UA - Warlock and Wizard -

[8wGremlin]

It's up

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/warlock-and-wizard

pdf here

http://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/20170213_Wizrd_Wrlck_UAv2_i48nf.pdf

[Mikey P]

Not allot of new Subclasses, but a bevy of new Invocations!

The Hexblade is Bad Ass!
Wizards that can change their damage type (I was looking for you as a meta-magic option last time)!
I have to go through it again... I'm thinking Hexblade has made that archetype playable!

[Grod_The_Giant]

Hah! A Warlock patron that makes Blade Pact usable without multiclassing! Not entirely surprised, but very pleased.

[RulesJD]

Hooooooly crap did they throw balance straight out the window with these additions.

Hexblade is stupppidly OP. You basically get GWM damage for free against one target per short rest, which is quite a lot.


But that pales in comparison to the Lore Wizard. Ability to change damage type and all is nice, but it's got nothing on increasing Save DC AND CHANGING THE SAVE STAT???

Seriously???

Okay, literally every spell I cast now requires an Int save instead. Congrats, game over. Lore Wizard wins.

Having basically a minor Wish spell at level 14 is just icing in the cake.

[Dudu]

Lore wizard is... too strong?

He might as well be the strongest wizard archetype. Once per short rest you can change the save of a spell!
Couples well with high knowledge checks.

Dunno, I liked the archetype a lot, but it might be too strong.

[Mhl7]

Okay, literally every spell I cast now requires an Int save instead. Congrats, game over. Lore Wizard wins.



It is limited once per rest. Really nice though.

[DireSickFish]

Lore wizard has some very nice abilities. But they seem very do or die. You're not going to be blowing 2 spell slots for every spell you cast all the time.

The invocations are the best part about this IMO. Nice to see some bladelock love. And while the 2d8 per slot seems real good, Warlocks don't get that many spells per short rest. It will vary a lot by player group. Warlock2/Sorcerer18 still looks really strong. You get the Eldrich blast twice a round trick and more spell slots to smite with. With the SCAG cantrips for melee damage so you don't need the extra attack from Warlock.

[NecroDancer]

I love those invocations! This is the best UA yet!

[DracoKnight]

Lore wizard has some very nice abilities. But they seem very do or die. You're not going to be blowing 2 spell slots for every spell you cast all the time.

The invocations are the best part about this IMO. Nice to see some bladelock love. And while the 2d8 per slot seems real good, Warlocks don't get that many spells per short rest. It will vary a lot by player group. Warlock2/Sorcerer18 still looks really strong. You get the Eldrich blast twice a round trick and more spell slots to smite with. With the SCAG cantrips for melee damage so you don't need the extra attack from Warlock.

It's 2d8 per LEVEL of spell slot.

[Gignere]

I love those invocations! This is the best UA yet!

The most overpowered one ever. I expect to see everything to be hit by the nerf bat before it goes live. I do like the attempt to fix the bladelock but that wizard tradition blows all other wizard traditions away.

[Hathorym]

Lore Master with the Elemental Adept feat? Brutal
1. Choose a elemental damage spell with the dimensions you like
2. Change it to your favorite element.
3. Change the saving throw to Intelligence
4. Spend a 3rd level slot to increase the DC by 2
5. Cast it.
6. Profit.

I think I'm in love.

[maxwell_wolfen]

i agree. that tradition is so op....it gives so much flexibility.
especially the change to spell saving throw.. ok any disabling spell using int or cha saves..oh myy

[Mikey P]

Welcome to the Big Nova Team Mr. Hexblade, Sharpshooters, Great weapon masters, and Paladins are happy to greet you!

[DireSickFish]

It's 2d8 per LEVEL of spell slot.

Correct. I miss typed it, but still don't think it's to over the top for a pure Warlock that doesn't multiclass. Might need to be toned down to 2d6, but someone would need to runt he numbers. Huge burst potential when you crit though, and you can crit on a 19 or 20 if you are cursing the target.

[Foxhound438]

My thoughts:

Hexblade- kind of necessary to fix the problem of always needing to be a fighter 1/ warlock x to do blade pact optimally; the curse is neat, but since it already gives you a build-defining feature at level 1, I feel like it could be nerfed a bit. Remove the damage bonus, maybe bring it back later on. Otherwise, everything's cool and fine in my opinion.

Raven queen- I'll be honest, I expected after seeing this one that there would be a third one about your patron being a giant book, since it seems that this UA is pact boons as patrons. Anyways, all of it seems good and neat.

For the invocations, I'll just talk about the ones that I don't like for one reason or another; anything else is A-okay

burning hex/ chilling hex seems kind of odd in that they do the same damage for the same action, but one is an AOE while the other is single target. Just confusing, I don't think either is too strong or anything.

All of the x patron/ pact of blade options that give you a "smite" option should probably be brought in line with divine smite in scaling, or at least limit it to warlock slots- it's not too powerful if it costs one of your only 3 slots to shoot 10d8 into something, but if you can go warlock 3/ sorc X for a strictly better paladorc, there's a problem- especially in the case of the moon bow, and especially in the case of the hexblade since that one gives you improved crit on top.


Lore master- certainly neat, taking a little bit from metamagic in changing the spells and a little bit from bard by casting one spell from anywhere once per day. I would say that steps on bard's toes a bit, but bard can build their combat strategy around the spells they pick, while lore wizard only gets to do it once and thus has to use extreme discretion when doing so. I feel like there's risk of really slowing down a game there too, having the wizard look at every spell list on every turn while they have the feature up...



Overall a very good UA.

[jas61292]

I know they don't normally nail the balance with unearthed arcana, but this is on a whole different level. Like... holy crap. What were they thinking?

[DracoKnight]

Correct. I miss typed it, but still don't think it's to over the top for a pure Warlock that doesn't multiclass. Might need to be toned down to 2d6, but someone would need to runt he numbers. Huge burst potential when you crit though, and you can crit on a 19 or 20 if you are cursing the target.

Even at 2d8, it's not busted for a single classed warlock.

[maxwell_wolfen]

the warlock update is huge...never again in any UA have we seen so much new content for a single class

[jaappleton]

The Moon Bow invocations makes ranged Paladins possible now. Divine smite at range.

[DracoKnight]

the warlock update is huge...never again in any UA have we seen so much new content for a single class

They did for the Warlock what I was 100% sure they were gonna do for the Wizard :smalltongue: :smallbiggrin:

[Arkhios]

Considering how little I was actually expecting from warlock I'm pretty content actually. Raven Queen is among the most flavorful deities in Dawn War Pantheon, and her acting as a patron isn't too surprising.

That said, I kinda like both the Hexblade and the Raven Queen patrons.

I wasn't expecting a wizard would get wound up in the same pdf, but honestly I'm not surprised either.

However. Of the sub-classes, Lore Master is my absolute favorite. Not only because it reminds me of my favorite wizard - a character I wrote a short story about before I even began playing D&D, and that's a long time ago! I also like the Spell Secrets a LOT.

Now I can finally make a caster who focuses on cold, lightning, and thunder exclusively without having to cherrypick only a very few spells.

[Byke]

The Warlock changes were necessary, I only wish they would have made the invocation slightly higher level so as to avoid multi-class abuse. Great abilities...wow!

I look at Lore wizard and wonder: How they could have published the Sorcerer UA? They have made the sorcerer class exactly 3 levels long at this point.

[jaappleton]

The Warlock changes were necessary, I only wish they would have made the invocation slightly higher level so as to avoid multi-class abuse. Great abilities...wow!

I look at Lore wizard and wonder: How they could have published the Sorcerer UA? They have made the sorcerer class exactly 3 levels long at this point.

UA is made without multiclassing in mind. I expect the Lore Wizard's ability to be limited to Wizard spells.

[Sception]

The hexblade lets you use cha instead of strength for melee attacks only so long as the weapon is NOT two handed, but the hexblade blade pact invocation only makes a great sword? Why? Does hexblade want you to use two handed weapons, or not?

Also, the bonus damage from the hex feels a bit excessive at first level. Maybe push it to 6th level, and grant the bonus damage only when the target is both cursed and under the hound effect?

Also, is chilling hex not supposed to affect the target itself? Because as it's written, it seems to do so (your curse target is, by default, an enemy within 5' of itself), but I can't imagine why anyone would ever take burning hex if did, since they have the same requirements, take the same action, and burning hex only affects the target and with a (slightly) more commonly resisted damage type.

[Tanarii]

Hooooooly crap did they throw balance straight out the window with these additions.Yeah, that's exactly my first thought.
Hexblade is way OP, and Lore is so far over the top I can't believe it made it to print even in UA.

[Mikey P]

Yeah, having Hex Warrior not interact with Curse Bringer is a glaring example of idiocy.
You have special ability to wield your other weapons, but your special weapon can't use it?

[Drackolus]

The elemental changing should share the refresh of the other part of the ability. Having one or the other on a short rest should be okay, but even getting one of each would be too much. The level 6 ability should also be 1 per short rest.


I love the fluff, but spell secrets and alchemical casting is sort of like giving a life cleric Blight. A clever wizard doesn't just take the hammer to every problem. It's kind of why I really don't like evokers. The wizard's strength is in his spells, using the correct spell for the situation. Fireball is lazy. Leave that to sorcerers and warlocks. Contingency, Clone, Mislead - those are what seperate the wizards from everyone else. They aren't strong because you throw a fistful of dice at everything within a square mile. They're strong because you use them in a way your opponent just isn't SMART enough to defeat.
Something like taking ritual casting for wizard spells to 1 minute instead of 10 would fit far better. Wizards play the long game.


Hexblade is a bit too much, I suspect. However, ithe charisma attack doesn't work for the greatsword invocation, and that's also quite cool. I would still go 1h+shield.
They kind of take out the "dipping paladin for smite" by giving them a much more powerful smite tied to a very cool and flavorful weapon. I suppose it would take a lot to make a melee warlock up to snuff with an EB one (yes, bladepact is already doable, but it's ten times the risk for half the reward.)
Invocations to make eldritch blast more flavorful and interesting is a very welcome addition. Making it stronger is probably not a great thing, though.
It seems they're pushing warlocks away from being a caster class. They are magic vs.doing magic, which does go a ways towards making them more unique and not just "Im a wizard who took a shortcut."
I have no complaints about the Raven Queen pact. Free extra not-familiar! Have your Quasit take a raven form, and have it sit on the other shoulder. Or heck, take the tome and just have a raven familiar. Not because it's strong, but because then you can pretend to be Henry (Fire Emblem: Awakening).
Edit: "[/SOAPBOX]" is not how you do that. I apparently needed more coffee this morning.
Edit 2: Oh, and shoutout to spiritual weapon on a warlock. Hex madness.

[RulesJD]

Also, two levels of Tempest Cleric + changing Fireball/Meteor Swarm/etc to Lightning + max damage?

Aaaahahahahahahaha.

And while changing spell save DC is only once per short rest, haaaave you met my friend Hypnotic Pattern? Or heck even just a Hold Person/Monster

[Joe the Rat]

Because the other melee patron-special weapons require strength as well?

Tweaking the invocation to allow Hex Warrior to apply is probably the best adjustment - leaving two-handers in general for a Strength build Hexblade seems a fair approach.

[DireSickFish]

Raven queen- I'll be honest, I expected after seeing this one that there would be a third one about your patron being a giant book, since it seems that this UA is pact boons as patrons. Anyways, all of it seems good and neat.

Now I want to make a Warlock that worships a giant book.

[JellyPooga]

Free extra not-familiar! Have your Quasit take a raven form, and have it sit on the other shoulder. Or heck, take the tome and just have a raven familiar. Not because it's strong, but because then you can pretend to be Henry (Fire Emblem: Awakening) Odin, the Allfather.

Fixed that for you.

[Gignere]

I guess one good thing about the Lore wizard is that resilient int will not be a terrible choice anymore.

[BRC]

Now I want to make a Warlock that worships a giant book.

Warlocks who worship books become Lore Wizards.

[Byke]

I seriously would have been happy with just Hex Warrior ....no more stupid shillelagh. Hex Curse is just the cherry a triple whip cream on top.

[Athoren]

A sorcerer loremaster can shocking grasp at a range of 1 mile with distant and a second level spell slot

[DracoKnight]

A sorcerer loremaster can shocking grasp at a range of 1 mile with distant and a second level spell slot

This just made my day! I'm crying I'm laughing so hard at this cheese! :smallbiggrin:

[maxwell_wolfen]

Also, two levels of Tempest Cleric + changing Fireball/Meteor Swarm/etc to Lightning + max damage?

Aaaahahahahahahaha.

And while changing spell save DC is only once per short rest, haaaave you met my friend Hypnotic Pattern? Or heck even just a Hold Person/Monster

thats maybe the best combo with that arcane tradition. while you have only one channel divinity for this to work..it can be a potent encounter breaker.

changing the spell's damage type is free. its like having chromatic orb's main feature to every spell...for free...infinitely...

[Specter]

Was reading it over, sounded cool and fair...

But then...

"If the spell's radius is at least 30 feet, it becomes one mile"

What. The. Actual. Hell.

[Sception]

Because the other melee patron-special weapons require strength as well?

Tweaking the invocation to allow Hex Warrior to apply is probably the best adjustment - leaving two-handers in general for a Strength build Hexblade seems a fair approach.

Yeah, limiting the hexblade cha-based attacks to one handed (or versatile) weapons only is fine by me. It's just odd to then prevent a hexblade that uses that ability from accessing their signature invocation. Making the invocation a longsword, or even a choice between a longsword and a greatsword, would have made more sense.

[Drackolus]

A sorcerer loremaster can shocking grasp at a range of 1 mile with distant and a second level spell slot
Combine with Arcane Eye to fulfill any "within sight" requirements.

[Joe the Rat]

A sorcerer loremaster can shocking grasp at a range of 1 mile with distant and a second level spell slot


This just made my day! I'm crying I'm laughing so hard at this cheese! :smallbiggrin:

Nix nix, you need to cast from a spell slot to use Wizard Distant Spell. Feel free to chromatic orb someone in the next county, though.

[DracoKnight]

Yeah, limiting the hexblade cha-based attacks to one handed (or versatile) weapons only is fine by me. It's just odd to then prevent a hexblade that uses that ability from accessing their signature invocation. Making the invocation a longsword, or even a choice between a longsword and a greatsword, would have made more sense.

Or tweak the Invocation so that you're allowed to use CHA with that greatsword.

[Sception]

"If the spell's radius is at least 30 feet, it becomes one mile"

Range, not radius.

[Tanarii]

On all these Pact Blade Invocations ... which do you think is the correct way to read them:

Interpretation number 1:
On a hit:
A) You can spend a spell slot to do and extra 2d8 damage per level
B) You reduce the creature's speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater)

Interpretation number 2:
On a hit, you spend a spell slot to:
A) do extra 2d8 damage per level
B) reduce the creatures speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater.

[Mikey P]

Because the other melee patron-special weapons require strength as well?

Tweaking the invocation to allow Hex Warrior to apply is probably the best adjustment - leaving two-handers in general for a Strength build Hexblade seems a fair approach.

Agreed.

As is, it makes for an even more tempting dip situation... Armor, shields, short rest spellslots and one handed weapons based on a common casting stat? with all the trouble I often am willing to go through to get Shillelagh based on CHA.... So nice!

[Sception]

On all these Pact Blade Invocations ... which do you think is the correct way to read them:

Interpretation number 1:
On a hit:
A) You can spend a spell slot to do and extra 2d8 damage per level
B) You reduce the creature's speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater)

Interpretation number 2:
On a hit, you spend a spell slot to:
A) do extra 2d8 damage per level
B) reduce the creatures speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater.

My reading was interpretation 2, but the wording is ambiguous.

[DracoKnight]

Interpretation number 2:
On a hit, you spend a spell slot to:
A) do extra 2d8 damage per level
B) reduce the creatures speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater.

I believe that this is the correct reading. Both effects happen.

[EKruze]

Really dislike this UA.

The Hexblade is over strong compared to existing options but the Bladelock needed some love. I don't feel like this patron has much character but it has a lot of mechanical strength.

The Raven Queen is neat and flavorful. It has some cool abilities to play with that feel very appropriate to the patron without unbalancing anything.

The Lore Master is just terribly designed and represents the bulk of my complaint with this UA. It's abilities are cheesy and unbalancing and aside from the expertise in four Lore skills there's nothing about it that feels appropriate to the school. It feels like the author was going for a flavor of 'better and smarter than everyone else.'

I suppose I can see some sense in using Int for initiative with the Lore subtype, though it's an awfully powerful effect.

The elemental substitution effect of Spell Secrets is strong but not overly so, but I'm left to wonder what this has to do with the idea of a Lore focus. I think this power would be better built into an Evoker variant or some kind of elementalist. If this is a product of their extensive study, perhaps it should be the case that the element type is chosen when the spell is prepared for the day rather than on the fly which seems a bit much.

It's the second part of Spell Secrets where things really get crazy. It's no secret that some saves tend to be easier to make than others and that generally the potency of a given spell effect is weighted in part against the saving throw that it targets. This ability throws all of that out of the window while only tangentially connecting to the focus of Lore Mastery as an archetype.

Alchemical Casting is just silly. Sorcerers give up an awful lot in relation to Wizards for the reason that they get Metamagic. As if allowing a Lore Wizard to chose which saving throw to target weren't enough they're now given a potent and flexible form of metamagic too. What does this have to do with Lore Mastery? Well it's magical and that's Lore-ish.

Prodigious Memory is fine. It's powerful, particularly in the hands of a Wizard who already has the most available class spells to choose from, but it doesn't break anything and fits the theme of the arcane tradition. Tremendous utility in this. If one were looking to tone it down perhaps it should allow the Wizard to swap out any number of spells but only during a short rest.

Master of Magic should probably have been the name for the arcane tradition, since that seems to be what the author is going for. Level 14 powers are strong, so I think we can forgive a little power creep at this point. This is a very powerful ability, basically the functional part of the Wish spell once per day. It steps on the Bard's toes an awful lot, but then Bards will be Wishing on their own four levels later. I think this could be a thematically appropriate capstone to the Arcane Tradition if the rest of the powers weren't so over the top.

If I were to do the Lore Master I'd say scrap Spell Secrets as it exists altogether. If you really want to keep it get rid of the ability to choose a target save and make the elemental change part of spell preparation. Keep the Expertise in the various Lore skills at level 2 and give the Lore Wizard the choice of three cantrips from any class lists to count as Wizard cantrips. Get rid of Alchemical Casting and add Intelligence to Dexterity for Initiative as the level 6 power. Keep Prodigious Memory or possibly add the ability to also swap prepared spells during a short rest. At level 10 give the Lore Master the ability to scribe spells from all schools at half the usual time and gold costs (the level 2 ability for all other schools). At level 14 give the Lore Master a version of Bardic Magical Secrets, letting them choose up to three spells from any class lists to have as Wizard Spells and let them prepare these at all times without counting against their normal Spells Prepared.

[tomato]

Was reading it over, sounded cool and fair...

But then...

"If the spell's radius is at least 30 feet, it becomes one mile"

What. The. Actual. Hell.

...Would this work with Destructive Wave?

[Byke]

On all these Pact Blade Invocations ... which do you think is the correct way to read them:

Interpretation number 1:
On a hit:
A) You can spend a spell slot to do and extra 2d8 damage per level
B) You reduce the creature's speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater)

Interpretation number 2:
On a hit, you spend a spell slot to:
A) do extra 2d8 damage per level
B) reduce the creatures speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater.

I read it as #2 as well. But forget that, I'm going Gnome or Halfling Fiend pact Hexblade so I can knock giants and dragon prone every time I hit them. The visual is just to awesome to pass up. All Hail Dis!

[Tanarii]

I believe that this is the correct reading. Both effects happen.My question is: does the second affect happen even if you don't spend a spell slot? Because it sure reads like it does.

[Deleted]

Ah, another wizard subclass that should belong to the Sorcerer.

They just want the Wizard to be a blaster so damn bad and I have no clue why.

Lore Tradition is essentially a Wizard with free Metamagic... I mean... Damn.

[DracoKnight]

My question is: does the second affect happen even if you don't spend a spell slot? Because it sure reads like it does.

Oh, sh!t...you're right. Good gods, they really gave Pact of the Blade nice support here! :smallbiggrin:

[Byke]

...Would this work with Destructive Wave?

LOL! The way it's written....no no sanity must be applied or this is a city nuke.

[thepsyker]

Given the lore given for the hexblade patron being a sentient weapon to which the warlock binds themself, beyond the Hex Warrior ability the actual patron abilities don't seem to tie into weilding a sentient weapon all that much. I feel like a bigger deal could/should be made of the fact that in this warlock's case their patron is the weapon they are wacking people with.

[Joe the Rat]

LOL! The way it's written....no no sanity must be applied or this is a city nuke.

My copy says range, so sanity came on board at some point.


So here's a question: If you removed the elemental tuning, do you still see a blaster? Altered saves, increased range, heightened DCs - all would work very well on a controller.

[Byke]

Ah, another wizard subclass that should belong to the Sorcerer.

They just want the Wizard to be a blaster so damn bad and I have no clue why.

Lore Tradition is essentially a Wizard with free Metamagic... I mean... Damn.

Spell secret is EXACTLY what Sorcerers needed, instead they gives wizard at will Elemental Substitution ( I even said so repeatedly in my UA speculation for Sorcerers) . But the rider where you can change the save is absolutely bonkers and 1 per short rest. I'm trying to think of a good reason as to why I would ever play Sorcerer past 3 levels and I can't.

[DivisibleByZero]

Given the lore given for the hexblade patron being a sentient weapon to which the warlock binds themself, beyond the Hex Warrior ability the actual patron abilities don't seem to tie into weilding a sentient weapon all that much. I feel like a bigger deal could/should be made of the fact that in this warlock's case their patron is the weapon they are wacking people with.

The idea is that they pledge themselves into service of, and receive their power from, a sentient weapon (just like they do for/from other Patrons). That's not to say that the DM couldn't fluff it to be the weapon they're wielding, but that would require that the PC has a magical sentient weapon at level one.... which is quite obviously problematic.

[Byke]

My copy says range, so sanity came on board at some point.


So here's a question: If you removed the elemental tuning, do you still see a blaster? Altered saves, increased range, heightened DCs - all would work very well on a controller.

So here is my question do Wizards need any of it?

[Joe the Rat]

The idea is that they pledge themselves into service of, and receive their power from, a sentient weapon (just like they do for/from other Patrons). That's not to say that the DM couldn't fluff it to be the weapon they're wielding, but that would require that the PC has a magical sentient weapon at level one.... which is quite obviously problematic.

Plus not all weapons are made for whacking people. An immortal siege engine, or a sky fortress, or something so powerful and complex that it develops a conscience and a British accent would certainly fill the "weapon" categorization. If your patron is a soul-powered nuke, you don't want to be swinging it at people.

[thepsyker]

The idea is that they pledge themselves into service of, and receive their power from, a sentient weapon (just like they do for/from other Patrons). That's not to say that the DM couldn't fluff it to be the weapon they're wielding, but that would require that the PC has a magical sentient weapon at level one.... which is quite obviously problematic.

I don't see why that necessarily has to be problematic. The lore given says the weapon grows more powerful the more it is used, it doesn't seem to much of a stretch to implement that as a weak connection with a magic weapon at low levels that becomes more powerful as the character levels up and gains new abilities. To me at least that makes more sense then a pact with a magic weapon where the weapon is just something that is hanging out on some other plane like a demon prince or any of the other patron. But that might just be my own baggage as the whole "make deal with magic weapon for power dynamic" immediately puts me in the mind for an Elric/Stormbringer type deal.

[Sception]

What's the best place to provide feedback for these? The Curse Bringer thing is such an obvious and painful oversight that I'd like to hope if attention is called to it quickly enough they might just make the change and we wouldn't have to wait for a later review or beg DMs for house rule adjustments.

[DivisibleByZero]

What's the best place to provide feedback for these? The Curse Bringer thing is such an obvious and painful oversight that I'd like to hope if attention is called to it quickly enough they might just make the change and we wouldn't have to wait for a later review or beg DMs for house rule adjustments.

When next they release a different UA on wizards.com/dnd there will be both a link to the new article and a link to a survey about this article.
Take a look at this week's article and you'll see below it a survey about last week's sorcerer article.

As to the reasoning for your question and your hope.... Nope. Doubt it. Highly. Like, not going to happen.

[Byke]

I missed Master of Magic...Any spell any list...1/ long rest...Nice capstone.

[Specter]

...Would this work with Destructive Wave?

No because its range is Self, and the radius itself wouldn't increase. But now Loremaster is the ultimate assassin: killing an army from a mile away with Fireballs is something lesser wizards only dream of.

[Dromuthra]

The powergamer in me likes the Lore Wizard, but the majority of me that's a fan of system balance really doesn't. Aside from obviously being too powerful, I really, REALLY think this belonged as a Sorcerer bloodline (with the fluff changed). This archetype seems to be entirely focused on getting the most bang for your limited spells, and I'd have preferred to see it on Sorcerers who have much more limited spell choices. Especially with the damage-changing power - I'd have loved to give it to Sorcerers so they don't have to waste spells known to find new damage types. Also not personally a fan of Master of Magic being MUCH better than what Lore Bards get (IMO).

Utterly in love with the Warlock stuff though, but if I were to use it I'd change Curse Bringer to allow Hexblades to actually use their own invocation. Not sure whether I'd let it apply to 2-handed or just have it be a silver longsword - leaning towards longsword. Mildly annoyed with how weak the rider on the Moon Bow is, but being a ranged weapon is definitely an advantage on its own.

[Deleted]

Spell secret is EXACTLY what Sorcerers needed, instead they gives wizard at will Elemental Substitution ( I even said so repeatedly in my UA speculation for Sorcerers) . But the rider where you can change the save is absolutely bonkers and 1 per short rest. I'm trying to think of a good reason as to why I would ever play Sorcerer past 3 levels and I can't.

The only reason to play a sorcerer seems to be if you want multiclass synergy.

[MrStabby]

Another thematically lovely UA.

Another mechanically troubling one.

It is probably fair to say that although I love the ideas I wouldn't be allowing much of the content in my games. Raven Queen patron maybe. Maybe some invocations. The rest seem a bit too strong.

Lore wizard should never be allowed to see the light of day. Ever. Stupid dribbling heap of faecal matter.

[Sception]

As to the reasoning for your question and your hope.... Nope. Doubt it. Highly. Like, not going to happen.

Unfortunate, then, as that leaves hexblades just as dependent on taking at least one level of fighter for heavy armor as every other bladelock. The proficiency with shields is wasted, and the ability to attack with cha exists only for paladins and stone sorcerers to dip into it, it isn't something a primary hexblade that intends to survive past level 3 will ever use.

I just... balance issues I can deal with, but the failure to get a second set of eyes to give these things even a once over before throwing them up is something else.


Honestly, it's readily apparent from the article that they think bladelocks should have a smite feature to begin with. Patching that thing in as taxed 'options', from a list that gets so few choices to begin with, and is already heavily taxed within the build, is just... it's just a bad way to go about things.

Rather than a hexblade patron, I really wish they had just re-designed the blade pact all together.

[Deleted]

Another thematically lovely UA.

Another mechanically troubling one.

It is probably fair to say that although I love the ideas I wouldn't be allowing much of the content in my games. Raven Queen patron maybe. Maybe some invocations. The rest seem a bit too strong.

Lore wizard should never be allowed to see the light of day. Ever. Stupid dribbling heap of faecal matter.

There are some good ideas there, just shouldn't be put into a Wizard Tradition.

Just... Hot damn.

[Specter]

Also not personally a fan of Master of Magic being MUCH better than what Lore Bards get (IMO).

Personally I'd much rather have 2 known spells than one mutable spell cast once per long rest. But that's just me.

[MrStabby]

There are some good ideas there, just shouldn't be put into a Wizard Tradition.

Just... Hot damn.

I am not sure that some of these should be put into any tradition.

Swapping damage types is dangerous in this edition - fire damage does so much more damage than other types and is balanced by the higher frequency of resistances and immunities. I think screwing with this is not advisable.

Even this has nothing on changing the save of spells. This... this is just crazy. Half the skill of being a wizard is getting that balance among your prepared spells to cover different damage types and different save vulnerabilities, maybe more like 2/3rds. These abilities seem to just strip away from the class a lot of what makes it a wizard.

Alchemical casting letting you add 2d10 force damage to a spell for a level 1 spell is like a paladin. If paladins were smiting with a less resistant damage type, had more spell slots, used d10s not d8s, could do so at range and could do so with multiple targets on spells like fireball.

OK, its level 6 - but still worth comparing to the sorcerer's quicken at that level. Sorcerer can expend 2SP (enough to buy a level 1 spell) to do an extra 2d10 damage by casting an extra firebolt. This is replicating and improving on another class' signature ability which concerns me.

The other abilities are equally silly but there are fewer direct comparisons to make.

Prodigious memory is OK - it is a wizardly ability, around the right power level. If they were to take a feature from this UA and use it elsewhere, this would be the one I would suggest.

Master of Magic: who cares. Already there was no point in playing any other caster so simply making it explicit doesn't change much.

[maxwell_wolfen]

I am not sure that some of these should be put into any tradition.

Swapping damage types is dangerous in this edition - fire damage does so much more damage than other types and is balanced by the higher frequency of resistances and immunities. I think screwing with this is not advisable.

Even this has nothing on changing the save of spells. This... this is just crazy. Half the skill of being a wizard is getting that balance among your prepared spells to cover different damage types and different save vulnerabilities, maybe more like 2/3rds. These abilities seem to just strip away from the class a lot of what makes it a wizard.

Alchemical casting letting you add 2d10 force damage to a spell for a level 1 spell is like a paladin. If paladins were smiting with a less resistant damage type, had more spell slots, used d10s not d8s, could do so at range and could do so with multiple targets on spells like fireball.

OK, its level 6 - but still worth comparing to the sorcerer's quicken at that level. Sorcerer can expend 2SP (enough to buy a level 1 spell) to do an extra 2d10 damage by casting an extra firebolt. This is replicating and improving on another class' signature ability which concerns me.

The other abilities are equally silly but there are fewer direct comparisons to make.

Prodigious memory is OK - it is a wizardly ability, around the right power level. If they were to take a feature from this UA and use it elsewhere, this would be the one I would suggest.

Master of Magic: who cares. Already there was no point in playing any other caster so simply making it explicit doesn't change much.


i totally 100% agree in that.
yeap the capstone while its good, is not that broken. But the 2nd lvl feature really breaks everything.

[Deleted]

I am not sure that some of these should be put into any tradition.

Swapping damage types is dangerous in this edition - fire damage does so much more damage than other types and is balanced by the higher frequency of resistances and immunities. I think screwing with this is not advisable.

Even this has nothing on changing the save of spells. This... this is just crazy. Half the skill of being a wizard is getting that balance among your prepared spells to cover different damage types and different save vulnerabilities, maybe more like 2/3rds. These abilities seem to just strip away from the class a lot of what makes it a wizard.

Alchemical casting letting you add 2d10 force damage to a spell for a level 1 spell is like a paladin. If paladins were smiting with a less resistant damage type, had more spell slots, used d10s not d8s, could do so at range and could do so with multiple targets on spells like fireball.

OK, its level 6 - but still worth comparing to the sorcerer's quicken at that level. Sorcerer can expend 2SP (enough to buy a level 1 spell) to do an extra 2d10 damage by casting an extra firebolt. This is replicating and improving on another class' signature ability which concerns me.

The other abilities are equally silly but there are fewer direct comparisons to make.

Prodigious memory is OK - it is a wizardly ability, around the right power level. If they were to take a feature from this UA and use it elsewhere, this would be the one I would suggest.

Master of Magic: who cares. Already there was no point in playing any other caster so simply making it explicit doesn't change much.

The ideas aren't bad... You can make them a bit more balanced. I've posted this over in the Sorcerer threads before but... If you want to make a "change saving throw" type set up then the Chaos Mage would be perfect (I haaate how the DM fricken has all the power in that subclass).


Chaos Origin

Chaos: Starting at first level your magic is chaotic and just plain weird. Whenever you cast an Innate Spell that requires a saving throw, roll a d6 and consult the list below. The spell now requires a different save based on your roll.

1: Str
2: Dex
3: Con
4: Int
5: Wis
6: Cha

The player and DM are encouraged to fluff the spell in a different way based on the saving throw. If burning hands requires an Int save then perhaps it is an illusion spell. If burning hands is a Cha save, perhaps it is an enchantment spell where the sorcerer "burned" the target so bad with insults that the target really felt the flames.


You get to change the saving throws, yes, but it's random and can't really be exploited like the Wizard's could... Holy hell, there are a lot of spells that shouldn't be certain saves... This is bigger than heighten spell! No prof + penalty on the save (for a low Int creature)... Damn.

Switching damage types is another thing that would be perfect for Metamagic. It would actually balance out even if it took SP.

You know what... I think Wizards are dead to me.

[Sariel Vailo]

i love these,the wizard is a perfect fit for my wizard ive been using its just nice. than the warlock now i have good additions for one of my patrons plus the new ones.myfavorites are undeath,hexblade,and arcfey

[Byke]

The ideas aren't bad... You can make them a bit more balanced.

You know what... I think Wizards are dead to me.

Agreed they could be made more balanced. Sadly Sorcerer is now dead to me :(

[Draco4472]

Hexblade is amazing, and the invocations seem fine to me. Most people seem to be forgetting how few spell-slots Warlocks get to use them with. If these new invocations are OP, then Paladin is too with Divine Smite and its Smite spells.

[Tanarii]

Hexblade is amazing, and the invocations seem fine to me. Most people seem to be forgetting how few spell-slots Warlocks get to use them with. If these new invocations are OP, then Paladin is too with Divine Smite and its Smite spells.They're a lot more powerful if you don't have to spend the spell slot to get the secondary non-damage effect. Which appears to be the case, given the way they are worded.

[Deleted]

Agreed they could be made more balanced. Sadly Sorcerer is now dead to me :(

I'm making my own, I prefer the fluff of the Sorcerer in D&D than the wizard.

If they actually explored the fluff of the wizard in their spellcasting... Like letting you create spells from a few lists, then I would like the wizard but... I'll just stick with the Sorcerer.

[Beechgnome]

I noticed none of the invocations were for Undying Warlocks. Are we just going to pretend SCAG never happened?

[Xethik]

What's the best place to provide feedback for these? The Curse Bringer thing is such an obvious and painful oversight that I'd like to hope if attention is called to it quickly enough they might just make the change and we wouldn't have to wait for a later review or beg DMs for house rule adjustments.
I had a brief Twitter exchange with Jeremy and it seems that the invocation is consciously built to not work with Hex Warrior:
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/831262145597693952

That being said, I think voicing your opinion in the feedback next week is quite important.

[Mikey P]

They're a lot more powerful if you don't have to spend the spell slot to get the secondary non-damage effect. Which appears to be the case, given the way they are worded.

Because of the comma? I think that's jut bad editing. The way the text is parsed, beginning with the use of the spell slot, creates the context that suggests all effects occur only when the spell slot is spent.

[DracoKnight]

I noticed none of the invocations were for Undying Warlocks. Are we just going to pretend SCAG never happened?

I think they're trying to pretend that that part of SCAG never happened.

Source: other UA Patrons got Invocations, and that did not :smalltongue:

[Deleted]

I noticed none of the invocations were for Undying Warlocks. Are we just going to pretend SCAG never happened?

WotC likes to pretend a lot of things don't exist so... Probably.

Though this is just playtest stuff... But I wouldn't put it past them.

[Tanarii]

Because of the comma? I think that's jut bad editing. The way the text is parsed, beginning with the use of the spell slot, creates the context that suggests all effects occur only when the spell slot is spent.It's completely possible that's what was intended. If so, it's fairly bad editing.

Of course, could just be hopeful thinking on my part, wanting to see a way for them not suck without burning a spell slot.

[Sigreid]

I really like these. I'm a wizard guy so I particularly like the lore wizard. I like it enough I'm going to have to do some thinking to see if I like it too much, meaning that I think it's so much better than any of the other specializations that I would never take one of the others. It doesn't seem too nuts.

[ZZTRaider]

Because of the comma? I think that's jut bad editing. The way the text is parsed, beginning with the use of the spell slot, creates the context that suggests all effects occur only when the spell slot is spent.

Even without the comma, I read it the same way as Tanarii.

"When you hit a creature with this weapon, you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level, and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn."

It breaks down to "When W, [you can X to Y] AND [you can Z]." The only way Z would be contingent on X is if it read "When W, you can X to [Y and Z]."

Admittedly, assuming that Tanarii and I are reading it correctly, it'd be far more clear to flip it around to mention the speed bit first, then mention what you can do by spending a spell slot.

[Deleted]

Even without the comma, I read it the same way as Tanarii.

"When you hit a creature with this weapon, you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level, and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn."

It breaks down to "When W, [you can X to Y] AND [you can Z]." The only way Z would be contingent on X is if it read "When W, you can X to [Y and Z]."

Admittedly, assuming that Tanarii and I are reading it correctly, it'd be far more clear to flip it around to mention the speed bit first, then mention what you can do by spending a spell slot.

The biggest issue people forget, 5e works off basic english so you have to read it on about a 4th grade level.

Breaking it down like this isn't the intent.

Not that you are wrong in reading it this way, but remember that 5e doesn't use perfect english or legal english.

[maxwell_wolfen]

I really like these. I'm a wizard guy so I particularly like the lore wizard. I like it enough I'm going to have to do some thinking to see if I like it too much, meaning that I think it's so much better than any of the other specializations that I would never take one of the others. It doesn't seem too nuts.

well from a first glance..
a divine wizard with portent can influence the dice. ok
a lore wizard changing the saving throw is effectively the same thing. (disintegrate with int checks for example)
but the divine wizard can use portent for his own save checks as well, so defensively he is better.
obviously the lore wizard is more offensive than the other archetypes.
and still the best wizard archetype capstone IMHO is the abjurers spell resistance

[Sigreid]

I'm making my own, I prefer the fluff of the Sorcerer in D&D than the wizard.

If they actually explored the fluff of the wizard in their spellcasting... Like letting you create spells from a few lists, then I would like the wizard but... I'll just stick with the Sorcerer.

I've read a lot of your posts now and I'm convinced you and I want very different things from D&D. :smallbiggrin:

[Sception]

I had a brief Twitter exchange with Jeremy and it seems that the invocation is consciously built to not work with Hex Warrior:
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/831262145597693952

That being said, I think voicing your opinion in the feedback next week is quite important.

The problem with the two not interacting is the implication via the other pact blade invocations that bladelocks are intended to have smite damage, regardless of pact. I can understand giving hexblades who do favor strength or dex some bonus for dealing with the mad, but locking the smite damage to it basically kills the cha attack feature altogether for hexblades. As it is, that feature exists exclusively for other classes dipping in, its not something a main class hexblade will ever use. At that rate, it might as well be removed, outright.

How is a single classed hexblade even supposed to work, in the default, points-buy environment? You need a maxed strength to attack with, a highish dex to make use of medium armor, a highish con as a melee class (and especially as a melee caster). That already doesn't leave anything left for charisma, your main primary stat, so all the warlock's offensive spells, whether spell attacks or save based, are null. At least you can smite instead? Thirsting blade might as well not exist. You're not going to get much mileage out of green flame blade. Good thing you get two attacks, but you're already talking about two tax invocations, out of very few total, before you even get into fun stuff like relentless hex.


Bleh. Again, it's apparent that the designers felt hexblade was lacking, and decided to add the smite as a patch, but they really should have just errata'd it in at that rate. As it is, the pact of the blade's third level feature is a ribbon on an empty box, and that would have freed up the patron-specific pact blade invocations to be flavorful options where a hexblade might take it or might not, and thus have an actual choice between strength and cha as their primary stat, and not obligatory taxes that forclose the hexblade's tantalizing cha attack outright.

[Rfkannen]

I love the moon bow invoction thematically! you could make a pretty cool stealthly archer type, one with shadows, moon bow, all that!

Anyone have any idea how powerful moon bow is? like is a archer warlock worth it? I think I might play one as my next character now.

[ZZTRaider]

The biggest issue people forget, 5e works off basic english so you have to read it on about a 4th grade level.

Breaking it down like this isn't the intent.

Not that you are wrong in reading it this way, but remember that 5e doesn't use perfect english or legal english.

Sure, and 95% of the time, that's plenty. But when there's uncertainty about the meaning, what else is there to really fall back on other than what the text actually says? Especially in something like UA where we can't fall back on something seeming completely over or under powered.

I mean, it is literally what those words mean in that order. It may not be what they meant to write down, but it is what they wrote.

Personally, the only reason I find any ambiguity here is that the extra "you can" could be the result of a copy/paste error during editing. Otherwise, I'd say that adding additional words that fundamentally change the meaning of the sentence shows intent.

[Deleted]

I love the moon bow invoction thematically! you could make a pretty cool stealthly archer type, one with shadows, moon bow, all that!

Anyone have any idea how powerful moon bow is? like is a archer warlock worth it? I think I might play one as my next character now.

Reminds me of the vetige Leraje.. That's not a bad thing :p

[Rfkannen]

Reminds me of the vetige Leraje.. That's not a bad thing :p


who? nothing turned up when I googled them.

[Xethik]

The problem with the two not interacting is the implication via the other pact blade invocations that bladelocks are intended to have smite damage, regardless of pact. I can understand giving hexblades who do favor strength or dex some bonus for dealing with the mad, but locking the smite damage to it basically kills the cha attack feature altogether for hexblades. As it is, that feature exists exclusively for other classes dipping in, its not something a main class hexblade will ever use. At that rate, it might as well be removed, outright.

How is a single classed hexblade even supposed to work, in the default, points-buy environment? You need a maxed strength to attack with, a highish dex to make use of medium armor, a highish con as a melee class (and especially as a melee caster). That already doesn't leave anything left for charisma, your main primary stat, so all the warlock's offensive spells, whether spell attacks or save based, are null. At least you can smite instead? Thirsting blade might as well not exist. You're not going to get much mileage out of green flame blade. Good thing you get two attacks, but you're already talking about two tax invocations, out of very few total, before you even get into fun stuff like relentless hex.


Bleh. Again, it's apparent that the designers felt hexblade was lacking, and decided to add the smite as a patch, but they really should have just errata'd it in at that rate. As it is, the pact of the blade's third level feature is a ribbon on an empty box, and that would have freed up the patron-specific pact blade invocations to be flavorful options where a hexblade might take it or might not, and thus have an actual choice between strength and cha as their primary stat, and not obligatory taxes that forclose the hexblade's tantalizing cha attack outright.
I think you are overvaluing Charisma for the two-handed Hexblade. Yeah, you probably don't want a terrible score in it, but if you are using all your spell slots for buffs and rarely use Eldritch Blast, what are you losing? As you mention, Cha is only useful for spell attacks and your saves. Some hitpoints from Hexblade's Curse? You won't get Thirsting Blade for a while, giving you plenty of time to max out Strength and start padding your Charisma.

I think the way I would play it is to start out being Cha focused with 14 Dex. Pick a versatile weapon and use that. Then, once I get enough ASIs to max out Cha, I would think about pumping Strength and picking up Curse Bringer.

And don't forget that the Strength boosting magic items are often better than even looking at the stat. Going from 8 Str to 24 Str with one attunement slot is pretty bonkers, if you ask me. This is probably the most optimal way to make use of Curse Bringer, but I know most player's won't have a Belt of X Giant Strength just fall on their laps.

I don't disagree that Pact of the Blade is weak and a lot of these feel like a patch. But I think Hexblade can stand on its own, without Curse Bringer, at least for quite some time.

[Tanarii]

Even without the comma, I read it the same way as Tanarii.

"When you hit a creature with this weapon, you can expend a spell slot to deal an additional 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level, and you can reduce the creature’s speed to 0 feet until the end of your next turn."

It breaks down to "When W, [you can X to Y] AND [you can Z]." The only way Z would be contingent on X is if it read "When W, you can X to [Y and Z]."Thanks for making it more clear what I mean. Looking at it again, I can't see any possible way to read this as requiring the spell slot to reduce the creatures speed. I really don't think it's just wishful thinking on my part. I think it's the only reasonable way to read the sentence. You'd have to be willfully misinterpreting it for it to mean that the speed reduction affect comes from expending the spell slot.


Admittedly, assuming that Tanarii and I are reading it correctly, it'd be far more clear to flip it around to mention the speed bit first, then mention what you can do by spending a spell slot.Yeah, that was the other thing that occurred to me initially. It's the only reason I even questioned myself. I was like ... did they intentionally put it in the other order to try and make it seem like a spell slot was needed for everything after, but just messed up?

[Sception]

I think you are overvaluing Charisma for the two-handed Hexblade. Yeah, you probably don't want a terrible score in it, but if you are using all your spell slots for buffs and rarely use Eldritch Blast, what are you losing? As you mention, Cha is only useful for spell attacks and your saves. Some hitpoints from Hexblade's Curse? You won't get Thirsting Blade for a while, giving you plenty of time to max out Strength and start padding your Charisma.

I think the way I would play it is to start out being Cha focused with 14 Dex. Pick a versatile weapon and use that. Then, once I get enough ASIs to max out Cha, I would think about pumping Strength and picking up Curse Bringer.

Between smite damage and hex shifting (a critical option, given you only get one hex per rest), I do not think Curse Bringer can be considered an option that one can reasonably delay until the late game, let alone pass on altogether.

As such, taking Curse Bringer is critical asap, so at no levels can let strength languish. You might raise cha some in the late game for thirsting blade, but a single classed hexblade should never be attacking with it, and as such might as well not (and probably shouldn't) get it as an option in the first place.

Or, better yet, the smite damage should have been made part of the blade pact to begin with, and hex-shifting should have been made a higher level hexblade feature (perhaps in place of the cool-but-off-theme shadow hound). Then you could have a cool, strong, greatsword pact invocation for strength hexblades without cha hexblades feeling like they were missing critical class features by not taking it.

[Deleted]

who? nothing turned up when I googled them.

3.5 Binder had Vestiges that gave you power... The Warlock is directly related to the 4e Warlock which is closely related to the 3.5 Binder more so than the 3e Warlock.

http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/frcc/20070718

http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=2942.0

[Haldir]

Hex Armor adds a wonky, amateurish mechanic of rolling a D6 instead of 50% miss chance. Seriously, give the D2 some play if you're scared of rolling percentile. That D6 malarky is stuff I do at my table when I have a random chance of like... one of three things happening, and even then it feels too complicated and clunky.

[Drackolus]

If you were the author and you were trying to say that the effect IS contingent on spending a slot, and the way they did it was wrong (which I agree with), how would you have written it?
Regardless of what it is supposed to be, it seems clear that it wasn't worded very well.

[ZiddyT]

Between smite damage and hex shifting (a critical option, given you only get one hex per rest), I do not think Curse Bringer can be considered an option that one can reasonably delay until the late game, let alone pass on altogether.

As such, taking Curse Bringer is critical asap, so at no levels can let strength languish. You might raise cha some in the late game for thirsting blade, but a single classed hexblade should never be attacking with it, and as such might as well not (and probably shouldn't) get it as an option in the first place.

Or, better yet, the smite damage should have been made part of the blade pact to begin with, and hex-shifting should have been made a higher level hexblade feature (perhaps in place of the cool-but-off-theme shadow hound). Then you could have a cool, strong, greatsword pact invocation for strength hexblades without cha hexblades feeling like they were missing critical class features by not taking it.

Pretty much. I feel like choosing to play without Curse Bringer is like making a ranged Paladin, or not taking agonizing blast for whatever reason as a blaster. Can you do it? Sure, it's optional. Are you heavily gimping yourself for no real reason? Of course.

Curse Bringer is *ridiculously* strong. I would view it as mandatory personally, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

[Drackolus]

Hex Armor adds a wonky, amateurish mechanic of rolling a D6 instead of 50% miss chance. Seriously, give the D2 some play if you're scared of rolling percentile. That D6 malarky is stuff I do at my table when I have a random chance of like... one of three things happening, and even then it feels too complicated and clunky.
The "d2" isn't a mechanic in 5e, at least not yet.
I would have used a d20, since that's more or less how death saves work already.

[Sariel Vailo]

I noticed none of the invocations were for Undying Warlocks. Are we just going to pretend SCAG never happened? i like the undying patron could we as a community come up with some.

[ZZTRaider]

If you were the author and you were trying to say that the effect IS contingent on spending a slot, and the way they did it was wrong (which I agree with), how would you have written it?
Regardless of what it is supposed to be, it seems clear that it wasn't worded very well.

All they actually need to do is remove the second "you can".

Or change "and you can" to "as well as".

Or, to make it super explicit, re-arrange it to something like, "By expending a spell slot when you hit a creature with this weapon, you can reduce the creature's speed to 0 until the end of your next turn and deal an extra 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level of the slot expended."

[Drackolus]

Pretty much. I feel like choosing to play without Curse Bringer is like making a ranged Paladin, or not taking agonizing blast for whatever reason as a blaster. Can you do it? Sure, it's optional. Are you heavily gimping yourself for no real reason? Of course.

Curse Bringer is *ridiculously* strong. I would view it as mandatory personally, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
It is very strong, but I think the cost is also quite considerable. You lose out on an invocation, some ac, probably some con and/or dex, and whatever asi's go into strength instead of feats. Not to meantion that master of hexes sort of makes the free passing somewhat less useful, though that's not a factor before level 14.
If you get heavy armor (such as starting vuman), it becomes far easier since you can basically just use the paladin spread... But then, your dex and wis may suffer, and without the aura, it comes with it's own problems.

[Sception]

Frankly, between increased damage dice and the existence of Great Weapon Master, hexblades who opt to skip the cha option to attack with strength anyway didn't need any extra cookies baked into the class, let alone a cookie containing exclusive access to critical subclass features.

[Drackolus]

All they actually need to do is remove the second "you can".

Or change "and you can" to "as well as".

Or, to make it super explicit, re-arrange it to something like, "By expending a spell slot when you hit a creature with this weapon, you can reduce the creature's speed to 0 until the end of your next turn and deal an extra 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level of the slot expended."
All of these remove the option of dealing damage without reducing speed/proning. For example, if you know that your bard is going to go for a dissonent whispers and you want the free reaction attack.

[some guy]

I think the Loremaster is fun, but too powerful (and the abilities more fiting to a sorcerer, as has been said). Still, I kinda want to see a lvl 6 Loremaster/lvl 6 Barbarian with the aspect of the Eagle; "I'm going to cast Maximilian’s Earthen Grasp on the guard on second left, near the palace a mile in front of me and then next round I want to move the hand to block the gate 1 mile behind me.".

[tieren]

Pretty much. I feel like choosing to play without Curse Bringer is like making a ranged Paladin, or not taking agonizing blast for whatever reason as a blaster. Can you do it? Sure, it's optional. Are you heavily gimping yourself for no real reason? Of course.

Curse Bringer is *ridiculously* strong. I would view it as mandatory personally, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

I strongly disagree, as written they are giving you a choice to sword and board using just charisma, and using your slots for things like AoA, he'll is rebuke and other spells, or in the alternative you can make a great sword user to get a little more mileage from the curse, and burn your sots on smites.

People asked for more options and they gave them. At least you don't have to go tome for shillelagh and then make an odd shield and staff character any more.

Frankly I suspect great sword in curse bringer may be a misprint, replace it with longsword and everything is fine (and gives longsword a reason to exist).

[skaddix]

Yeah HexBlade + Blade Pact does seem quite MAD.

What it really needs is something to let it not need Dexterity or Strength. Cause right now it needs CHA, CON, STR and DEX.
Honestly, your Charisma should apply to your Great Sword or make it a Long Sword. 4 Stats needed is too many. Does seem good for 3 level dip into Paladin though. Palalock. Or I guess Eldritch Knight if you are worried about spell slots lost to smite. You could dip 1 level into Stone Sorcerer to fix your Dex problem and still grab 2 of Paladin to get Smite I suppose. Also your smite being Slashing is lame. Can I not get necrotic on that? Or Force? Its all Charisma Anyway at least. Honestly, yeah I suggest 17 Warlock (HexBlade with Blade Pact), 1 Sorcerer (Stone) and 2 Paladin. Then you just need CHA, CON and STR. Granted you don't get to use your Armor Proficiencies. But oh well sacrifices have to be made.

Can anyone tell me why you shouldn't take Lore Wizard? I mean how does any other type of Wizard compete. Really you get the best of both worls in terms of Wizards and Sorcerers. Metamagic with Plenty of Spell Slots and a Long Spell List. Plus this with Stone Sorcerer is the greatest combination ever. A 1 Level Dip and all I lose is Signature Spells (1 Free Cast of 2 3 Level Spells that I don't have to prepare). A great trade for me since all I need is max INT and CON. I don't even lose my ASI's so I can easily hit 20 in CON and 20 in INT. Even going by the simple point buy put 15 into both. I even get some basic martial weapon Shield Proficiencies. It aunt even hard to role play in order to justify that decision making to your DM. Got cursed with Stone Powers went to train as a Wizard to learn more about it.

[Sception]

Too much of the subclass is tied up in the hex to pass on the ability to shift it around after killing the first target. That alone makes Curse Bringer mandatory, imo. A while you can cast other spells, I don't really feel the smite is something that can be passed up lightly, either. Frankly, even if curse bringer let you choose between a greatsword and, say, a long sword or a rapier, the greatsword would still have been a strong option just for damage dice and access to great weapon master. With exclusive access to Curse Bringer, I don't really see how the hexblade could justify anything other than a greatsword.

Again, unless you're just dipping into the class, which already feels too easy, to the point of being practically mandatory for valor bards and paladins.


IMO, pull out the hex-shifting from Curse Bringer, and make it part of a new 6th level feature (the shadow hound is cool, but weak, and off theme), and give the Curse Bringer something else. Maybe pull out the increased critical range from level one (again, way too front loaded), and give that to Curse Bringer instead.

Then make a second weapon invocation option for blade pact hexblades, this one a one handed weapon that gets the same smite damage, and allows attacks with cha instead of strength as part of that invocation.

That way cha attacks aren't so easily dippable (3 levels instead of 1), one handed hexblades get access to a smite damage invocation, and all hexblades get access to hex shifting.

[Byke]

Yeah HexBlade + Blade Pact does seem quite MAD.

What it really needs is something to let it not need Dexterity or Strength. Cause right now it needs CHA, CON, STR and DEX.
Honestly, your Charisma should apply to your Great Sword or make it a Long Sword. 4 Stats needed is too many. Does seem good for 3 level dip into Paladin though. Palalock. Or I guess Eldritch Knight if you are worried about spell slots lost to smite. You could dip 1 level into Stone Sorcerer to fix your Dex problem and still grab 2 of Paladin to get Smite I suppose. Also your smite being Slashing is lame. Can I not get necrotic on that? Or Force? Its all Charisma Anyway at least. Honestly, yeah I suggest 17 Warlock (HexBlade with Blade Pact), 1 Sorcerer (Stone) and 2 Paladin. Then you just need CHA, CON and STR. Granted you don't get to use your Armor Proficiencies. But oh well sacrifices have to be made.

Can anyone tell me why you shouldn't take Lore Wizard? I mean how does any other type of Wizard compete. Really you get the best of both worls in terms of Wizards and Sorcerers. Metamagic with Plenty of Spell Slots and a Long Spell List. Plus this with Stone Sorcerer is the greatest combination ever. A 1 Level Dip and all I lose is Signature Spells (1 Free Cast of 2 3 Level Spells that I don't have to prepare). A great trade for me since all I need is max INT and CON. I don't even lose my ASI's so I can easily hit 20 in CON and 20 in INT. Even going by the simple point buy put 15 into both. I even get some basic martial weapon Shield Proficiencies. It aunt even hard to role play in order to justify that decision making to your DM. Got cursed with Stone Powers went to train as a Wizard to learn more about it.

As other have already said Lore Wizard is broken...take a level or fighter or cleric if you want Armor and shield. It's a better trade off for a one level dip that SS.

[ZiddyT]

I strongly disagree, as written they are giving you a choice to sword and board using just charisma, and using your slots for things like AoA, he'll is rebuke and other spells, or in the alternative you can make a great sword user to get a little more mileage from the curse, and burn your sots on smites.

People asked for more options and they gave them. At least you don't have to go tome for shillelagh and then make an odd shield and staff character any more.

Frankly I suspect great sword in curse bringer may be a misprint, replace it with longsword and everything is fine (and gives longsword a reason to exist).

I think it absolutely should've been a longsword (if only to curb even more GWM shenanigans... I kinda hate that feat).

But again, yeah sword and board is an option, but it's not a particularly strong one. It's not like Paladin where they have a fighting style for it and still have access to their divine smites. You're giving up a battlefield control option, 40d8*(short rests) extra damage and the ability to transfer your curse.

I'm not arguing that options aren't good, but intentionally creating a class feature that inherently gimps your abilities that much just by virtue of wanting to *use* it is definitely not good. Granted, the fault lies with the invocation and not the feature, but it sounds like they were both created intentionally to be conflicting rather than it being an oversight.

[Drackolus]

Dunno if anyone else already thought of this, but the hexblade can also dual-wield with cha. With pact of the blade, you still get multiattack on your main hand. Then you can use your hex spell and try to apply it 3 times in a turn. You'd be missing out on the fighting style and thirsting blade wouldn't apply to your off hand though, making it a flat d6. A 1 level dip can fix this though. You can get the feat too, since you're SAD.
Just an option.

[ZZTRaider]

All of these remove the option of dealing damage without reducing speed/proning. For example, if you know that your bard is going to go for a dissonent whispers and you want the free reaction attack.

Okay, fair enough.


"By expending a spell slot when you hit a creature with this weapon, you can apply one or both of the following effects:
Reduce the creature's speed to 0 until the end of your next turn
Deal an extra 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level of the slot expended"

Probably takes a little more page space, but it's also the most flexible wording; neither effect is tied to the other, but both are contingent on spending a spell slot.

If you want to require the extra damage...

"When you hit a creature with this weapon, you may expend a spell slot to deal an extra 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level. When you do so, you may also reduce the creature's speed to 0 until the end of your next turn."

[Sception]

Yeah, 4 stats is too many, and curse bringer, while it seems to have been intended as optional, really isn't. So that first level of fighter is just as mandatory for the hexblade as it is for every other bladelock.

[skaddix]

As other have already said Lore Wizard is broken...take a level or fighter or cleric if you want Armor and shield. It's a better trade off for a one level dip that SS.

The Shield is Bonus and is there purely to boost AC some more. Stone means I only care about 2 stats in INT and CON both of which I can max to 20 with my ASIs. I wont need the Medium Armor anyway. Of course with the type of damage your dropping changing every FireBall to a mighty Force Ball. Nothing will live long enough that your Shield or Armor is likely to matter.

[Drackolus]

Okay, fair enough.


"By expending a spell slot when you hit a creature with this weapon, you can apply one or both of the following effects:
Reduce the creature's speed to 0 until the end of your next turn
Deal an extra 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level of the slot expended"

Probably takes a little more page space, but it's also the most flexible wording; neither effect is tied to the other, but both are contingent on spending a spell slot.

If you want to require the extra damage...

"When you hit a creature with this weapon, you may expend a spell slot to deal an extra 2d8 slashing damage to the target per spell level. When you do so, you may also reduce the creature's speed to 0 until the end of your next turn."

Bullet points are the way to go.
We should all suggest that in the survey. Ambiguous wording is annoying.

[Trampaige]

Edit: Totally overlooked an invocation mechanic.

[Drackolus]

The +1 blade pact invocation is horrible.

For one, it competes with extra attack, which also requires lvl5. Nobody is going to pick +1 over extra attack. Which means taking it at warlock 7, and then replacing it with the +2 version two levels later at lvl9. Alternately, if you go martial 5 first, then warlock 5, you could take it as your 5th level invocation in place of extra attack, but that's gaining a +1 weapon at level 10. Wtf?

Blade pact needs to be improved at its core, like the ranger was. How on earth did this UA not simply grant it extra attack automatically at lvl5?

And all the special weapon invocations being tied to specific weapons is bad for roleplay and variety.

You can replace a known invocation every level, and you learn one at that level as well. You could get both at level 5.

[Trampaige]

You can replace a known invocation every level, and you learn one at that level as well. You could get both at level 5.

I completely forgot that you could swap the earlier one.

Hey look, a rock. I'm going to go hide under it.

[Squiddish]

I agree that Lore Mastery might be too good. Let's break it down.


Lore Master: Expertise but for int skills, and you get to go sooner in fights. Decent, not too powerful.
Spell Secrets: Damage substitution: This can mean a few things, it leads to some obvious and powerful combos with sorcerers and tempest clerics, as well as with Elemental Adept. The other consequence is that most wizards will do almost exclusively force or radiant damage. Fortunately, it does specify that you need to cast a spell with a slot, so no cantrips or spell mastery shenanigans here. At lower levels the requirement of using a slot is a strong limit, since you only get a few each day. At higher levels it's potentially quite broken. Best suggestion for limiting would be to restrict it as an X/rest thing, maybe equal to int mod+1 per (short/long) rest.
Spell Secrets: Save substitution: This seems more broken than it is, and even if it was immensely broken I would be tempted to leave it because of how fun it is. How do you even describe a fireball that requires an int save? An explosive math problem? (Credit to Jamgretter for that one) The other thing to note is that it's once per short rest, so effectively once per encounter. This can be powerful because you can play to things weaknesses, but at the same time wizards already do that.
Alchemical Casting: This is pretty much just metamagic. I'd say you should probably replace this, but I don't know what you would replace it with.
Prodigious memory: Swap out prepared spells on the fly. Handy but not gamebreaking. Saves at most a day.
Master of Magic: Once per day cast a spell you shouldn't be able to. Nice, but hardly gamebreaking.

[Foxhound438]

Hexblade is amazing, and the invocations seem fine to me. Most people seem to be forgetting how few spell-slots Warlocks get to use them with. If these new invocations are OP, then Paladin is too with Divine Smite and its Smite spells.

no. F***ing no. paladin only scales 1d8 per slot level and caps out at 5.

On a pure warlock, fine, have 2d8 per slot level, but as a 3 level dip for a bladesinger, this is absolutely positively busted beyond repair.

[Potato_Priest]

I see no glaring problems with the warlock stuff. I'm not a big fan of hexblade flavor, and until I get someone who explains to me what one actually is, and what their basis in mythology is, I don't think I'll be playing one of them. I also don't particularly approve of the features that reduce an enemy's speed to zero with every hit. They could be particularly abused with 2 warlocks. 1 with the weapon that knocks huge or smaller enemies prone, the other with a weapon of reduce speed to zero. (I'm usually a grappler, so this is a clear case of casters taking over my groove.)

But Lore wizard. Dang. Firstly, exchanging damage types is broke for so many reasons. One of the biggest weaknesses of the wizard class is that they have to specialize in damage types, and some enemies are resistant to their best ones. (Fire and lightning) When you can cast a fireball that deals force damage, why would you ever approach an encounter in a different way? Particularly when you later get a feature that allows you to buff the damage of said fireball using a worthless 1st level slot.

[DracoKnight]

On a pure warlock, fine, have 2d8 per slot level, but as a 3 level dip for a bladesinger, this is absolutely positively busted beyond repair.

Which is why it should be limited to Pact Magic slots.

[ZiddyT]

no. F***ing no. paladin only scales 1d8 per slot level and caps out at 5.

On a pure warlock, fine, have 2d8 per slot level, but as a 3 level dip for a bladesinger, this is absolutely positively busted beyond repair.

I think you mean stone sorcerer. A blade singer brings nothing to the table except extra attack and even more MADness, considering they can't use their bladesong with a greatsword.

[Squiddish]

But Lore wizard. Dang. Firstly, exchanging damage types is broke for so many reasons. One of the biggest weaknesses of the wizard class is that they have to specialize in damage types, and some enemies are resistant to their best ones. (Fire and lightning) When you can cast a fireball that deals force damage, why would you ever approach an encounter in a different way? Particularly when you later get a feature that allows you to buff the damage of said fireball using a worthless 1st level slot.

Since when do wizards specialize in anything besides school of magic?

When you could cast a fireball that deals radiant damage.

Yeah, Alchemical Casting is just kinda crazy.

[skaddix]

I agree that Lore Mastery might be too good. Let's break it down.


Lore Master: Expertise but for int skills, and you get to go sooner in fights. Decent, not too powerful.
Spell Secrets: Damage substitution: This can mean a few things, it leads to some obvious and powerful combos with sorcerers and tempest clerics, as well as with Elemental Adept. The other consequence is that most wizards will do almost exclusively force or radiant damage. Fortunately, it does specify that you need to cast a spell with a slot, so no cantrips or spell mastery shenanigans here. At lower levels the requirement of using a slot is a strong limit, since you only get a few each day. At higher levels it's potentially quite broken. Best suggestion for limiting would be to restrict it as an X/rest thing, maybe equal to int mod+1 per (short/long) rest.
Spell Secrets: Save substitution: This seems more broken than it is, and even if it was immensely broken I would be tempted to leave it because of how fun it is. How do you even describe a fireball that requires an int save? An explosive math problem? (Credit to Jamgretter for that one) The other thing to note is that it's once per short rest, so effectively once per encounter. This can be powerful because you can play to things weaknesses, but at the same time wizards already do that.
Alchemical Casting: This is pretty much just metamagic. I'd say you should probably replace this, but I don't know what you would replace it with.
Prodigious memory: Swap out prepared spells on the fly. Handy but not gamebreaking. Saves at most a day.
Master of Magic: Once per day cast a spell you shouldn't be able to. Nice, but hardly gamebreaking.


Well Alchemical Casting, Spell Casting and Spell Secrets provide plenty of power. Prodigious Memory is essentially there for swapping in Support Spells. And Master of Magic is basically for when you need that Emergency Resurrection. So if your party gets annihilated.

I really like use something else as Initiative to be handed out more though. Break The Reign of DEX.

Lore Wizard is like they listened to all the requests for Sorcerers. More Spell Slots, More Spells Known, Damage Change, etc and decided to give it to the Wizard instead. Wizards of the Coast Indeeed.

[8wGremlin]

Simple quick build:

Warlock: Undying Light 1st
Wizard: Lore 2nd

Your Magic Missiles now are radiant and add CHA mod to damage.
so 1d4+1+Cha for each bolt.

[DracoKnight]

Simple quick build:

Warlock: Undying Light 1st
Wizard: Lore 2nd

Your Magic Missiles now are radiant and add CHA mod to damage.
so 1d4+1+Cha for each bolt.

Hell, all of your spells are Radiant. Only 4 things resist radiant damage and nothing's immune to it.

[Potato_Priest]

Power creep, anyone?

[Foxhound438]

How is a single classed hexblade even supposed to work, in the default, points-buy environment? You need a maxed strength to attack with, a highish dex to make use of medium armor, a highish con as a melee class (and especially as a melee caster). That already doesn't leave anything left for charisma, your main primary stat, so all the warlock's offensive spells, whether spell attacks or save based, are null. At least you can smite instead? Thirsting blade might as well not exist. You're not going to get much mileage out of green flame blade. Good thing you get two attacks, but you're already talking about two tax invocations, out of very few total, before you even get into fun stuff like relentless hex.



Nonvariant human, stats 16/12/14/10/9/16. You lose 1 point of AC for slightly better damage. Yes, you now need 4 ASI's to max 2 different offensive stats, but to be honest join the club on that one.

Or heck, trash that, variant human with Heavily Armored. 16/8/14/10/10/16. no problem at all.

As far as having "tax invocations", they are in fact optional. You can spread a bit thinner for broad effectiveness, or stay stacked tall in one area for optimization almost purely to that.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Simple quick build:

Warlock: Undying Light 1st
Wizard: Lore 2nd

Your Magic Missiles now are radiant and add CHA mod to damage.
so 1d4+1+Cha for each bolt.

might sound weird but here is a quick build

warlock hexblade 1 and wizard lore

curse someone as a bonus action. add your PROFICIENCY bonus to your damage rolls...ok do any damage spell you like, eat one 1 spell slot and add another 2d10 force damage

spell damage + prof bonus to every roll (scorching ray for example,,,) and another 2d10 damage

and you have medium armor from hexblade too...

[skaddix]

That is pretty broken. I mean sure some more AC would be nice I suppose especially at the lower levels but a t higher levels nothing is liable to live long enough to get close enough to hit the Lore Wizard Anyway. Especially when you can Drop that Radiant + CHA Fire Ball on them from a Mile away to soften them up.

[maxwell_wolfen]

That is pretty broken. I mean sure some more AC would be nice I suppose especially at the lower levels but a t higher levels nothing is liable to live long enough to get close enough to hit the Lore Wizard Anyway. Especially when you can Drop that Radiant + CHA Fire Ball on them from a Mile away to soften them up.

actually abi dalzim horrid wilting is a good spell now. lol .. 10d8 damage of your choice, and choose int save....


hold person, disintigrate, reverse gravity...for cha saves lol...

[Foxhound438]

Which is why it should be limited to Pact Magic slots.

precisely, it wouldn't be much of an issue at that point. I would still argue to cut scaling to 1d8 per spell level, but at least it wouldn't be the most busted melee build in the game.

[skaddix]

Honestly Flip a coin. Heads for Radiant and Tails for Force Damage.

[ZiddyT]

Hell, all of your spells are Radiant. Only 4 things resist radiant damage and nothing's immune to it.

May as well add some Phoenix to that.

Scorching What? I take all my damage guaranteed, son.

[DracoKnight]

precisely, it wouldn't be much of an issue at that point. I would still argue to cut scaling to 1d8 per spell level, but at least it wouldn't be the most busted melee build in the game.

Eh, leaving it at 2d8 is fine. For most tables you'll never hit 11th level.

EDIT: relevant because that's when they get a 3rd spell slot.

[maxwell_wolfen]

all those enchantment spells requiring int or sth else save..

[skaddix]

Plus you being a Lore Buff means you have an excuse to flip through the monster manual to see what works or force your DM to tell you what it sucks against to make sure you always pick the right damage type or its worst saving throw. If you don't know.

That said you can usually guess but Radiant and Force will never steer you wrong.

[DeAnno]

My reaction to Loremaster is... hurray for Monster Hunter (https://dnd.wizards.com/sites/default/files/media/upload/articles/UA%20Gothic%20Characters.pdf), and pseudo-proficiency with Int/Wis/Cha saves. :smallcool:

Honestly I think that despite some of the glaring issues in the article, the wealth of Warlock Invocations was a great thing and represents a good direction for UA. Also I would rather have options be good-to-overpowered, get complaints, and eventually be nerfed down, then have them being sub-mediocre and just bloating the edition with worthless chafe (hello Purple Dragon Knight).

[MrStabby]

Some of the invocations I wouldn't mind having a stab at. I have always liked blade pact warlocks but there have just been too many things that make them a little dull.

Of interest:

Mace of Dispater
So the warlock thing I didn't like was that it was hard to shove and grapple with a bladelock. Now invocations like this allow you to knock about anything huge or smaller. That is a pretty wide range of things and probably 90%+ of things below level 13 or so. Now you get all the thrill of mixing it up in combat but with the ability to add in a bit of control as well. The damage return on this is great - better than a paladin smite (from 2nd level onwards) and the chances of getting critical hits are not bad given you can knock down enemies.

Kiss of Mephistophales
It kind of shoehorns you into using your spells for fireballs - but fireball is a great spell. Maybe 3-5 times per day you get an extra free eldritch blast. Kind of comparable to action surge which isn't too shabby.

Frost lance
Awesome by power but maybe boring. Now your repelling agonising eldritch blasts get another buff. Now you can pretty much keep a lot of enemies out of melee. Like a great control spell but with a to hit roll rather than a save - which might not be bad on the archetype that gets improved invisibility.

Tomb of Levistus
I can't tell if this is great or terrible. It seems to be one of those things that when you need it, you really need it but is generally a waste of space. It takes a pretty powerful attack to get through 10hp per level, downside is you need your reaction. No chance to use counterspell on that disintegrate then use this ability.

Green Lords Gift
Now this gives the frontline warlock access to huge boosts in healing. If multiclassing is allowed then warding bond from a life cleric could be good. You kind of don't need that high wisdom when every die of healing gets maximised. Even then this is only if there is no other healer in the party. If there is a cleric then instead you could go for barbarian to get damage resistance and you can soak a huge amount of damage for little actual healing being needed. Nice with song of rest as well.

Claw of Acmar
Well this bad boy is a bit mean. Go within 10ft of an enemy, hit them with this, withdraw and they cant chase you. Less good if you get enemies with reach. I suppose this helps bladelocks a lot as they can perform better without high Con (they can use this to be hit less often).


I suspect they will need to adjust these quite a lot when it comes to multiclassing. Things like mace of dispater don't need warlock spell slots. Combining this with a more generic casting class might boost the flexibility of the invocation and reduce the chance of overkill.

Hexblade now gives access to shield for a level 1 dip. Now dipping becomes even more attractive.
Hex warrior is like a better version of Shillelagh. Now a hexblade dip looks almost mandatory for swashbucklers and paladins. Add to this the curse ability and this archetype is massively frontloaded.

Sorlocks get a lot from this as well. Booming blade is already powerful enough but more Cha based abilities tip this over the edge. On the other hand sticking with the PHB+1 guide should avoid the worst of this if it ever does see a book.

[maxwell_wolfen]

Some of the invocations I wouldn't mind having a stab at. I have always liked blade pact warlocks but there have just been too many things that make them a little dull.

Of interest:

Mace of Dispater
So the warlock thing I didn't like was that it was hard to shove and grapple with a bladelock. Now invocations like this allow you to knock about anything huge or smaller. That is a pretty wide range of things and probably 90%+ of things below level 13 or so. Now you get all the thrill of mixing it up in combat but with the ability to add in a bit of control as well. The damage return on this is great - better than a paladin smite (from 2nd level onwards) and the chances of getting critical hits are not bad given you can knock down enemies.

Kiss of Mephistophales
It kind of shoehorns you into using your spells for fireballs - but fireball is a great spell. Maybe 3-5 times per day you get an extra free eldritch blast. Kind of comparable to action surge which isn't too shabby.

Frost lance
Awesome by power but maybe boring. Now your repelling agonising eldritch blasts get another buff. Now you can pretty much keep a lot of enemies out of melee. Like a great control spell but with a to hit roll rather than a save - which might not be bad on the archetype that gets improved invisibility.

Tomb of Levistus
I can't tell if this is great or terrible. It seems to be one of those things that when you need it, you really need it but is generally a waste of space. It takes a pretty powerful attack to get through 10hp per level, downside is you need your reaction. No chance to use counterspell on that disintegrate then use this ability.

Green Lords Gift
Now this gives the frontline warlock access to huge boosts in healing. If multiclassing is allowed then warding bond from a life cleric could be good. You kind of don't need that high wisdom when every die of healing gets maximised. Even then this is only if there is no other healer in the party. If there is a cleric then instead you could go for barbarian to get damage resistance and you can soak a huge amount of damage for little actual healing being needed. Nice with song of rest as well.

Claw of Acmar
Well this bad boy is a bit mean. Go within 10ft of an enemy, hit them with this, withdraw and they cant chase you. Less good if you get enemies with reach. I suppose this helps bladelocks a lot as they can perform better without high Con (they can use this to be hit less often).


I suspect they will need to adjust these quite a lot when it comes to multiclassing. Things like mace of dispater don't need warlock spell slots. Combining this with a more generic casting class might boost the flexibility of the invocation and reduce the chance of overkill.

Hexblade now gives access to shield for a level 1 dip. Now dipping becomes even more attractive.
Hex warrior is like a better version of Shillelagh. Now a hexblade dip looks almost mandatory for swashbucklers and paladins. Add to this the curse ability and this archetype is massively frontloaded.

Sorlocks get a lot from this as well. Booming blade is already powerful enough but more Cha based abilities tip this over the edge. On the other hand sticking with the PHB+1 guide should avoid the worst of this if it ever does see a book.


even wizard can profit. you get medium armor and shield plus + bonus damage on EVERY roll from curse, only as a bonus action, without wasting any resource like hex. (and you can still get hex too).

[MrStabby]

even wizard can profit. you get medium armor and shield plus + bonus damage on EVERY roll from curse, only as a bonus action, without wasting any resource like hex. (and you can still get hex too).

Oh crap... you just made me realise that hexblade + magic missile is pretty brutal.

[MrStabby]

Oh crap... you just made me realise that hexblade + magic missile is pretty brutal.

Or even worse - the hexblade curse and spike growth. Given you could get repelling blast as well...

[maxwell_wolfen]

Or even worse - the hexblade curse and spike growth. Given you could get repelling blast as well...

the worse thing is the classic Sorlock. instead of casting hex for 1d6 damage, you get for 10 rounds the maximized of it 6 lol (for higher levels) and with no concentration. plus your usual quicken and agonizing blast EB's
free Hex spell for ALL!!! and with every roll.

[Drackolus]

A hexblade stone sorcerer could make a pact with Whelm.

[maxwell_wolfen]

hmmm

11 level battlemaster, 1 hexblade (congrats you get guaranteed bonus damage equal to your prof) +prof with 3 attacks GWM and PAM...oh myy. and you get the best feature from champion too 19 crit range
8 lvl barbarian...

[Sigreid]

well from a first glance..
a divine wizard with portent can influence the dice. ok
a lore wizard changing the saving throw is effectively the same thing. (disintegrate with int checks for example)
but the divine wizard can use portent for his own save checks as well, so defensively he is better.
obviously the lore wizard is more offensive than the other archetypes.
and still the best wizard archetype capstone IMHO is the abjurers spell resistance

The reason the save change doesn't completely freak me out is that it's 1/rest. I think I would be fine with it if it were on/long rest.

The mile range on a ranged spell doesn't bother be at all because realistically, how often is that even going to come up?

Changing the elemental type doesn't bug be because if a player just wanted to say "Can my fireball be an ice ball?" I'd say ok anyway.

Prodigious Memory doesn't bug me because it's basically a 1/rest "Damn I wish I prepared x spell" and if you picked your spells well, it shouldn't come up that often.

Master of Magic doesn't bother me because 3 levels later you can spend wish to do it for spells up to 8th level I think. Fine, instead of wish you can do a 9th level spell from another list. Woopty Fricken Doo.

Alchemical casting doesn't bother me because you're burning your spell slots faster.

I think I'm ok with it, actually.

[MrStabby]

the worse thing is the classic Sorlock. instead of casting hex for 1d6 damage, you get for 10 rounds the maximized of it 6 lol (for higher levels) and with no concentration. plus your usual quicken and agonizing blast EB's
free Hex spell for ALL!!! and with every roll.

At high levels I think there is enough stuff going on from high level spells that I worry a bit less about that.

A level 3 character doing a magic missile for a minimum of 9 damage (assuming lowest possible rolls on all dice) - not hit roll needed - roughly 8 times per day is a bit scary (ok, kind of best case).

[Potato_Priest]

Changing the elemental type doesn't bug be because if a player just wanted to say "Can my fireball be an ice ball?" I'd say ok anyway.


How about if your player said "can my fireball ignore fire resistances and immunities?"

[skaddix]

Yeah Ice Ball Fine as a theme if this was limited to Elemental I don't think there would be much grumbling besides Sorcerer's wanting this as well.
What break it is being able to pick Radiant or Force and hit everything like that have no Resistance or Immunities Period. Hard to beat pure damage essentially.

[D.U.P.A.]

Warlock makes no sense even thematically. How can be HEXBLADE a patron? The player is a Hexblade, not his patron. If they wanted to fix Pact of the blade, they could throw some invocations to fix it instead. Raven queen is just one of the patrons, will they make a patron path for every possible patron? She can be easily classified as both Archfey or Undying patron, so this does not really bring anything new.

And yay now Paladins do not need to take 3 levels to get shillelagh if they renounce to great weapon.

[skaddix]

Warlock makes no sense even thematically. How can be HEXBLADE a patron? The player is a Hexblade, not his patron. If they wanted to fix Pact of the blade, they could throw some invocations to fix it instead. Raven queen is just one of the patrons, will they make a patron path for every possible patron? She can be easily classified as both Archfey or Undying patron, so this does not really bring anything new.

And yay now Paladins do not need to take 3 levels to get shillelagh if they renounce to great weapon.

Well sentient weapons corrupting people and granting power isn't unusual in fantasy granted you usually wield the weapon. Honestly Curse Bringer should allow you to use said Weapon or at least summon a copy. Shouldn't be restricted to Great Sword and Should have something better then Slash. Or are only Wizards allowed to be super unbalanced?

[Drackolus]

Warlock makes no sense even thematically. How can be HEXBLADE a patron? The player is a Hexblade, not his patron. If they wanted to fix Pact of the blade, they could throw some invocations to fix it instead. Raven queen is just one of the patrons, will they make a patron path for every possible patron? She can be easily classified as both Archfey or Undying patron, so this does not really bring anything new.

And yay now Paladins do not need to take 3 levels to get shillelagh if they renounce to great weapon.
They just wanted to use the name. Those who make the pact with a sentient legendary weapon become Hexblades.
It breaks the naming theme, but "The Legendary Sentient Weapons Made from the Shadowfell" is just not a good name.
It could be interpereted to mean that such weapons are also known as hexblades, but I suspect it's just a matter of presentation.

[DracoKnight]

Well sentient weapons corrupting people and granting power isn't unusual in fantasy granted you usually wield the weapon. Honestly Curse Bringer should allow you to use said Weapon or at least summon a copy. Shouldn't be restricted to Great Sword and Should have something better then Slash. Or are only Wizards allowed to be super unbalanced?

Eh, it's magical slashing damage. Nothing's immune to that, and only one thing resists it. So it doesn't bother me that it's slashing damage.

[Petrocorus]

What is the Seeker patron? Is this from another UA?

[DracoKnight]

What is the Seeker patron? Is this from another UA?

It's from the Unearthed Arcana centered around Divine Faithful who aren't Clerics. It's the same one that gave us the Theurgist Wizard.

[Drackolus]

Well sentient weapons corrupting people and granting power isn't unusual in fantasy granted you usually wield the weapon. Honestly Curse Bringer should allow you to use said Weapon or at least summon a copy. Shouldn't be restricted to Great Sword and Should have something better then Slash. Or are only Wizards allowed to be super unbalanced?

I imagined that your pact weapon would be a "shadowy echo" of your patron blade. Not necessary, but I like the idea.

[Puh Laden]

I would probably make a character with a hexblade pact with the background that they found their patron as a shell of its former self. It's been so neglected that it can't even use its magic for weapon attacks. It sees the warlock as a way of restoring itself to its former glory. It cuts a deal with the warlock to use the last reserves of its power while the warlock uses it so it can be "recharged."

[Millstone85]

How can be HEXBLADE a patron? The player is a Hexblade, not his patron.
It could be interpereted to mean that such weapons are also known as hexblades, but I suspect it's just a matter of presentation.Personally, I like that interpretation.

I would also make it so the weapon wants to be found and is calling to the warlock.


Raven queen is just one of the patrons, will they make a patron path for every possible patron? She can be easily classified as both Archfey or Undying patron, so this does not really bring anything new.I wouldn't classify her as either of these. Still, I really wonder why the new patron isn't called "The Psychopomp" or "The Reaper", with the Raven Queen as an example. They did break the naming theme here.

Are they adapting the 4e Points of Light setting to 5e? Are they making the Raven Queen part of the setting-unspecific 5e Shadowfell? Something is going on here.

[Farecry]

Magic missile with alchemical casting, anyone? Guaranteed (2d10+1d4+1)x3 for two first level spell slots.

[Sigreid]

How about if your player said "can my fireball ignore fire resistances and immunities?"

First, I've at least not played a wizard that doesn't have at least 2 damage types prepared anyway.
Second, I think everyone understands that wizard damage spells are for clearing mooks and knocking invisible creatures out of their invisibility. For single target damage, you may as well use a cantrip most of the time.

So, no. Not bothered at all.

[maxwell_wolfen]

First, I've at least not played a wizard that doesn't have at least 2 damage types prepared anyway.
Second, I think everyone understands that wizard damage spells are for clearing mooks and knocking invisible creatures out of their invisibility. For single target damage, you may as well use a cantrip most of the time.

So, no. Not bothered at all.

hold person on enemy mage. target cha or str. he is held. next round send him a nice cone of cold with any type you like (and he is not resistant). he is critted too.
job done

PS. cast dimension door. go at 400 ft away. he cant counterspell you or harm you. burn a 2nd spell slot and cast hold person from 400 ft away

[SharkForce]

hold person on enemy mage. target cha or str. he is held. next round send him a nice cone of cold with any type you like (and he is not resistant). he is critted too.
job done

can't crit with saves. besides, clearly you want a disintegrate instead :P

[maxwell_wolfen]

can't crit with saves. besides, clearly you want a disintegrate instead :P

disintegrate is dexterity saving throw

let the party crit him anyway

[Tanarii]

Kiss of Mephistophales
It kind of shoehorns you into using your spells for fireballs - but fireball is a great spell. Maybe 3-5 times per day you get an extra free eldritch blast. Kind of comparable to action surge which isn't too shabby.
Kiss of Mephistopheles is a bonus spell known. Instead of spending a spell known on Fireball, you're spending an invocation. It even scales up since it uses spell slots. It's a little more limited, since you have to center it on a creature, and you have to hit that creature first. Warlocks don't suffer from limited spells known quite as much as Sorcerers due to their short rest mechanic meaning they can't go nova and their automatic upcasting. But it's still a nice benefit, so it's important to keep that in mind when evaluating the value of this invocation.

[ZZTRaider]

/u/Frank_Isaacs on this thread (http://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/5tx65d/lore_master_combos/) that a paralyzed creature automatically fails Strength and Dexterity saves. So a Lore Master wizard can use Spell Secrets to make Hold Person rely on a Strength or Dexterity save and, as long as the initial save is failed and the wizard doesn't lose concentration, the creature is paralyzed for the entire duration.

So broken.

[Armok]

Ladies.

Look at your wizard. Now back to me. Now back at your wizard. Back to me. What's that in my hand? It's a fireball. Back at your wizard. Now to me. Now it's a thunderball. Anything is possible with a degree in higher magicks from your local wizard's enclave. What's that over there? It's the versatility you could have, if you'd invested in a higher education.

I'm on a gryphon.

[skaddix]

I imagined that your pact weapon would be a "shadowy echo" of your patron blade. Not necessary, but I like the idea.

That works for me.

[Rhaegar14]

I love the idea of the unique pact weapons, but their execution is sloppy. A single-classed Warlock has no business wielding a flail or a mace unless they want to burn two feats on Heavy Armor Proficiency, and most characters can't do that even if they want to before level 8. The Moonbow is also a lackluster option to me, as it's only narrowly better than Eldritch Blast before level 17 and worse after, at the cost of a feat and multiple invocations. Curse Bringer is a bit less offensive as Hexblade gets medium armor proficiency, but still benefits from heavy armor proficiency and makes them more MAD. Were it me, I would add the Charisma to attack and damage thing from Hex Warrior to all of them. I would also allow Hexblade Patron to qualify for any of them to open their options up a bit, since the entire Patron was built for Pact of the Blade (I did not make the claim that other Pacts can't use it, just that it was pretty obviously meant for Bladelocks).

Also, please, for the love of God, can they stop giving other classes' archetypes strictly better versions of Paladin signature abilities? The smites all need to be nerfed to do the same damage as Divine Smite, if not less; again, it's the Paladin's signature ability, Warlocks have bigger spell slots to burn in the first place, and all of them have rider effects (being ranged, in the case of Moonbow).

Hexblade Patron is mechanically fine for the most part, though their L6 ability seems very nearly useless (I'm pretty sure cover doesn't actually matter for melee, if I'm wrong somebody please correct me). It might be more useful if it also countered concealment. I think Hexblade's fluff is dumb, though. If your Patron is a sentient magic weapon, why aren't you wielding that sentient magic weapon? Also, it seems especially stupid to me for them to specifically be weapons tied to the Shadowfell.

Raven Queen seems inoffensive. The features are solid enough and it's got a flavorful, if not particularly good spell list. I feel like the L14 feature doesn't fit thematically, though. Why would the Raven Queen give you a spell that creates undead?

Lore Mastery... ho boy. This is clearly one of the better Arcane Traditions, but all of the REALLY bonkers stuff it can do is limited in how often it can be used, so I'm not sure if it's quite broken.

[Drackolus]

/u/Frank_Isaacs on this thread (http://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/5tx65d/lore_master_combos/) that a paralyzed creature automatically fails Strength and Dexterity saves. So a Lore Master wizard can use Spell Secrets to make Hold Person rely on a Strength or Dexterity save and, as long as the initial save is failed and the wizard doesn't lose concentration, the creature is paralyzed for the entire duration.

So broken.

:smalleek:
Well, the good news is that, after they see the survey, they'll see what a big mistake they've made and do better. This is the strongest I've felt about pretty much any ua, and I haven't even played the wizard that much.

[SharkForce]

/u/Frank_Isaacs on this thread (http://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/5tx65d/lore_master_combos/) that a paralyzed creature automatically fails Strength and Dexterity saves. So a Lore Master wizard can use Spell Secrets to make Hold Person rely on a Strength or Dexterity save and, as long as the initial save is failed and the wizard doesn't lose concentration, the creature is paralyzed for the entire duration.

So broken.

huh.

well, that's pretty funny. also extremely broken (but then, the class feature was ridiculously overpowered even without this, so not really too surprising there).

[Sigreid]

hold person on enemy mage. target cha or str. he is held. next round send him a nice cone of cold with any type you like (and he is not resistant). he is critted too.
job done

PS. cast dimension door. go at 400 ft away. he cant counterspell you or harm you. burn a 2nd spell slot and cast hold person from 400 ft away

Changing the save is something I would personally scale back to 1/long rest. For the rest of it /shrug. Really don't find damage types a terrible threat.

[Drackolus]

Hexblade Patron is mechanically fine for the most part, though their L6 ability seems very nearly useless (I'm pretty sure cover doesn't actually matter for melee, if I'm wrong somebody please correct me).

It helps if you use eldritch blast, which is still nice to have in your back pocket. Or any thrown weapon, since you can use charisma for any non-two handed melee weapon, whether you actually use it for melee or not.

[Petrocorus]

Ladies.

Look at your wizard. Now back to me. Now back at your wizard. Back to me. What's that in my hand? It's a fireball. Back at your wizard. Now to me. Now it's a thunderball. Anything is possible with a degree in higher magicks from your local wizard's enclave. What's that over there? It's the versatility you could have, if you'd invested in a higher education.

I'm on a gryphon.

You're in dungeon with the wizard your wizard could cast like.

Awesome. Obviously said in the voice of Isaiah Mustafa.

More seriously, i second (or nth) all the post about the Lore Master being too OP. The level 2 and 6 abilities open way to far too many shenanigans and level 10 and 14 abilities are also on the upper side of power.

I also think the Hexblade has issues. The Curse is too good, it comes in addition of Hex Warrior which is already cool. Both also make the Warlock even more front-loaded than he already is and make it too good a dip for Pally and Sorcerer or even Sorcadin. The Hex Warrior should probably be a part of Pact of the Blade IMHO.

[skaddix]

It helps if you use eldritch blast, which is still nice to have in your back pocket. Or any thrown weapon, since you can use charisma for any non-two handed melee weapon, whether you actually use it for melee or not.

There is no reason not to get Eldritch Blast, its the best ranged cantrip in the game. Granted there are plenty of melee cantrips you can use. But Eldritch Blast is better then throwing weapons or a bow. Considering you can trade out old invocations for newer ones with 7 or 8 choices you should be able to get one invocation that buffs it while optimizing your melee combat.

Of course by the time they get into range for you to Eldritch Blast. Your Lore Wizard has probably roasted them all.

[Sigreid]

I think my feedback will be:


Have the first tier of abilities be either the change the damage type or change the save stat, not both.
Have the alchemy one be either the range boost or the DC boost, not all three and I'd leave the damage boost one out.


I think the expertise in knowledge skills and the other two abilities are fine.

[Chaosmancer]

Also, please, for the love of God, can they stop giving other classes' archetypes strictly better versions of Paladin signature abilities? The smites all need to be nerfed to do the same damage as Divine Smite, if not less; again, it's the Paladin's signature ability, Warlocks have bigger spell slots to burn in the first place, and all of them have rider effects (being ranged, in the case of Moonbow

Lore Mastery... ho boy. This is clearly one of the better Arcane Traditions, but all of the REALLY bonkers stuff it can do is limited in how often it can be used, so I'm not sure if it's quite broken.

Complains about Paladin abilities being given away.

Doesn't mention sorcerer abilities being given away.

Though, i will admit the lay on hands being given to the monk subclass a while back means the paladin has 2... And is still one of the best classes in the game

[Rhaegar14]

It helps if you use eldritch blast, which is still nice to have in your back pocket. Or any thrown weapon, since you can use charisma for any non-two handed melee weapon, whether you actually use it for melee or not.

Yeah, but on a melee-oriented character like a Hexblade Bladelock, how often is that honestly going to come up? I said it's NEARLY useless, not completely useless. I think if it added advantage to Intimidate checks (playing off that vague sense of dread fluff text) it'd be fine. The Hexblade could use a noncombat ability in there somewhere.

@Chaosmancer, I play a Paladin in my home campaign and it's a class that's near and dear to my heart, so I recognize that more immediately. What Sorcerer ability got pawned off? I don't actually know what you're referring to in your snark.

[skaddix]

??? The Lore Mastery Wizard basically is the Sorcerer + Wizard. In one class, the metamagic of the sorcerer with the spell slots and spell selection of the Wizard.

But yeah the Shadow Hound is Trash. Honestly be more useful if you got something like the Raven Ability. Some sort of movement ability would be nice. Teleport to the target would be useful. Or Switch Places with your hound. Something like that would be useful.

[Sigreid]

??? The Lore Mastery Wizard basically is the Sorcerer + Wizard. In one class, the metamagic of the sorcerer with the spell slots and spell selection of the Wizard.

Not really. Lore has some fun toys, but they can't sculpt a spell, they can't cast subtle, they can't quicken, they can't twin, etc. And other wizard classes had some over lap already (I'm looking at you Evoker, with your superior sculpting of evocation damage spells).

As I posted earlier, I do think lore is given a bit too much. I'd loose half to 2/3 of their options from the first two tiers.

[skaddix]

Not really. Lore has some fun toys, but they can't sculpt a spell, they can't cast subtle, they can't quicken, they can't twin, etc. And other wizard classes had some over lap already (I'm looking at you Evoker, with your superior sculpting of evocation damage spells).

As I posted earlier, I do think lore is given a bit too much. I'd loose half to 2/3 of their options from the first two tiers.

I didn't say it was a perfect copy. But the Lore's Abilities are pretty metamagic inspired if you ask me.

They can sculpt spells not in the same way sure but its still useful
1) Choose Damage Type
2) Change which Save gets Targeted
3) Arcane Damage Boost
4) Change Range
5) Change DC

Granted if you want to say Sorcerer Metamagic is more versatile I would agree. Damage wise it kinda washes out but the Sorcerer does have more of the buff options.

[Rhaegar14]

I didn't say it was a perfect copy. But the Lore's Abilities are pretty metamagic inspired if you ask me.

They can sculpt spells not in the same way sure but its still useful
1) Choose Damage Type
2) Change which Save gets Targeted
3) Arcane Damage Boost
4) Change Range
5) Change DC

Granted if you want to say Sorcerer Metamagic is more versatile I would agree. Damage wise it kinda washes out but the Sorcerer does have more of the buff options.

Yeah, I kind of have to disagree that it's the same thing as my Paladin complaint, though I agree they're somewhat similar conceptually. My problem is not giving the Warlocks a spellstrike mechanic -- on the contrary, I think that's awesome and thematically appropriate. My problem with it is that it works almost exactly the same as, but is strictly better than what is quite arguably the Paladin's single most defining ability.

Also, having reread the save change feature on Lore Mastery, it's definitely overpowered. On my first read I thought it only recharged on a long rest. That's a reasonable ability once a day, but not 3 or more times.

[Dudu]

The mere fact you can compare the perks of a subclass with the core feature of an entire class is troubling.

I know the content of the UA is meant to be playtested before being officially avaible, so they will likely to be flawed, but a quick look at Lore Wiz would be enough to notice it was too powerful.

[skaddix]

First The Wizards Came For The Cleric.
Then The Wizards Came For the Sorcerer.

Who will they strike next?

As for Warlocks getting a better smite. I think it balances out considering Warlocks can only cast 8 Spells without rest. Paladins get 16.

[Rhaegar14]

As for Warlocks getting a better smite. I think it balances out considering Warlocks can only cast 8 Spells without rest. Paladins get 16.

Not when the Paladin's smite caps at 5d8 damage and the Warlock's caps at 10d8. Plus, if you assume two short rests (and a Warlock is not a functional member of the party if they're not getting short rests), a 20th level (for ease of comparison) Warlock is getting 160d8 extra damage if they smite with all of their slots (they wouldn't, but again, ease of comparison), while the Paladin is getting 54d8 extra damage with all of theirs. That's barely a third. The Warlock comes out ahead as early as 3rd level (which, by the way, is the level they GET Pact of the Blade), with 24d8 extra damage in smites compared to Paladin's 6d8. The Warlock even wins without any short rests at that level, with both of their slots getting them a total of 8d8 damage. And that's not even factoring in any smites that get doubled by crits (the time they're most often used), which would only widen the Warlock's advantage. All this bearing in mind that, although the Warlock is a full caster, they do not get any spell slots above 5th level that they could use for this ability.

I feel like those numerical comparisons make it pretty clear how unacceptable the disparity is, but I also felt like the disparity was unacceptable before I even broke down the numbers, so you may disagree.

[Foxhound438]

Not when the Paladin's smite caps at 5d8 damage and the Warlock's caps at 10d8. Plus, if you assume two short rests (and a Warlock is not a functional member of the party if they're not getting short rests), a 20th level (for ease of comparison) Warlock is getting 160d8 extra damage if they smite with all of their slots (they wouldn't, but again, ease of comparison), while the Paladin is getting 54d8 extra damage with all of theirs. That's barely a third. The Warlock comes out ahead as early as 3rd level (which, by the way, is the level they GET Pact of the Blade), with 24d8 extra damage in smites compared to Paladin's 6d8. The Warlock even wins without any short rests at that level, with both of their slots getting them a total of 8d8 damage. And that's not even factoring in any smites that get doubled by crits (the time they're most often used), which would only widen the Warlock's advantage. All this bearing in mind that, although the Warlock is a full caster, they do not get any spell slots above 5th level that they could use for this ability.

I feel like those numerical comparisons make it pretty clear how unacceptable the disparity is, but I also felt like the disparity was unacceptable before I even broke down the numbers, so you may disagree.

^ this, and it gets even worse with multiclassing since there's no cap to the warlock's "smite" damage that scales twice as fast as the class they ripped it from.

[MrStabby]

I am less worried about the Paladin being copied than the sorcerer. The paladin is a melee focused class with some spells. The warlock is a spell focused class with a little melee. That the warlock can make better use of their spell slots than the paladin doesn't either surprise me or really bother me.

Now if the Warlock started getting abilities like the Paladin Aura I would worry for the paladin, that is uniquely paladin, but using a class ability to do more damage on melee attacks is not uncommon.



For me the sorcerer is more of a worry. Both are casting focused classes so this ability brings them both closer together than it brings the warlock and paladin. Whilst adding damage to melee attacks is kind of a thing for many classes modifying spells is pretty much sorcerer only, and the wizard does it much better. For the sorcery points needed to buy a level 1 spell - the cost for the wizard of their "metamagic" - a sorcerer can quicken a spell to cast a firebolt. Now the firebolt may, at the highest of levels, do 4d10 damage - but more likely in the order of 2d10. But that damage will be fire damage (so commonly resisted) and will be to one target. The lore wizard can throw a fireball, hit multiple targets and apply 2d10 force damage to all of them.

[Garresh]

While I agree that Hexblades will want to go Two-Handed in order to be optimal, something I think people are overlooking is that one-handed hexblades make the ultimate "switch-hitter". They can pick up the extra attack invocation and the agonizing blast invocation, and still have one to spare. This means they can be extremely effective in melee, or at range, in addition to running a shield so they can have great AC as well. They have no problem pumping Con since they only use 2 attributes, and their spell saves won't suffer because they opted to run blade pact.

The ability to have good spells, melee, ranged, AC, and health in one package is pretty dang tempting. Ultimately, it comes down to preference as to which style you want to go for.

[Zalabim]

I seem to have reached my multiquote limit. I didn't know there was one. I'll have to edit this later.
[EDITed once]My overall impression is that they decided to just give us everything anyone had ever asked for, more or less. I'm sure that's not really a good idea for balance. And that shadow hound idea is still lurking around for some reason. I don't like it here either.

Hexblade gets medium armor, shields, cha with melee weapons, hex without spell slot, hex without an action, and displacement-style miss chance.

Raven Queen gets a familiar that lets you scout with it, see through it without an action, and be carried by it while you're invisible.

It's like a combination of every crazy idea and every wishful misconception about warlocks bundled together with the biggest middle finger to sorcerers I have seen yet. I'm not sure if Lore Mastery is particularly overpowered, but it is just mean.


On all these Pact Blade Invocations ... which do you think is the correct way to read them:

Interpretation number 1:
On a hit:
A) You can spend a spell slot to do and extra 2d8 damage per level
B) You reduce the creature's speed to 0 (or knock it prone for the Mace of Dispater)

I think it's number 1. The moonbow explicitly doesn't require the slot to be spent, and all the other weapons would seem to be worse than what you would normally choose to summon outside of when you actually smite with them.

I noticed none of the invocations were for Undying Warlocks. Are we just going to pretend SCAG never happened?
It may just be that Undying is really bad, but it'd also be kind of awkward in a PHB+1 sense to have new invocations in unnamed player options expansion book that require a patron from another book besides the PHB.

Between smite damage and hex shifting (a critical option, given you only get one hex per rest), I do not think Curse Bringer can be considered an option that one can reasonably delay until the late game, let alone pass on altogether.

As such, taking Curse Bringer is critical asap, so at no levels can let strength languish. You might raise cha some in the late game for thirsting blade, but a single classed hexblade should never be attacking with it, and as such might as well not (and probably shouldn't) get it as an option in the first place.

Or, better yet, the smite damage should have been made part of the blade pact to begin with, and hex-shifting should have been made a higher level hexblade feature (perhaps in place of the cool-but-off-theme shadow hound). Then you could have a cool, strong, greatsword pact invocation for strength hexblades without cha hexblades feeling like they were missing critical class features by not taking it.
I do agree the level 3 benefits for Pact of the Blade need to be improved, but I don't know if the Smite option is the best choice for that. The class won't have many spare spell slots until much later.

You're forgetting that Hexblade is just the patron. There can be Hexblades that don't use pact of the blade at all. That's who Hex Warrior benefits.

A hexblade pact of the blade is as MAD as a ranger using a Str weapon. I'd advise still taking Heavily Armored ASAP so that Dex isn't as important, just like PHB bladelocks. There's also still the option of waiting until you get a Strength replacing magic item and only taking that invocation later.

On a pure warlock, fine, have 2d8 per slot level, but as a 3 level dip for a bladesinger, this is absolutely positively busted beyond repair.
The weapon you get has to use Str, except the Longbow, so there's some stat anti-synergy. Then you don't actually gain much of anything over the warlock.

Spending all the level 20 warlock's slots gives you 40D8 over 4 slots, plus 4 slots from the Eldritch Master capstone, and plus 4 slots per short rest. With two rests, that's 160D8 over 16 slots. You still have your Mystic Arcanum.

Spending all of a level 3 warlock/level 17 bladesinger's slots gives you 150D8 +8D8 per short rest, +18D8 from Arcane Recovery. With two short rests, that's 184D8 over 27 slots and you have nothing else left. You're probably better off casting Meteor Swarm than smiting with your 9th level slot, too. You only get a few smites that are any stronger than the warlock's individually, about enough for one round a day, and then you're taking much longer to output any more total damage from the feature.

If each smite did 2d8+1d8 per level, 6d8 for a 5th level slot, 27 average damage, I'd be sorely tempted to never use it at all and spend all my slots on Armor of Agathys and Hellish Rebukes.

I see no glaring problems with the warlock stuff. I'm not a big fan of hexblade flavor, and until I get someone who explains to me what one actually is, and what their basis in mythology is, I don't think I'll be playing one of them.
I made a bargain with an ancient sentient weapon that was used in humanity's last great war. Her name is Zefiris and she grants me flight, protection, and magical energy blasts. I think her true from is some kind of huge dragon-mech-thing. My name is Shannon Casull and I am an anime character.

But also Elric with Stormbringer, Arthas with Frostmourne, and all of Warcraft's Death Knights.


I also don't particularly approve of the features that reduce an enemy's speed to zero with every hit. They could be particularly abused with 2 warlocks. 1 with the weapon that knocks huge or smaller enemies prone, the other with a weapon of reduce speed to zero. (I'm usually a grappler, so this is a clear case of casters taking over my groove.)
Two dudes with big sticks beat another dude down so hard he can't even get up. They keep swinging until he's dead. This is casters now, folks.

[D-naras]

Regarding the lack of Undying invocations, I bet that that's because these new invocations will only reference core + the book they will inevitably be in. It is safe to assume that all players will have access to the PHB but not necessarily the SCAG.

[Millstone85]

Nevermind the absence of Undying invocations. Where are the Chain invocations?

[MrStabby]

Nevermind the absence of Undying invocations. Where are the Chain invocations?

Hmm. A good point. Only one Tome invocation (and that limited to one patron) and no chain invocations. Somewhat saddened.

[EKruze]

Granted if you want to say Sorcerer Metamagic is more versatile I would agree. Damage wise it kinda washes out but the Sorcerer does have more of the buff options.

The crazy thing of it is that Sorcerer's aren't really more versatile in their Metamagic options. Yes, the Sorcerer class has a slightly larger collection of options that the Lore Master subclass but an individual Sorcerer knows how to use two of them, a third when they get into Tier 3. This Wizard subclass gets all of these options.

[kladams707]

Just my initial reaction to hexblade:

Can armor of Hexes counter criticals?

[Mikal]

Just my initial reaction to hexblade:

Can armor of Hexes counter criticals?

I'd say yes. It's a straight 50% miss chance if you get hit by your Curse target.

[Sigreid]

I didn't say it was a perfect copy. But the Lore's Abilities are pretty metamagic inspired if you ask me.

They can sculpt spells not in the same way sure but its still useful
1) Choose Damage Type
2) Change which Save gets Targeted
3) Arcane Damage Boost
4) Change Range
5) Change DC

Granted if you want to say Sorcerer Metamagic is more versatile I would agree. Damage wise it kinda washes out but the Sorcerer does have more of the buff options.

From my view point Lore seems to be an attempt to re-create the Archmage PRC from 3.x. The abilities match up pretty well.

[Haldir]

Yeah, but on a melee-oriented character like a Hexblade Bladelock, how often is that honestly going to come up? I said it's NEARLY useless, not completely useless. I think if it added advantage to Intimidate checks (playing off that vague sense of dread fluff text) it'd be fine. The Hexblade could use a noncombat ability in there somewhere.

You want to give MORE to the Hexblade? You'd like my table, I give my players new and ridiculous toys every session.

[Sicarius Victis]

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but I found something that ought to be pointed out: The Hexblade, even though it's usable with other Boons, is mainly intended for Bladelocks. Hexblade Warlocks get access to Magic Weapon and Elemental Weapon, which would both be more useful for Bladelock than anyone else. However, as Bladelocks' Pact Blades are inherently magical, they can't use Magic Weapon or Elemental Weapon on them. Something seems a bit wrong there.

[Zalabim]

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but I found something that ought to be pointed out: The Hexblade, even though it's usable with other Boons, is mainly intended for Bladelocks. Hexblade Warlocks get access to Magic Weapon and Elemental Weapon, which would both be more useful for Bladelock than anyone else. However, as Bladelocks' Pact Blades are inherently magical, they can't use Magic Weapon or Elemental Weapon on them. Something seems a bit wrong there.
That's because Hexblade lets you be a bladelock without taking Pact of the Blade.

[Sicarius Victis]

That's because Hexblade lets you be a bladelock without taking Pact of the Blade.

Really. I never would have guessed.

However, if you're using a weapon (you know, to actually make use of what you get from the subclass), then Bladelock is still the better choice, for just about everything. And yet, Magic Weapon and Elemental Weapon are both completely useless for them.

[DivisibleByZero]

Nevermind the absence of Undying invocations. Where are the Chain invocations?

The main complaint with Warlocks, whether you agree with the masses or not, was that Pact of the Blade didn't offer enough to be functional at what it was designed for. This UA addressed that with Hexblade and multiple new Invocations.
If you wanted options for Chainlock and Tomelock from this UA, the Raven Queen Patron has you covered.

[Vorpalchicken]

Does it seem like Moon Bow and Swift Quiver are incompatible (for MC bards and rangers) or can you just ignore the extra arrow that forms? Or do you turn into Robin Hood, Prince of Cheese and fire two arrows with every pull of the bow?

[jaappleton]

Ladies.

Look at your wizard. Now back to me. Now back at your wizard. Back to me. What's that in my hand? It's a fireball. Back at your wizard. Now to me. Now it's a thunderball. Anything is possible with a degree in higher magicks from your local wizard's enclave. What's that over there? It's the versatility you could have, if you'd invested in a higher education.

I'm on a gryphon.

This is legitimately the greatest post I've seen on this forum.

Bravo.

-slow clap-

[tieren]

Does it seem like Moon Bow and Swift Quiver are incompatible (for MC bards and rangers) or can you just ignore the extra arrow that forms? Or do you turn into Robin Hood, Prince of Cheese and fire two arrows with every pull of the bow?

Don't forget it removes the ammo limitation from Ranger's volley ability too so a decent ranger can kill entire armies.

[DivisibleByZero]

Does it seem like Moon Bow and Swift Quiver are incompatible (for MC bards and rangers) or can you just ignore the extra arrow that forms? Or do you turn into Robin Hood, Prince of Cheese and fire two arrows with every pull of the bow?

Moon Bow: When you draw back its string and fire, it creates an arrow of white wood, which vanishes after 1 minute.
Swift Quiver: On each of your turns until the spell ends, you can use a bonus action to make two attacks with a weapon that uses ammunition from the quiver. Each time you make such a ranged attack, your quiver magically replaces the piece of ammunition you used with a similar piece of nonmagical ammunition.

Technically a Bow is a weapon that uses ammunition from a quiver. The fact that your Moon Bow creates its own ammunition doesn't change this fact.
So the Swift Quiver spell overwrites the Moon Bow's normal properties, because that's what it says that the Swift Quiver spell does, and you get to make two additional attacks. But in so doing, the arrows are no longer considered magical (which, as being from your Pact Weapon, they were before). I fail to see the problem.

[Zalabim]

Really. I never would have guessed.
A lot of people seem to ignore that.


However, if you're using a weapon (you know, to actually make use of what you get from the subclass), then Bladelock is still the better choice, for just about everything. And yet, Magic Weapon and Elemental Weapon are both completely useless for them.
They can still cast it for others then.

Does it seem like Moon Bow and Swift Quiver are incompatible (for MC bards and rangers) or can you just ignore the extra arrow that forms? Or do you turn into Robin Hood, Prince of Cheese and fire two arrows with every pull of the bow?

I'll ask you the question I asked the last time this came up: Assuming you have a quiver to use Swift Quiver on, how many rounds does it take for the attacks from Swift Quiver to be better than the average 45 damage of a Moon Smite with that spell slot?

[Nishant]

just a thought on the 'smite' mechanic for warlocks; yes, they can burn their slots for crazy burst damage then need to take a nap like a paladin, but at 11th level, Paladins get the bonus 1d8 radiant on every hit, even without smiting. It's not a whole lot, but it is something to be considered when you're dealing an extra 2d8 per turn without burning anything. Even with the pact of the blade smiting, I don't feel like paladin is being pushed to the side.

[Mikal]

just a thought on the 'smite' mechanic for warlocks; yes, they can burn their slots for crazy burst damage then need to take a nap like a paladin, but at 11th level, Paladins get the bonus 1d8 radiant on every hit, even without smiting. It's not a whole lot, but it is something to be considered when you're dealing an extra 2d8 per turn without burning anything. Even with the pact of the blade smiting, I don't feel like paladin is being pushed to the side.

True though a Bladelock can get Lifedrinker for 4-5 damage necrotic one level later (assuming their Cha is topped off) as well as Hex if they want to use a slot.

[Nishant]

True though a Bladelock can get Lifedrinker for 4-5 damage necrotic one level later (assuming their Cha is topped off)

Fair enough. Which still fits into the tax idea of playing a bladelock.. thirsting blade, lifedrinker, smite invocation, and the improved pact weapon shore up the gap a bit, but against it oddly still doesn't compare to what an eldritch blast focused warlock can do with 2 or three invocations. (An archfey using frost lance and repelling blast, for example.)

Edit; and by another note, if you want to delve further into Hexblade invocations, taking relentless hex and chilling/burning hex is another two of your eight invocations. The opportunity cost feels almost like a balancing measure in its own right.

[DivisibleByZero]

Fair enough. Which still fits into the tax idea of playing a bladelock.. thirsting blade, lifedrinker, smite invocation, and the improved pact weapon shore up the gap a bit, but against it oddly still doesn't compare to what an eldritch blast focused warlock can do with 2 or three invocations. (An archfey using frost lance and repelling blast, for example.)

Archfey does nothing for damage, nor does frost lance.
I think you mean Burning/Chilling Hex, which adds Cha mod damage once as a bonus action.
But even then, Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, and a psuedo-smite can also be used with those Hex Invocations as a bonus action.

[Nishant]

Archfey does nothing for damage, nor does frost lance.
I think you mean Burning/Chilling Hex, which adds Cha mod damage once as a bonus action.
But even then, Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, and a psuedo-smite can also be used with those Hex Invocations as a bonus action.

I was actually comparing the opportunity cost between pact of the blade and the standard eldritch blaster, and how there is still a huge gap between the two options; damage is less of an issue if you keep pushing the bladelock 40 feet away and cutting his speed by ten.

[Deleted]

First The Wizards Came For The Cleric.
Then The Wizards Came For the Sorcerer.

Who will they strike next?

As for Warlocks getting a better smite. I think it balances out considering Warlocks can only cast 8 Spells without rest. Paladins get 16.

Wizards in 3e were better fighters than fighters and the Blade Tradition makes for a great archer in 5e...

6e core classes will have three core classes.

Wizard (Divine): Archivist
Wizard (Martial): Swordmage
Wizard (Arcane): Wizard

[DivisibleByZero]

I was actually comparing the opportunity cost between pact of the blade and the standard eldritch blaster, and how there is still a huge gap between the two options; damage is less of an issue if you keep pushing the bladelock 40 feet away and cutting his speed by ten.

Just because a blastlock is *arguably* functionally more powerful in a white-room vacuum that never actually happens at the table with a DM who doesn't know how to use terrain and circumstance to create a challenge for players doesn't mean that a bladelock is somehow the lesser choice.
That has never been the case. But people use it as a basis to claim that the Bladelock is subpar, when in reality it is (especially now) and has always been, perfectly fine.


the Blade Tradition makes for a great archer in 5e...

Using a bow (as an archer would) requires two hands to make an attack, and as such ends Bladesong. So no, the Blade Tradition does not make a great archer. Not at all. Blade and archery are mutually exclusive.

[Vorpalchicken]

Moon Bow: When you draw back its string and fire, it creates an arrow of white wood, which vanishes after 1 minute.
Swift Quiver: On each of your turns until the spell ends, you can use a bonus action to make two attacks with a weapon that uses ammunition from the quiver. Each time you make such a ranged attack, your quiver magically replaces the piece of ammunition you used with a similar piece of nonmagical ammunition.

Technically a Bow is a weapon that uses ammunition from a quiver. The fact that your Moon Bow creates its own ammunition doesn't change this fact.
So the Swift Quiver spell overwrites the Moon Bow's normal properties, because that's what it says that the Swift Quiver spell does, and you get to make two additional attacks. But in so doing, the arrows are no longer considered magical (which, as being from your Pact Weapon, they were before). I fail to see the problem.

Why do you assume the arrows aren't magical? When you fire normal arrows from a magic bow those are considered magical. The problem I see is an annoying extra arrow appears when you draw the bowstring after you've already knocked it with an arrow from the quiver. So can you ignore that property? Or can you let the extra arrow drop to the ground? Or can you shoot both a la Costner? (Kinda kidding about shooting both)

[Nishant]

Just because a blastlock is *arguably* functionally more powerful in a white-room vacuum that never actually happens at the table with a DM who doesn't know how to use terrain and circumstance to create a challenge for players doesn't mean that a bladelock is somehow the lesser choice.
That has never been the case. But people use it as a basis to claim that the Bladelock is subpar, when in reality it is (especially now) and has always been, perfectly fine.



Using a bow (as an archer would) requires two hands to make an attack, and as such ends Bladesong. So no, the Blade Tradition does not make a great archer. Not at all. Blade and archery are mutually exclusive.

Which is also fair. The few times I've played a warlock, I found using repelling blast in conjunction with terrain to be extremely helpful (I.e. Pushing someone down a chasm, pushing them into and behind furniture, shattering things for difficult terrain, etc.) but not every DM plays the same, so my experience will differ from others. That being said, I would still play Hexblade for the fun of it, I just wanted to point out 'expensive' it is, so to speak.

[jaappleton]

Why do you assume the arrows aren't magical? When you fire normal arrows from a magic bow those are considered magical. The problem I see is an annoying extra arrow appears when you draw the bowstring after you've already knocked it with an arrow from the quiver. So can you ignore that property? Or can you let the extra arrow drop to the ground? Or can you shoot both a la Costner? (Kinda kidding about shooting both)

Costner? Pfft. Cary Elwes all the way.

[Beechgnome]

Regarding the lack of Undying invocations, I bet that that's because these new invocations will only reference core + the book they will inevitably be in. It is safe to assume that all players will have access to the PHB but not necessarily the SCAG.

That makes sense. But it only serves to illustrate how unnecessary SCAG was. Most of it was reheated 'history' and of the new classes, I think swashbuckler is the only one that has seen action at our table.

[Byke]

The level 1 Hex Warrior abilities should have been baked into Pact of the Blade. The rest of the Hex blade class abilities should focused on Curses and non-invocation upgrades to the weapon.

[solidork]

Why do you assume the arrows aren't magical? When you fire normal arrows from a magic bow those are considered magical. The problem I see is an annoying extra arrow appears when you draw the bowstring after you've already knocked it with an arrow from the quiver. So can you ignore that property? Or can you let the extra arrow drop to the ground? Or can you shoot both a la Costner? (Kinda kidding about shooting both)

Plus, I mean, if they weren't magical then you wouldn't even be able to damage any lycanthropes with it.

[Deleted]

Using a bow (as an archer would) requires two hands to make an attack, and as such ends Bladesong.* So no, the Blade Tradition does not make a great archer.* Not at all.* Blade and archery are mutually exclusive.

You are being short sighted.

Everyone needs to repeat after me. Just because you have options doesn't mean you have to use all options with each other at all times. Repeat about a thousand times and get back to me.

Shield, Absorb Elements, Blur, Magic Weapon, Haste, greater invisibility and many other spells WITH the spell slots to back them up (take that 1/3 casters).

You use blade song if you are going into melee or forced into melee. it is a great defensive ability to be able to improve your AC by Int mod and being able to pull out a rapier will put enemies off gaurd (if roleplayed correctly).

Pick up whatever feat you prefer, crossbow mastery if you want to be more melee shooter or sharpshooter/skulker if you are going to be a ranaged archery or sneaky archery (you have greater invisibility a level after you get extra attack).

Not only will you keep up with the expectations of the game with regards to martial damage... You have a TON of spell choices to mix things up.

The biggest thing is that you are a full caster who gets extra attack. The bladesong is best used as a defensive tool or if you feel like going melee (pick up Booming Blade/Greenflame Blade as a backup).

[DivisibleByZero]

Why do you assume the arrows aren't magical?

I assume nothing. I read it in the rules and the description for the Swift Quiver spell.
Swift Quiver: On each of your turns until the spell ends, you can use a bonus action to make two attacks with a weapon that uses ammunition from the quiver. Each time you make such a ranged attack, your quiver magically replaces the piece of ammunition you used with a similar piece of nonmagical ammunition.

[Vorpalchicken]

And if you fire a non magical arrow from a magic bow it becomes magical.

[DivisibleByZero]

And if you fire a non magical arrow from a magic bow it becomes magical.

Except that the spell specifically overwrites that and states very plainly that it is nonmagical.

[metaridley18]

Except that the spell specifically overwrites that and states very plainly that it is nonmagical.

Which the bow makes magical again, due to magical bows making ammo they fire magic.

Both these effects trigger roughly simultaneously so you can't argue one way or the other which one overrides. It's a DM call.

For the record I think the intent is that swift quiver doesn't make ammo magical just because it is a spell, but it will allow you to use your magic weapon with it. Without clarification it will be a DM ruling.

[Vorpalchicken]

Except that the spell specifically overwrites that and states very plainly that it is nonmagical.
I don't see how your quiver refilling itself with nonmagical ammunition has anything to do with the bow-induced magic arrow you just fired. That ammunition would also become magical when fired.

[JellyPooga]

Has anyone considered the possibilities of Gaze of Khirad? It seems like a really cool ability, but I'm not sure about it actual applicability. I can see some potential using it in conjunction with Misty Step to 'port through walls or locked doors and there's obviously some application in trap-finding, but aside from that I'm not seeing a great deal of use.

[Nishant]

Has anyone considered the possibilities of Gaze of Khirad? It seems like a really cool ability, but I'm not sure about it actual applicability. I can see some potential using it in conjunction with Misty Step to 'port through walls or locked doors and there's obviously some application in trap-finding, but aside from that I'm not seeing a great deal of use.

My mind goes to spying on a group in another room through a solid wall, or scanning for trap mechanisms.

[metaridley18]

Has anyone considered the possibilities of Gaze of Khirad? It seems like a really cool ability, but I'm not sure about it actual applicability. I can see some potential using it in conjunction with Misty Step to 'port through walls or locked doors and there's obviously some application in trap-finding, but aside from that I'm not seeing a great deal of use.

It's kind of a ribbon ability. Not super powerful, but the cool factor as well as the Intel of just KNOWING what's beyond that next door is great.

Also I think as written you can use Action Surge with it to cast ranged CC spells that require you to see the target, even through walls. Most of those don't require line of effect.

[DivisibleByZero]

Which the bow makes magical again, due to magical bows making ammo they fire magic.

If that were the case, then there would be absolutely zero reason to include that passage at all. It becomes irrelevant and redundant.
The general rule is that nonmagical arrows fired from a magical bow become magical. The specific rule from the spell supercedes the general rule.
The two arrows fired from the bonus action via Swift Quiver are nonmagical, just like the text of the spell states.

[SharkForce]

gaze of khirad is interesting enough that i would seriously consider going GOO lock just for that ability. it gives you at-will X-ray vision... when you're walking through a dungeon, you can see what's in the hallways beside you, and possibly into the next room. you can look through the ground, through walls, basically guarantee that you'll spot secret doors, traps, hidden compartments, find out what's in containers without opening them, you should probably be able to use it to see through smoke, fog, and mist as well (water particles are objects)... it's pretty danged awesome. bit of a shame that it uses an action, but i think it's among my favourite abilities now :P

(you could also use it to take total cover while still directing a spell or something like that).

[Albonor]

Now I want to make a Warlock that worships a giant book.

That would have been very convenient for me as the warlock player in my campaign is pretty much getting his powers from a mysterious book he found himself with after two years of amnesia. Fiend pact (he REALLY wanted fireball) + Tome makes it ok but I'm left trying to include an Archevil in a story where they don't belong...

[metaridley18]

If that were the case, then there would be absolutely zero reason to include that passage at all. It becomes irrelevant and redundant.
The general rule is that nonmagical arrows fired from a magical bow become magical. The specific rule from the spell supercedes the general rule.
The two arrows fired from the bonus action via Swift Quiver are nonmagical, just like the text of the spell states.

Like I said, I think the reason is to clarify that the pieces of ammo aren't magical just because they're created via a spell. Magic weapons should still function as normal with nonmagical magically created ammunition. There's even a stronger case for this than I thought, since the spell doesn't create the ammo as you fire, but before you do, directly into your quiver. So the later, magic weapon effect will still work normally.


If you rule it your way it's a huge nerf to a very late game spell. Many of the monsters you face at the level it comes online for Rangers are flat immune to nonmagical weapons.

[deathadder99]

If that were the case, then there would be absolutely zero reason to include that passage at all. It becomes irrelevant and redundant.
The general rule is that nonmagical arrows fired from a magical bow become magical. The specific rule from the spell supercedes the general rule.
The two arrows fired from the bonus action via Swift Quiver are nonmagical, just like the text of the spell states.

I'm not sure that's quite the case - it places nonmagical arrows back into the quiver. You then can draw them and fire them no? I assume the non-magical arrows rule is just so you can't use it to clone magic arrows.

[DivisibleByZero]

(you could also use it to take total cover while still directing a spell or something like that).

Nope.
It uses your action, and ends when your turn does. No casting except for bonus action spells, of which you have zero that target enemies, so it becomes moot.

[SharkForce]

If that were the case, then there would be absolutely zero reason to include that passage at all. It becomes irrelevant and redundant.
The general rule is that nonmagical arrows fired from a magical bow become magical. The specific rule from the spell supercedes the general rule.
The two arrows fired from the bonus action via Swift Quiver are nonmagical, just like the text of the spell states.

there are 2 reasons to include that passage.

1) if you had magic arrows in your quiver, swift quiver won't let you fire an infinite number of magic arrows.
2) if you're fighting an enemy with resistance or immunity to nonmagic weapon damage, and you don't have a magic bow, the arrows from swift quiver (in spite of being magically created) are not magical enough to bypass the resistance or immunity.

[Xethik]

If that were the case, then there would be absolutely zero reason to include that passage at all. It becomes irrelevant and redundant.
The general rule is that nonmagical arrows fired from a magical bow become magical. The specific rule from the spell supercedes the general rule.
The two arrows fired from the bonus action via Swift Quiver are nonmagical, just like the text of the spell states.
No it doesn't? It states that the arrows you fire with the bonus action are REPLACED with nonmagical arrows.

And then when you grab these nonmagical arrows and fire them out of the bow, they become magic again. I'm fairly certain that text is there to stop you from duplicating Arrows of Slaying and the like.

[DivisibleByZero]

No it doesn't? It states that the arrows you fire with the bonus action are REPLACED with nonmagical arrows.

And then when you grab these nonmagical arrows and fire them out of the bow, they become magic again. I'm fairly certain that text is there to stop you from duplicating Arrows of Slaying and the like.

Fair point.
I guess I always just read it as replacing the arrow you drew, as in, you drew this new arrow instead. But in reading it again, it says the "quiver" replaces the arrow.
I always took that to mean, the spell (as in, Swift Quiver), but I can totally see how you read it that way. And now it actually makes more sense to me this way.

[ZiddyT]

Fair point.
I guess I always just read it as replacing the arrow you drew, as in, you drew this new arrow instead. But in reading it again, it says the "quiver" replaces the arrow.
I always took that to mean, the spell (as in, Swift Quiver), but I can totally see how you read it that way. And now it actually makes more sense to me this way.

Yeah it's not replacing new ammo that you draw, it's replacing ammo that you've already fired ("Each time you make such a ranged attack, your quiver magically replaces the piece of ammunition you used"), so that it's essentially like animation cancelling, skipping the need to draw altogether (hence, letting you attack more swiftly, pull string > fire > pull string > fire, repeat). It's just clarifying that the ammo you're getting for free is not inherently magical, and shutting the door on shenanigans like assuming a "replaced" arrow would be the same as the one you fired (which actually, probably would be a valid interpretation without the clarification), letting you repeatedly dup arrows of slaying or the like, as someone pointed out earlier.

Interestingly enough, the Moon Bow functions pretty much the same way. You never need to draw ammo and are attacking as fast as you can be just by drawing back its string. It should function exactly like swift quiver, flavor-wise... but obviously that'd be broken as hell.

[DracoKnight]

Really. I never would have guessed.

However, if you're using a weapon (you know, to actually make use of what you get from the subclass), then Bladelock is still the better choice, for just about everything. And yet, Magic Weapon and Elemental Weapon are both completely useless for them.

No, they're not. Pact of the Blade counts as magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical damage. It is not actually magical, thus can be enchanted by those spells. Read the text of PotB again :smallbiggrin:

[pandacache]

Aside from the many great ideas that have already been mentioned, it seems to me that Hex Warrior allows wildshaped druids to use CHA for attack and damage rolls. Beast stat blocks generally have attack rolls calculated as STR / DEX mod + Proficiency bonus, so I assume that beasts are proficient with their natural weapons. Since natural weapons are melee weapons and you retain your class features and mental ability scores in wildshape, you can get a reliable +5 to hit and damage.

However, most combat-savvy wildshape forms already boast a STR of 16+, so I'm not sure this actually gains you much. It might up the damage of a few generally less-used forms, but nothing jumps out at me as particularly abusable? Anyone have any ideas that use this as a jumping off point? Sadly the Pact of the Blade smites don't carry over, since they're all tied to specific weapons...

[Mikal]

No, they're not. Pact of the Blade counts as magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical damage. It is not actually magical, thus can be enchanted by those spells. Read the text of PotB again :smallbiggrin:

Until you use the Improved/Superior/Ultimate Pact weapon invocations of course.

Or bond with a magic weapon
Which does bring up the fact... if you bond with a magic greatsword, does Curse Bringer become useless since it says you have to use its weapon?

If so, that severely limits options for a bladelock offensively.

[Xethik]

Until you use the Improved/Superior/Ultimate Pact weapon invocations of course.

Or bond with a magic weapon
Which does bring up the fact... if you bond with a magic greatsword, does Curse Bringer become useless since it says you have to use its weapon?

If so, that severely limits options for a bladelock offensively.

I believe you cannot gain use of Curse Bringer/Mace of Dispater/Claw of Whatevers/Moonbow with pre-existing weapons; you have to create the new "non-magical" weapon. That's my interpretation, at least.

[Mikal]

I believe you cannot gain use of Curse Bringer/Mace of Dispater/Claw of Whatevers/Moonbow with pre-existing weapons; you have to create the new "non-magical" weapon. That's my interpretation, at least.

It's funny. I really feel like the smite invocations are the wonkiest part of the class update, purposefully clashing with other class benefits, such as the ability to bond with an actual magic weapon, using invocations to boost your pact weapon if you don't have a magical one, or using the charisma to hit and damage ability.

[ZiddyT]

Or bond with a magic weapon
Which does bring up the fact... if you bond with a magic greatsword, does Curse Bringer become useless since it says you have to use its weapon?

If so, that severely limits options for a bladelock offensively.

I mean, it depends on what playstyle you want. I feel that, if you went for cursebringer in the first place, it's because you are making a melee-first bladelock. In that case, I can't see any weapon that will be superior to 10d8 smites. If you care more about your spell slots and being able to use them for other things by being able to bond with a random magical greatsword... well, I'd think you should probably be using a one-hander and making use of superior defense, saves and cha-to-hit to get that spell slot flexibility/utility from the get-go.

Personally, favoring more martial flavor to my gishes, I'd never give up those smites for anything.


Until you use the Improved/Superior/Ultimate Pact weapon invocations of course.

Well, you wouldn't take those invocations if you want to use elemental weapon instead of hex, would you? They're both meant to do the same thing, it's just a matter of which resource do you want to spend doing it.

[DivisibleByZero]

Aside from the many great ideas that have already been mentioned, it seems to me that Hex Warrior allows wildshaped druids to use CHA for attack and damage rolls. Beast stat blocks generally have attack rolls calculated as STR / DEX mod + Proficiency bonus, so I assume that beasts are proficient with their natural weapons. Since natural weapons are melee weapons and you retain your class features and mental ability scores in wildshape, you can get a reliable +5 to hit and damage.

However, most combat-savvy wildshape forms already boast a STR of 16+, so I'm not sure this actually gains you much. It might up the damage of a few generally less-used forms, but nothing jumps out at me as particularly abusable? Anyone have any ideas that use this as a jumping off point? Sadly the Pact of the Blade smites don't carry over, since they're all tied to specific weapons...

Natural weapons are not "weapons" in the game's sense. Natural weapons are melee weapon attacks, but they are not melee weapons because they are not weapons at all. Natural weapons are simply an inherent attack form, but they are in and of themselves not weapons for game purposes. It's just like a monk's unarmed strike. It isn't a weapon. It is a weapon attack, but this is only to differentiate it from a spell attack. It is not a weapon.
If it doesn't appear on the weapon table in the PHB, the game does not consider it a weapon.

[jaappleton]

For the 'Greatswords not being usable by Charisma and therefore Curse Bringer is weird' crowd...

Gauntlets of Ogre Power is an Uncommon magic item. Sets your Strength to 19. That's +4. It's one less than the maximum you can achieve (Unless you're a lv20 Barbarian). It really shouldn't be too hard to come across one. Can you 100% count on finding one? No. But most DMs are willing to work with the concept players want for their characters, I find. Prior to finding it, rock a sword and shield with Charisma. And when you DO come across the Gauntlets, pick up the Curse Bringer Invocation.