels of bard and 12 levels of warlock.

So if you are 1 fighter/12 warlock/7 lorebard, could you snag lighting arrow? Unsure

Forget crossbow, and just use a bow, that will save you a feat.

[Giant2005]

Is the ammunition magical, or the bow/crossbow?

If the bow/crossbow is the pact weapon could you not also use lighting arrow or swift quiver and dump hex?

Say you multiclassed with lore bard, what could an 7-8th level lore bard bring to this build with magic secrets, such as lightning arrow. Swift quiver is 5th level spell so it probably out of reach because you need 12 levels of warlock.

So if you are 1 fighter/12 warlock/7 lorebard, could you snag lighting arrow?

Forget crossbow, and just use a bow, that will save you a feat.

I think Swift Quiver would certainly be worthwhile if it were possible to get while being a level 12 Warlock (it isn't - it would require 22 levels minimum), but Lightning Arrow isn't so useful. That would basically amount to a 6 level investment for an ability that isn't really any better than just launching a fireball.

[djreynolds]

I think Swift Quiver would certainly be worthwhile if it were possible to get while being a level 12 Warlock (it isn't - it would require 22 levels minimum), but Lightning Arrow isn't so useful. That would basically amount to a 6 level investment for an ability that isn't really any better than just launching a fireball.

Yeah at least 9 levels of bard.

What about a cheese dip of war cleric, for the bonus action-bonus attack?

[Giant2005]

Yeah at least 9 levels of bard.

What about a cheese dip of war cleric, for the bonus action-bonus attack?

That ability would mean you could use a d10 Heavy Crossbow instead of a d6 Hand Crossbow for as many rounds as you have uses of that ability, and that would obviously be useful. The problem is that that ability is tied to your Wisdom score and you already need as much Dex and Cha as you can muster. If you were rolling and rolled well enough to have 3 really high abilities it would be worth doing, but not with point buy. With point buy you would be lucky to have high Dex/Cha while still being able to meet the minimum requirement of 13 Wis to even take the class.

[djreynolds]

That ability would mean you could use a d10 Heavy Crossbow instead of a d6 Hand Crossbow for as many rounds as you have uses of that ability, and that would obviously be useful. The problem is that that ability is tied to your Wisdom score and you already need as much Dex and Cha as you can muster. If you were rolling and rolled well enough to have 3 really high abilities it would be worth doing, but not with point buy. With point buy you would be lucky to have high Dex/Cha while still being able to meet the minimum requirement of 13 Wis to even take the class.

I love the build, trying to be helpful. This is definitely a "I rolled awesome" build.

[Kryx]

Blade Pacts have always been a top tier choice with warlocks.
Yup. By RAW EB does less damage than a bladelock GWM until level 17 at which point it's within 5%.

The issue with the bladelock has always been defense.

[R.Shackleford]

Yup. By RAW EB does less damage than a bladelock GWM until level 17 at which point it's within 5%.

The issue with the bladelock has always been defense.

I would just give them The choice of replacing Dex with Cha to determine AC. (maybe only when in mage armor from the invocation? Or just all the time? Maybe just when you go blade lock?)

Thematic, already a 5e feature (monster feature), and gives the Warlock a decent defense.

13 + 5 is 18 so it isn't like it would be all that broken.

[Kryx]

13 + 5 is 18 so it isn't like it would be all that broken.
Not a bad idea. It does indeed exist for monsters. Though I think it's 12+5 (studded leather).

I'd also add medium armor proficiency to allow for 15+2.

[Tanarii]

The issue with the bladelock has always been defense.That's why they get a bunch of defensive features and spells. At-will Mage Armor and False Life, Infernal's temp hps, Archfey's escape, Armor of Agathys. Just to name a few specific to the Warlock.

[R.Shackleford]

Not a bad idea. It does indeed exist for monsters. Though I think it's 12+5 (studded leather).

I'd also add medium armor proficiency to allow for 15+2.

Yeah I was thinking Mage Armor but medium armor would be thematic as well (lots of fiend things wear armor).


That's why they get a bunch of defensive features and spells. At-will Mage Armor and False Life, Infernal's temp hps, Archfey's escape, Armor of Agathys. Just to name a few specific to the Warlock.


Mage Armor works through Dex, Bladelocks can go dex but they should have the option to go Str because... Why not?

False Life is terrible past the first few levels and takes up your action (bonus action at-will false life might be worth it but... Meh..).

AoA is nice but the temp HP isn't much. Plus Fiend + AoA doesn't stack.

The Warlock has a lot of options on defense, just not particularly decent options which forces Bladelocks to focus on dex when you really don't need to do that.

Replacing Dex with Cha when determining AC would be the way to go. Without feats or Multiclassing you could have 17 or 18 AC when you get +5 Cha.

I would make it part of an invocation (evocation? I always mix those up) that requires blade pact... Or just make it part of the blade pact.

Hell, blade singers get to add their Int to the AC a few times a day (when they go into melee) so replacing Dex with Cha shouldn't be a big deal.

[bid]

So if you are 1 fighter/12 warlock/7 lorebard, could you snag lighting arrow? Unsure
If you accept "Classes chapter uses class level, anyywhere else uses character level", it would not be allowed. Nice edge case.

[bid]

Replacing Dex with Cha when determining AC would be the way to go.
1. SAD is already evil,
2. Dex is never replaced in AC:
-- 10 + Dex + Cha invocation would steal those starving barb/monk,
-- barkskin invocation looks nicer,
3. you want to boost the "new king"?!

[Giant2005]

False Life is terrible past the first few levels and takes up your action (bonus action at-will false life might be worth it but... Meh..).

AoA is nice but the temp HP isn't much. Plus Fiend + AoA doesn't stack.

As someone that has played, and enjoyed a low AC Fiendlock, both of those assumptions are incorrect (well the latter is correct in a technical sense, but the abilities do not overlap a huge amount in play).
The Fiendloack temporary hit point boost tends to be ready to kick in when your other source of temporary hit points are ready to expire. Sure they do not add together, but they assist one another nicely.
As for False Life, an extra 8 hit points per encounter is obviously absolutely huge if you have enough encounters per day. I wasn't getting an optimized amount of benefit from it due to not following the difficult-to-pull-off 6 encounters per day (which would have False Life be the equivalent of 48 HP), but even with just the 8-24 I was getting out of it, the difference was very noticeable. Those hit points mitigated the damage I took while setting up my spell combos. Between the early boost from False Life, the later procs from Fiendlock, and the healing of damage via Grim Harvest (2 levels of Wizard stack too well to ignore), I would end encounters relatively unscathed.

[R.Shackleford]

1. SAD is already evil,
2. Dex is never replaced in AC:
-- 10 + Dex + Cha invocation would steal those starving barb/monk,
-- barkskin invocation looks nicer,
3. you want to boost the "new king"?!

Heavy Armor replaces your dex as does the spell Barkskin.

In the monster manual there are creatures that get to add their Cha to their AC. Instead of going that far, you get Cha to AC instead of Dex.

If Dex can be replaced with heavy armor or whatever then it can be replaced with something else.

The Warlock can already get high AC, that isn't the problem. Everyone can get upper teen to mid 20s AC through class features. Giving the Str Based Warlock decent AC is no different from giving the Dex based Warlock decent AC. It doesn't stop higher CR creatures from hitting, but it helps keep the lower CR creatures from being a problem.

The issue is that if you try to play a style within a class then you get punished even though there is a thematic and easy fix.

Barkskin is a stupid spell like... So many issues with it. Not only does it make no sense fluff wise, the mechanics are backwards as all hell.

We should not encourage other classes from gaining Barkskin or Barkskin like things.

****

10 + Dex + Cha (when not wearing armor)

Or

Replace Dex with Cha

These two options are balanced and thematically appropriate for a Warlock.

[bid]

Heavy Armor replaces your dex as does the spell Barkskin.
No it doesn't. It caps the Dex bonus to 0, the same way medium armor caps it to +2.

If you don't mind power creep in your game, be my guest. But don't call it "balanced".

[MeeposFire]

No it doesn't. It caps the Dex bonus to 0, the same way medium armor caps it to +2.

If you don't mind power creep in your game, be my guest. But don't call it "balanced".

I took his suggestion as replacing dex with cha in the calculation assuming it was higher so most warlocks would then have (dex or cha)+armor bonus when wearing light armor.

So in terms of absolute numbers no power creep though clearly it would make it easier to hit the cap with the warlock than before.

[Giant2005]

So in terms of absolute numbers no power creep though clearly it would make it easier to hit the cap with the warlock than before.

Having an ability that allows you to achieve something with less resources invested than otherwise possible, is power creep.

[Kryx]

Having an ability that allows you to achieve something with less resources invested than otherwise possible, is power creep.
Power creep = lessening the MAD cost of the most MAD class in the game without increasing its damage?

Naw, all you're doing is making a few players not start Paladin or Fighter for 1 level.

[soldersbushwack]

The problem with Armor of Agathys is that it doesn't improve past 9th level.

Edit: NVM, this only really becomes a tiny problem at 19th level. It's still kind of awkward though.

[bid]

Naw, all you're doing is making a few players not start Paladin or Fighter for 1 level.
So, being 1 level behind is roughly worth 1 eldritch invocation?

[Occasional Sage]

I have some questions about that build.

1. At what level are you assuming that the character finds the magic crossbow necessary to make this build work at all?

2. How does it play for all the levels before you get that magic crossbow?

3. What happens if you don't ever get it?

Why not simply get a standard crossbow, and have your Paladin or Wizard buddy hold concentration on Magic Weapon through your bonding ritual? The ritual is an hour, and the spell duration is up to an hour, so the crossbow counts as magical through the whole thing.

Problem solved, right? Really, lots of Bladelock problems solved.

[JoeJ]

Why not simply get a standard crossbow, and have your Paladin or Wizard buddy hold concentration on Magic Weapon through your bonding ritual? The ritual is an hour, and the spell duration is up to an hour, so the crossbow counts as magical through the whole thing.

Problem solved, right? Really, lots of Bladelock problems solved.

Because it takes an hour to do the bonding, which is as long as the spell lasts. By the time you're finished bonding with it, it's no longer eligible to be your pact weapon.

[Giant2005]

Because it takes an hour to do the bonding, which is as long as the spell lasts. By the time you're finished bonding with it, it's no longer eligible to be your pact weapon.

That would be true if you tried to cast the spell yourself and ten bond to the weapon, but it isn't true if you have a friendly cast the spell. The firsts situation has the bonding occur 6 seconds too late, while the second has it finish just in time.

[JoeJ]

That would be true if you tried to cast the spell yourself and ten bond to the weapon, but it isn't true if you have a friendly cast the spell. The firsts situation has the bonding occur 6 seconds too late, while the second has it finish just in time.

That's not going to make any difference. You still won't have a chance to ever actually use it as your pact weapon, because it stops being magical at the same time you finish bonding it.

[MaxWilson]

That would be true if you tried to cast the spell yourself and ten bond to the weapon, but it isn't true if you have a friendly cast the spell. The firsts situation has the bonding occur 6 seconds too late, while the second has it finish just in time.

Naw, you can cast the spell yourself and still start the bonding that same turn. It's a bonus action cast anyway, and it lasts for an hour (so presumably will end at the end of the 600th turn following casting), so you finish with six seconds to spare.

But any DM who counts time so strictly that he will stop an hour-long activity from succeeding for the lack of six seconds is a pea-wit, anyway. It's obviously supposed to be a round number, not precisely 3600 seconds. I could imagine requiring some kind of abstract initiative roll or something (although I wouldn't, I would just let it succeed), but "you're always exactly six seconds too late, sucker!" is a jerk DM ruling.

[JoeJ]

Naw, you can cast the spell yourself and still start the bonding that same turn. It's a bonus action cast anyway, and it lasts for an hour (so presumably will end at the end of the 600th turn following casting), so you finish with six seconds to spare.

But any DM who counts time so strictly that he will stop an hour-long activity from succeeding for the lack of six seconds is a pea-wit, anyway. It's obviously supposed to be a round number, not precisely 3600 seconds. I could imagine requiring some kind of abstract initiative roll or something (although I wouldn't, I would just let it succeed), but "you're always exactly six seconds too late, sucker!" is a jerk DM ruling.

In what kind of scenario is it worth spending an hour to get a pact weapon for 1 round?

[Tanarii]

No it doesn't. It caps the Dex bonus to 0, the same way medium armor caps it to +2.That is not correct. Heavy Armor doesn't apply positive or negative modifiers. It removes Dex from the equation. That's why Dex is generally a dump stat for Heavy Armor classes.



Everyone can get upper teen to mid 20s AC through class features.Can get is not the same as does get. Many classes and builds don't assume you will have either Heavy Armor, or max Dex for Medium Armor or Light Armor (as appropriate). Including ones that can and will end up in periodic melee, such as Clerics & Bards, and even a lot of Melee in the case of Barbarians.

Str Bladelocks trade off AC for a huge damage increase compared to Dex warlocks, but that's viable because they have various mitigation features.

[Giant2005]

Naw, you can cast the spell yourself and still start the bonding that same turn. It's a bonus action cast anyway, and it lasts for an hour (so presumably will end at the end of the 600th turn following casting), so you finish with six seconds to spare.

But any DM who counts time so strictly that he will stop an hour-long activity from succeeding for the lack of six seconds is a pea-wit, anyway. It's obviously supposed to be a round number, not precisely 3600 seconds. I could imagine requiring some kind of abstract initiative roll or something (although I wouldn't, I would just let it succeed), but "you're always exactly six seconds too late, sucker!" is a jerk DM ruling.

Fair call - I was not aware that it was a bonus action spell. It might be worthwhile for the Necromancer dip to go to 3 levels instead of 2, so it doesn't have to rely on loot drops or outside help.


In what kind of scenario is it worth spending an hour to get a pact weapon for 1 round?

Once a weapon is bonded to you, it is bonded to you forever - not just one round. I agree, if a weapon bond only lasted for a single round, the ability may as well not even exist.

[Occasional Sage]

In what kind of scenario is it worth spending an hour to get a pact weapon for 1 round?

It is required that the weapon be magical to bond it as a pact weapon.



The weapon ceases being your pact weapon if you die, if you perform the 1-hour ritual on different weapon, or of you use a 1-hour ritual to break your bond to it.


Nothing in RAW says that the weapon must continue being magical, nor that it ceases being a pact weapon if this happens.

RAI changes table to table, do as you will shall be the whole of the law.

[MaxWilson]

In what kind of scenario is it worth spending an hour to get a pact weapon for 1 round?

I see nothing in the Pact Weapon description that makes your Pact Weapon cease being your pact weapon if the base weapon stops being magical. It ceases being your Pact Weapon only if you die, if you perform the ritual on a different weapon, or you perform a ritual to break the bond.

On the other hand, I also see nothing saying that it continues to be magical either for purposes of breaking weapon immunity, so the only benefit you get out of it is that you always have a non-magical crossbow handy.

[JoeJ]

Once a weapon is bonded to you, it is bonded to you forever - not just one round. I agree, if a weapon bond only lasted for a single round, the ability may as well not even exist.

No. If the weapon doesn't meet the requirements to be a pact weapon, then it's not your pact weapon.

[Giant2005]

On the other hand, I also see nothing saying that it continues to be magical either for purposes of breaking weapon immunity, so the only benefit you get out of it is that you always have a non-magical crossbow handy.

The benefit comes in the form of Invocations - which is why I made this thread in the first place. The Warlock is the only class in the game with a class ability that enables them to add damage to multiple ranged weapon attacks within the same turn. That means they get more out of Crossbow Expert than every other class.


No. If the weapon doesn't meet the requirements to be a pact weapon, then it's not your pact weapon.

The only requirement for a weapon to be your pact weapon is that you have successfully bonded with it.

[Garresh]

In what kind of scenario is it worth spending an hour to get a pact weapon for 1 round?

You know. I was going to say what happens if it's in the extradimensional space when the pact breaks. But in checking it, I saw no rule about the pact breaking if the weapon stopped being magical. Food for thought.

[JoeJ]

You know. I was going to say what happens if it's in the extradimensional space when the pact breaks. But in checking it, I saw no rule about the pact breaking if the weapon stopped being magical. Food for thought.

There's also no rule that says you have to stop taking actions when you die.

[Knaight]

There's also no rule that says you have to stop taking actions when you die.

That's not even remotely comparable. Pact weapons are a bit of in setting magic that isn't particularly well defined in this aspect, and whether the item needs to stay magical to remain a pact item is unknown even from a rules free setting perspective. Last I checked magic didn't actually exist and there wasn't some unified standard for how it works in all fiction, this can go either way.

Death is an actual thing. It exists in the real world, and we have a good enough understanding for how it works that the notion of taking actions while dead is obviously stupid.

[Giant2005]

There's also no rule that says you have to stop taking actions when you die.

Actually it does.
When one reaches 0 HP, they fall subject to the Unconscious Condition. The Unconscious Condition prevents them from moving, speaking, taking actions, and taking reactions. Dead people are subject to those same 0 hp rules, except with one additional restriction: "A creature that has died can’t regain hit points until magic such as the revivify spell has restored it to life."
In effect, Death is just a form of the Unconscious Condition that prevents one from having their hp raised above zero.

[JoeJ]

That's not even remotely comparable. Pact weapons are a bit of in setting magic that isn't particularly well defined in this aspect, and whether the item needs to stay magical to remain a pact item is unknown even from a rules free setting perspective. Last I checked magic didn't actually exist and there wasn't some unified standard for how it works in all fiction, this can go either way.

Death is an actual thing. It exists in the real world, and we have a good enough understanding for how it works that the notion of taking actions while dead is obviously stupid.

It is comparable in terms of common sense, however, and that has nothing to do with magic not existing in our world. It goes against both common sense and the way the game works in general for a limitation on a class ability to be removable with the one-time casting of a second level spell.



Actually it does.
When one reaches 0 HP, they fall subject to the Unconscious Condition. The Unconscious Condition prevents them from moving, speaking, taking actions, and taking reactions. Dead people are subject to those same 0 hp rules, except with one additional restriction: "A creature that has died can’t regain hit points until magic such as the revivify spell has restored it to life."
In effect, Death is just a form of the Unconscious Condition that prevents one from having their hp raised above zero.

Some effects, like Power Word Kill, cause death without reducing the target to 0 hp. They never gain the Unconscious condition, they just die.