Hexblade build, help needed

[spartan_ah]

what do you think about taking 5 levels in hexblade and the rest in EK?
starting a campaign in 12th or 13th level. it will give me war magic and curse bringer, action surge and enough slots for smiting.

for RP reasons ill take the aasimar.
what do you think?

[retaliation08]

what do you think about taking 5 levels in hexblade and the rest in EK?
starting a campaign in 12th or 13th level. it will give me war magic and curse bringer, action surge and enough slots for smiting.

for RP reasons ill take the aasimar.
what do you think?

Aside from the potential for MAD with your spells, I don't see why it wouldn't work out ok. Consider not taking Thirsting Blade as I don't think it stacks with Fighter's Extra Attack. That means you likely won't get Extra Attack until level 10, which means at level 12 or 13 you will still only have 1 extra attack.

[Steampunkette]

With Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade a third Extra Attack is basically useless once you've got War Magic.

At level 11 GFB is Weapon Damage + 3d8+Stat, then 3d8+Cha with no attack roll on a second target, then Weapon Damage to whoever with War Magic's bonus action attack.

[KnotaGuru]

With Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade a third Extra Attack is basically useless once you've got War Magic.

At level 11 GFB is Weapon Damage + 3d8+Stat, then 3d8+Cha with no attack roll on a second target, then Weapon Damage to whoever with War Magic's bonus action attack.

At level 11, GFB does weapon damage + attack stat + 2d8 fire to the primary target & 2d8+casting stat fire to the secondary target.

[jaappleton]

If you're going after War Magic...

Sorcerer is a better choice, IMO.

Attack twice as Hexblade, quicken Eldritch Blast as a bonus action. Better casting progression, you aren't limited in your spell selection like EK is, more spell slots to utilize Curse Bringer with, its already keying off Charisma...

[Steampunkette]

At level 11, GFB does weapon damage + attack stat + 2d8 fire to the primary target & 2d8+casting stat fire to the secondary target.

True! Sorry. Still.

Better than two attacks with most weapons. Especially if you're using your charisma mod for attacks and damage.

[KnotaGuru]

If you're going after War Magic...

Sorcerer is a better choice, IMO.

Attack twice as Hexblade, quicken Eldritch Blast as a bonus action. Better casting progression, you aren't limited in your spell selection like EK is, more spell slots to utilize Curse Bringer with, its already keying off Charisma...

Curse bringer invocation is a great sword and keys off strength. Hex warrior (level 1 feature) allows charisma instead, but only with 1-handed weapons.

[jaappleton]

Curse bringer invocation is a great sword and keys off strength. Hex warrior (level 1 feature) allows charisma instead, but only with 1-handed weapons.

Yeah. And? I fail to see how that has anything to do with what I said.

Was it the 'already keying off Charisma' part? Because I was referring to spellcasting, so he wouldn't need Int.

[joaber]

If you got 1 lvl as fighter for Con save and heavy armor prof, you would get at level 11 hexblade:
3 lvl 5 spellslots short rest
1 lvl 6 spell day
armor of hexes
more invocations with a magical weapon (if you already have none).
would be at 3 levels of infinite hexblade curses.

I can't see the great advantage in war magic if your second attack consume your bonus action always (since you already have other uses for that).

[Submortimer]

I'm gonna go a little on the odd side here, and suggest going 1 fighter/12 warlock.

Here's why:

Assuming basic starting stats (and I'd suggest the Assimar subrace that boosts strength) you should start with 16 str and 16 charisma, leaving you with 13 con, 12 dex, 10 int, 8 wis. Fighter gives you heavy armor and a fighting style (which I would suggest Defensive over GWF, since the latter only affects weapon damage die), 12 levels of warlock gets you a lot, including 3 ASIs. That will put you at 18 str, and 20 charisma.

You have 6 invocations to work with, which should go as follows:

- Thirsting Blade
- Curse bringer
- Relentless Hex
- Devil's Sight
- Life drinker
- Superior pact weapon

Now, as your attack action, you're hitting for 2d6+11 twice, or 4d6+22 (avg 36), with the caveat that you're getting a +2 to hit. As an EK, you'll be doing 4d6+2d8+10 (avg 33.5), since you have no room for Improved pact weapon and aren't high enough level for life drinker. You'll have 3 pact magic slots, one of which you should pretty much always devote to darkness (so you can have near constant advantage), and your Nova rounds, when you need them, will be to the tune of 20d8 damage on top of your already impressive usual DPR, or more if you only smite on a crit.

[Mikal]

I agree on the Fighter 1/Warlock 12

The biggest break points for Hexblades seem to be one of the following

1- Charisma dip for other class multi-builds. Primarily Paladins/Bards/Sorcerers

5- This gives you Cursebringer. Usually you'll either continue melee (and thus ignore Thirsting Blade) or you'll go Sorcerer for as many spell slots as possible to use with Cursebringer.

12- Lifedrinker. Cha to melee attacks. Nuff said.

14- This gives you the ability to Curse all day without taking a short rest.

15- This one... not really. But if you're DM is stingy with Magic Items you'd take it this far for Ultimate Pact Blade.

I'm playing a Hexblade with Blade Pact right now, and I'm still figuring out if I want to do the 1/5/14 or 1/14/5 level split.

Currently at 1/2.

One gives me more nova power, the other gives me more steady offense, provided I can take short rests reliably.

[Submortimer]

Though the wording is poor, the 14th level ability only allows you 1 additional Curse per short rest, not unlimited.

[Mikal]

Though the wording is poor, the 14th level ability only allows you 1 additional Curse per short rest, not unlimited.

Link confirming this? Not saying you're wrong, want to verify.

If so, makes the breakpoint at 5 or 12 a lot more attractive than toughing it out to 14.

[Steampunkette]

You may use it "Again"

Not "Any number of Times"

Not "Infinitely"

Not "Once Per Round"

But "Again"

Which implies a single additional instance.

[Mikal]

You may use it "Again"

Not "Any number of Times"

Not "Infinitely"

Not "Once Per Round"

But "Again"

Which implies a single additional instance.

So the wording is ambiguous. However, we do have plenty of examples of abilities that start out 1 time per rest and then expand. And this ability doesn't follow that nomenclature whatsoever.

If it was twice per short rest it would specifically say x times per rest, and would be part of the same ability description, not separate.

See: Cleric

"Beginning at 6th level, you can use your Channel Divinity twice between rests"

See: Fighter


"Starting at 17th level, you can use it twice before a rest" and "You can use this feature twice between long rests starting at 13th level".

Not only in those situations does it specifically say 'x per rest type', but it's lumped into the same ability.

Due to the fact this is a) a separate ability and b) does not use the wording, logically speaking it does not mean twice per rest.

It simply doesn't use the correct format for that type.

Otherwise it would say under Hexblade's Curse something similar to

"At 14th level you can use this an additional time before a short or long rest".

And it wouldn't be called Master of Hexes, because then you have one ability split into two parts vs. one ability with progression, and thus no true 14th level milestone.

As such, the wording stands as essentially 'You can use the curse again whenever you want without taking a rest, but only on one person at a time. Any existing Curses automatically end.'

Now... could it mean the other way? Yes. But then that means they're completely changing the nomenclature they use for abilities without warning or clarification.

But Occam's Razor shows us it is likely the simpler explanation, i.e. this is a separate ability which can be used any number of times without taking a short rest, and without further evidence to the contrary, there's really no way to refute it besides "that's what I think"... which isn't evidence so... *shrug*

[Steampunkette]

When one says "Again" and means "Repeatedly without end" they typically say "Again and Again"

Again represents a single further instance, and I stand by that. Irecognize it doesn't follow standard formatting but that doesn't mean it breaks standard grammatical useage.

Unlimited rages are denoted in a specific fashion. This is not noted in that fashion.

Ergo we should assume that it is an issue of a rushed statement and follows colloquial english standards.

[joaber]

When one says "Again" and means "Repeatedly without end" they typically say "Again and Again"

Again represents a single further instance, and I stand by that. Irecognize it doesn't follow standard formatting but that doesn't mean it breaks standard grammatical useage.

Unlimited rages are denoted in a specific fashion. This is not noted in that fashion.

Ergo we should assume that it is an issue of a rushed statement and follows colloquial english standards.

""I'll drink again before Christmas."

Don't know if is grammatically incorrect or my liver doesn't agree with your "just one more time" thing.

[FinnS]

I tend to think the intention was only to allow an extra use as well.
Unlimited use seems over the line to me.
That said, I think only having one use per short rest to be under the line.

I would make it more in line with the ability I think it is most akin to, Bladesong.
Look at the similarities...

*Bonus action activate, BS at 2nd, HC at 1rst, 10 round duration.

*BLADESONG
-You gain a bonus to your AC equal to your Intelligence
modifier (minimum of+ 1).
-Your walking speed increases by 10 feet.
-You have advantage on Dexterity (Acrobatics) checks .
-You gain a bonus to any Constitution saving throw
you make to maintain your concentration on a
spell. The bonus equals your Intelligence modifier
(minimum of +l).

VS

HEXBLADE'S CURSE
-You gain a bonus to damage rolls against the
cursed target. The bonus equals your
proficiency bonus.
-Any attack roll you make against the cursed
target is a critical hit on a roll of 19 or 20 on
the d20.
-If the cursed target dies, you regain hit points
equal to your warlock level + your Charisma
modifier.

*Extra Attack
BS-level 6
Lock-Invo level 5

*Level 10
-SONG OF DEFENSE
Beginning at 10th level, you can direct your magic to absorb
damage while your Bladesong is active. When you
take damage, you can use your reaction to expend one
spell slot and reduce that damage to you by an amount
equal to five times the spell slot's level.

VS

-ARMOR OF HEXES
At 10th level, your hex grows more powerful. If
the target cursed by your Hexblade’s Curse hits
you with an attack roll, roll a d6. On a 4 or
higher, the attack instead misses you.
First off, make it a flat 2/short rest right out of the gate just like Bladesong.
Master of Hexes at 14th would then allow you to target as many creatures within 30' as your Charisma mod +1.

*Level 14
-SONG OF VICTORY
Starting at 14th level, you add your Intelligence modifier
(minimum of +1) to the damage of your melee weapon
attacks while your Bladesong is active

VS

-Master of Hexes
Starting at 14th level, you can use your
Hexblade’s Curse again without resting, but
when you apply it to a new target, the curse
immediately ends on the previous target.


It breaks down in 2 spots for me.
First it should be 2/short rest period. That will negate the level 14 ability so I would then change it to be able to affect a number of creatures within 30' equal to your Charisma mod (minimum 1).

That's how I will be running it in my games anyway unless someone around here comes up with something better that sticks within the intended power curve.

[spartan_ah]

The problem with sorcerer is lack of hp and lack of ASI.
EK leaves me with GWM a STR of 18 and cha of 16 and con 16.
The EK spells can lack INT like shields, absorb elements, blur, BB and so on... 3 invocations give me curse blade, cha to EB and false life or dark vision. War magic gives me extra attack for free although it competes with GWM but that more situational.
And it gives me bond weapon as a bonus action and not an action, which helps the ASI are nova action. Another option is the paladin but my friend might play one and I think the synergy with EK is more reliable

[Mikal]

When one says "Again" and means "Repeatedly without end" they typically say "Again and Again"

Again represents a single further instance, and I stand by that. Irecognize it doesn't follow standard formatting but that doesn't mean it breaks standard grammatical useage.

Unlimited rages are denoted in a specific fashion. This is not noted in that fashion.

Ergo we should assume that it is an issue of a rushed statement and follows colloquial english standards.

No actually. We shouldn't.
The game had specific wording when an ability is used x times per rest.

It also has specific steps when an ability is increased from x times to y times per rest.

This ability follows neither of them.
So your response boils down to exactly what I said it would. I.e. "This is what I think but I have nothing to support it."

[Mikal]

The problem with sorcerer is lack of hp and lack of ASI.
EK leaves me with GWM a STR of 18 and cha of 16 and con 16.
The EK spells can lack INT like shields, absorb elements, blur, BB and so on... 3 invocations give me curse blade, cha to EB and false life or dark vision. War magic gives me extra attack for free although it competes with GWM but that more situational.
And it gives me bond weapon as a bonus action and not an action, which helps the ASI are nova action. Another option is the paladin but my friend might play one and I think the synergy with EK is more reliable
Let me know how it goes. Should be interesting to see which is better, more spell slots as a sorcerer vs going int-less EK

[Steampunkette]

No actually. We shouldn't.
The game had specific wording when an ability is used x times per rest.

It also has specific steps when an ability is increased from x times to y times per rest.

This ability follows neither of them.
So your response boils down to exactly what I said it would. I.e. "This is what I think but I have nothing to support it."

Uh huh. And where in the book does "Again" appear as a way of describing an infinite number of uses?

I'll wait.

It doesn't? GASP! Then neither of us is basing it off of the wording given elsewhere throughout the book as a consistent basis of RAI?

Truly stunning.

My basis is how English is used. Like, as a language between individuals on account of the book not using that wording, elsewise. Your basis for infinite uses is what, exactly?

'Cause You said so?

Nah. But you go on believing I'm basing mine of faerie dust and wishes while yours is somehow the only logical conclusion.

[FinnS]

No actually. We shouldn't.
The game had specific wording when an ability is used x times per rest.

It also has specific steps when an ability is increased from x times to y times per rest.

This ability follows neither of them.
So your response boils down to exactly what I said it would. I.e. "This is what I think but I have nothing to support it."

Regardless of the semantics of the wording, the reality is that it is far too powerful an ability to be an unlimited use/at will even at level 14.

No DM worth spit allows it in their campaign.

So when Steam adds that "logically" it makes more sense that it grants just an extra use per short rest, she is correct.

[Mikal]

Regardless of the semantics of the wording, the reality is that it is far too powerful an ability to be an unlimited use/at will even at level 14.

No DM worth spit allows it in his/her campaign.

So when Steam adds that "logically" it makes more sense that it grants just an extra use per short rest, she/he is correct.

Not really.

What does curse do?

It gives you an increased critical range against a single enemy.

Champion fighters get that against all enemies at level three.

It gives you healing if you drop the enemy yourself.

Fiend warlocks get a better bonus at level one, giving temp hp which means it can go above their main total, while the hexblade gets it against only a single opponent and it only heals, not overheals.

It gives you proficiency bonus in damage against a single opponent.

So that's what, an additional 6-12 damage against a single opponent?

To summarize, you're saying that giving a hexblade the ability to do something a fighter does at level 3 against everyone, the ability to do something almost as good as a level 1 warlock does against everyone, and a minor damage boost against a single opponent is overpowering?

And that a good 14th level class feature is to let him do it one more time, compared to the other 14th level features other patrons give?

Game balance is not your strong suit, friend.

[Mikal]

Uh huh. And where in the book does "Again" appear as a way of describing an infinite number of uses?

I'll wait.

It doesn't? GASP! Then neither of us is basing it off of the wording given elsewhere throughout the book as a consistent basis of RAI?

Truly stunning.

My basis is how English is used. Like, as a language between individuals on account of the book not using that wording, elsewise. Your basis for infinite uses is what, exactly?

'Cause You said so?

Nah. But you go on believing I'm basing mine of faerie dust and wishes while yours is somehow the only logical conclusion.

Here's the thing:

Your basis isn't valid.
We aren't talking about an English lesson. We are discussing how powers and abilities are worded in a game book.

The rules have a standard way of showing when an existing abilities uses are increased during a short or long rest.

This ability does not follow it. The closest it follows is the champions ability to gain an increased threat range of 18-20.

In every single instance where a short rest ability has the number of time it can be used between short rests increased it is always specifically stated to be the case and is always in the same ability, not a new one.

You have shown nothing except your personal opinion that wotc has suddenly decided to change that process.

I on the other hand have shown numerous examples of why this is not likely to be the case citing all the precedent that has come before.

That's why your basis has the same empirical evidence as fairie dust and mine doesn't.

You've provided nothing but opinion and supposition whereas I have provided facts and precedence.

Could I be wrong? Very likely. Have you shown the least thing to prove me wrong with any sort of empirical evidence to back it up? Not in the slightest.

Again, Occam's razor.
What's the simplest explanation? That they badly worded an ability that gives you a new ability expansion, at will vs once per rest?

Or that they completely changed how they explain short and long rest power quantities while also changing how the warlock patron powers work while also screwing the hexblade out of the 14th level power they normally get?

Also edited to add the following:
If your entire argument is based on English language supposition then you should realize that the wording also indicates more than a single extra use.

To wit:


...but when you apply it to a new target, the curse immediately ends on the previous target.

"A" new target.

If it could only be used twice than using English, aka your only argument point, the wording would be "the new target".

In addition, instead of "previous target" it would read "first target", if it meant a single extra use. You know, using English.

So, not only does my viewpoint have evidence based on precedent and existing examples, it's also supported by using the same argument (re:opinion) that you tried to use.

So... Yeah. Like you said, fairie dust.

And mine isn't the only possible logical conclusion. Mine is the only conclusion currently supported by evidence, making it the most probable conclusion at this time.
Big difference.

[Steampunkette]

The only time any ability has ever gone from Limited Use Per Rest to Unlimited Use Per Rest it is listed as a chart of progression with "Unlimited" as the final option.

Ergo your position is just as invalid as literally any other interpretation.

Occam's Razor, Right? Since the only example in the book doesn't line up with your interpretation, your interpretation is invalid.

Which is why I instead went to grammar to find an answer.

Because anything written is a person trying to convey an idea and words are the manner we do it in.

That, alone, makes it far more valid than "It's infinite 'cause it doesn't say it isn't"

[Steampunkette]

Hell, the phrase itself is "Again without Resting" which at the very least HEAVILY IMPLIES if not outright states "Once more between rests"

[Mikal]

The only time any ability has ever gone from Limited Use Per Rest to Unlimited Use Per Rest it is listed as a chart of progression with "Unlimited" as the final option.

Ergo your position is just as invalid as literally any other interpretation.

Occam's Razor, Right? Since the only example in the book doesn't line up with your interpretation, your interpretation is invalid.

Which is why I instead went to grammar to find an answer.

Because anything written is a person trying to convey an idea and words are the manner we do it in.

That, alone, makes it far more valid than "It's infinite 'cause it doesn't say it isn't"

Umm no. That's not Occam's razor. That's not Occam's razor at all. Maybe you should actually... Do basic googling before throwing terms around you don't understand.
Which is sad because I even provided a laymans explaination in my last post.

First of all what is this evidence? You say it's a chart.
If it's a chart then it's not an ability description like we have been discussing.

In addition there at similar abilities that completely supplant previous abilities, read again the champion critical threat range vs the multitude of abilities that are limited by short or long rest that get more uses per said rest.

Compare them to Master of Hexes.

In addition you cite grammar yet ignore the parts of grammar that actually show it's more likely meant to be more than a single extra use as my previous post pointed out.

And don't strawman. No one is saying "it's infinite cause it doesn't say it isn't."

I'm saying that its far more probable that the power is meant to be unlimited use because every other example of an existing power that has limited use which then gets extended between short or long rests uses a very specific wording which this doesn't follow.

So to summarize, you have still shown no evidence, have ignored how using your own criteria my interpretation is just as if not slightly more valid (two examples vs one in the ability description showing its more than a single extra use), and have attempted to use logical fallacies to shore up your viewpoint while also using apples to orange comparison at the same time.

Which again I'm curious to see what that actually is, since all you've said is that it's "a chart".

So yeah. Let me know when you have something factual and specific to back you up like I've done, several times.

[Mikal]

Hell, the phrase itself is "Again without Resting" which at the very least HEAVILY IMPLIES if not outright states "Once more between rests"

And if this were the only example whatsoever of an ability increasing its number of uses per rest period I'd agree with you.

However, it's not. It in fact completely goes against the literally dozens of examples throughout 5e which show the nomenclature used for when that happens.

The game rules don't IMPLY when an ability gets that type of extension. It CLEARLY STATES it, in the same ability block that the original value is in.

[McNinja]

Here's the thing:

Your basis isn't valid.
We aren't talking about an English lesson. We are discussing how powers and abilities are worded in a game book.

The rules have a standard way of showing when an existing abilities uses are increased during a short or long rest.

This ability does not follow it. The closest it follows is the champions ability to gain an increased threat range of 18-20.

In every single instance where a short rest ability has the number of time it can be used between short rests increased it is always specifically stated to be the case and is always in the same ability, not a new one.

You have shown nothing except your personal opinion that wotc has suddenly decided to change that process.

I on the other hand have shown numerous examples of why this is not likely to be the case citing all the precedent that has come before.

That's why your basis has the same empirical evidence as fairie dust and mine doesn't.

You've provided nothing but opinion and supposition whereas I have provided facts and precedence.

Could I be wrong? Very likely. Have you shown the least thing to prove me wrong with any sort of empirical evidence to back it up? Not in the slightest.

Again, Occam's razor.
What's the simplest explanation? That they badly worded an ability that gives you a new ability expansion, at will vs once per rest?

Or that they completely changed how they explain short and long rest power quantities while also changing how the warlock patron powers work while also screwing the hexblade out of the 14th level power they normally get?

Also edited to add the following:
If your entire argument is based on English language supposition then you should realize that the wording also indicates more than a single extra use.

To wit:


"A" new target.

If it could only be used twice than using English, aka your only argument point, the wording would be "the new target".

In addition, instead of "previous target" it would read "first target", if it meant a single extra use. You know, using English.

So, not only does my viewpoint have evidence based on precedent and existing examples, it's also supported by using the same argument (re:opinion) that you tried to use.

So... Yeah. Like you said, fairie dust.

And mine isn't the only possible logical conclusion. Mine is the only conclusion currently supported by evidence, making it the most probable conclusion at this time.
Big difference.Hey man, it's ok if english isn't your first language, but don't start arguments based on language when you clearly don't understand it.

[Mikal]

Hey man, it's ok if english isn't your first language, but don't start arguments based on language when you clearly don't understand it.

You mean like someone who posts into a discussion providing nothing of value to the debate while actively ignoring the fact that the post they quoted actually shows a better grasp of English than the person who butted in with an inflammatory comment?

Don't bother replying. Your post shows me that not blocking you would be a waste of time.

[McNinja]

And if this were the only example whatsoever of an ability increasing its number of uses per rest period I'd agree with you.

However, it's not. It in fact completely goes against the literally dozens of examples throughout 5e which show the nomenclature used for when that happens.

The game rules don't IMPLY when an ability gets that type of extension. It CLEARLY STATES it, in the same ability block that the original value is in.If I say "hey dude can you reply again" what moron would just start replying over and over and over? If I do something again, that means once more. You know, based on the literal definition of again.

a·gain
əˈɡen/
adverb
another time; once more.
"it was great to meet old friends again"
synonyms: once more, another time, afresh, anew
"her spirits lifted again"
returning to a previous position or condition.
"he rose, tidied the bed, and sat down again"
in addition to what has already been mentioned.
"the wages were low, but they made half as much again in tips"
synonyms: extra, in addition, additionally, on top
"this can add half as much again to the price"


And don't pretend that your absurd "A new target" argument has any basis in reality. The "first target" was the "previous target" so there's no room to misinterpret that unless you don't understand how english works. Like I said, if english isn't your first language that's fine, but don't start arguments over language when you clearly don't fully understand it.

[McNinja]

So the wording is ambiguous. However, we do have plenty of examples of abilities that start out 1 time per rest and then expand. And this ability doesn't follow that nomenclature whatsoever.

If it was twice per short rest it would specifically say x times per rest, and would be part of the same ability description, not separate.

See: Cleric


See: Fighter

The number of uses is clearly defined because the number of uses escalates above two. A cleric can use channel divinity three times at 18th and a fighter can use indomitable three times at 17th.

I cannot believe there is an actual argument over what the word "again" means. Jesus.

[Steampunkette]

Umm no. That's not Occam's razor. That's not Occam's razor at all. Maybe you should actually... Do basic googling before throwing terms around you don't understand.
Which is sad because I even provided a laymans explaination in my last post.

First of all what is this evidence? You say it's a chart.
If it's a chart then it's not an ability description like we have been discussing.

In addition there at similar abilities that completely supplant previous abilities, read again the champion critical threat range vs the multitude of abilities that are limited by short or long rest that get more uses per said rest.

Compare them to Master of Hexes.

In addition you cite grammar yet ignore the parts of grammar that actually show it's more likely meant to be more than a single extra use as my previous post pointed out.

And don't strawman. No one is saying "it's infinite cause it doesn't say it isn't."

I'm saying that its far more probable that the power is meant to be unlimited use because every other example of an existing power that has limited use which then gets extended between short or long rests uses a very specific wording which this doesn't follow.

So to summarize, you have still shown no evidence, have ignored how using your own criteria my interpretation is just as if not slightly more valid (two examples vs one in the ability description showing its more than a single extra use), and have attempted to use logical fallacies to shore up your viewpoint while also using apples to orange comparison at the same time.

Which again I'm curious to see what that actually is, since all you've said is that it's "a chart".

So yeah. Let me know when you have something factual and specific to back you up like I've done, several times.

Seriously? The only ability that does go from Uses per Rest to Infinite is the Barbarian Rage ability. It tells you to go by the chart attached to the class.

There is no "Hexblades Curses per Short Rest" entry on the Warlock Chart, not Chart is provided, ergo your basis is invalid because it doesn't follow the standard way of showing an ability goes from X per rest to Infinite (Unlimited is the term used)

Occam's Razor is "The simplest answer must be the right answer"

Which is Simpler:

Again before Rest is a new way for the Developers to describe Infinite Uses and they're doing it in an Unearthed Arcana with no other indication of it's meaning.

Or

It's an Unearthed Freaking Arcana and hasn't gone through the same polish as everything else and the use of "Again before Resting" means "Twice per Short Rest".

Gosh darnit I guess we'll never know!

[FinnS]

Not really.

What does curse do?

It gives you an increased critical range against a single enemy.

Champion fighters get that against all enemies at level three.

It gives you healing if you drop the enemy yourself.

Fiend warlocks get a better bonus at level one, giving temp hp which means it can go above their main total, while the hexblade gets it against only a single opponent and it only heals, not overheals.

It gives you proficiency bonus in damage against a single opponent.

So that's what, an additional 6-12 damage against a single opponent?

To summarize, you're saying that giving a hexblade the ability to do something a fighter does at level 3 against everyone, the ability to do something almost as good as a level 1 warlock does against everyone, and a minor damage boost against a single opponent is overpowering?

And that a good 14th level class feature is to let him do it one more time, compared to the other 14th level features other patrons give?

Game balance is not your strong suit, friend.

Because that's all it does right?
There isn't a level 10 ability that basically confers the old 50% concealment ability or anything right?
Or a bunch of Evocations associated to it?
I mean it's not like by level 14 said Lock wouldn't be doing more damage than the GWM feat without any penalties or anything right?

Tell ya what, let's run down what a level 14 Hexblade does per hit with say a longsword shall we...
Longsword 1d8
Crits on a 19-20
+5 slashing damage from Charisma
+5 necrotic damage from Charisma from Life Drinker
+5 slashing damage from the Curse
+2 slashing damage from Superior Pact Weapon.
An unlimited bonus action "Misty Step" to the target of your Curse.
Heals for 19 every kill.

Unlimited 1d8+17, Crits on a 19-20 and a heal for 19 on kill. Might as well add another 1d6 necrotic from hex as well.
Or hey, let's go the 2H STR route instead and tack on GWM feat while we're at it.
Now it's 2d6+27+1d6, Crits on a 19-20.
Oh I just Crit, ok I'll spend a 5th level spell slot to do 4d6+27+2d6+20d8....Yeeaaahhhh.

Yeah, I'm the one with game Balance issues...Ok then.

Name me one unlimited use single ability that comes remotely close to doing all that by 20th level, let alone by 14th?
You can't even come close to providing one.

Headshake time son.
And just for the record, unless you're more than 33 years old, I've been DMing longer than you have been alive.

[Arenabait]

Because that's all it does right?
There isn't a level 10 ability that basically confers the old 50% concealment ability or anything right?
Or a bunch of Evocations associated to it?
I mean it's not like by level 14 said Lock wouldn't be doing more damage than the GWM feat without any penalties or anything right?

Tell ya what, let's run down what a level 14 Hexblade does per hit with say a longsword shall we...
Longsword 1d8
Crits on a 19-20
+5 slashing damage from Charisma
+5 necrotic damage from Charisma from Life Drinker
+5 slashing damage from the Curse
+2 slashing damage from Superior Pact Weapon.
An unlimited bonus action "Misty Step" to the target of your Curse.
Heals for 19 every kill.

Unlimited 1d8+17, Crits on a 19-20 and a heal for 19 on kill.

Yeah, I'm the one with game Balance issues...Ok then.

Name me one unlimited use single ability that comes remotely close to doing all that by 20th level, let alone by 14th?
You can't even come close to providing one.

Headshake time son.
And just for the record, unless you're more than 33 years old, I've been DMing longer than you have been alive.
Don't forget you can do booming blade for an extra 2d8 if you want! wait, no... That's suboptimal, the 1d8+17 from extra attack with thirsting blade would be better...

[Steampunkette]

If I say "hey dude can you reply again" what moron would just start replying over and over and over? If I do something again, that means once more. You know, based on the literal definition of again.

a·gain
əˈɡen/
adverb
another time; once more.
"it was great to meet old friends again"
synonyms: once more, another time, afresh, anew
"her spirits lifted again"
returning to a previous position or condition.
"he rose, tidied the bed, and sat down again"
in addition to what has already been mentioned.
"the wages were low, but they made half as much again in tips"
synonyms: extra, in addition, additionally, on top
"this can add half as much again to the price"


And don't pretend that your absurd "A new target" argument has any basis in reality. The "first target" was the "previous target" so there's no room to misinterpret that unless you don't understand how english works. Like I said, if english isn't your first language that's fine, but don't start arguments over language when you clearly don't fully understand it.

Since he's got you on Ignore I'll go ahead and quote you so he can see you literally give him the dictionary definition of "Again" while he argues it means endlessly.

The Moon Logic is -strong- in this one.

[FinnS]

Don't forget you can do booming blade for an extra 2d8 if you want! wait, no... That's suboptimal, the 1d8+17 from extra attack with thirsting blade would be better...

Just take some levels of Sorc, metamagic quicken some Booming blades with green flame blades in the same round a few times...

[Marvnmartian]

Tell ya what, let's run down what a level 14 Hexblade does per hit with say a longsword shall we...
Longsword 1d8
Crits on a 19-20
+5 slashing damage from Charisma
+5 necrotic damage from Charisma from Life Drinker
+5 slashing damage from the Curse
+2 slashing damage from Superior Pact Weapon.
An unlimited bonus action "Misty Step" to the target of your Curse.
Heals for 19 every kill.

Unlimited 1d8+17, Crits on a 19-20 and a heal for 19 on kill. Might as well add another 1d6 necrotic from hex as well.
Or hey, let's go the 2H STR route instead and tack on GWM feat while we're at it.
Now it's 2d6+27+1d6, Crits on a 19-20.
Oh I just Crit, ok I'll spend a 5th level spell slot to do 4d6+27+2d6+20d8....Yeeaaahhhh.


completely agree that its a decent amount of damage but lets not say that its over powered when any fighter class can replicate it with more hits.

my personal character at 14 being a Halfling fighter with sharpshooter x crossbow feats is pumping out only 11 damage under the GWM build even without using a bonus action hand-crossbow attack

4xd10+45 so flat 65 compared to a hexblades 76 and they can only do that 76 damage 3 times whereas the fighter can do the 65 every round until crossbow bolts don't exist.

and if you are the annoying player at the table you can argue that you get the hand crossbow 1d6+5 to add up to 73 damage so... i mean what is 3 points of damage a round

then there is action surging for 130 damage in the first round making up for the damage comparable to the lock for the 3 rounds he can do the extra 10d8

Round 1---Fighter---Fighter w/hbow--Hexblade
--------------130----------146------------76
Round 2---130+65------219+73--------76+76
Round 3---195+65------292+73-------152+76
Round 4---260+65------365+73-------228+36
Round 5---325+65------438+73-------264+36
End---------390-----------511----------300

I agree with your point that it is just a second time, not infinite but i mean 5e does a great job of balancing the damage

[FinnS]

completely agree that its a decent amount of damage but lets not say that its over powered when any fighter class can replicate it with more hits.

my personal character at 14 being a Halfling fighter with sharpshooter x crossbow feats is pumping out only 11 damage under the GWM build even without using a bonus action hand-crossbow attack

4xd10+45 so flat 65 compared to a hexblades 76 and they can only do that 76 damage 3 times whereas the fighter can do the 65 every round until crossbow bolts don't exist.

and if you are the annoying player at the table you can argue that you get the hand crossbow 1d6+5 to add up to 73 damage so... i mean what is 3 points of damage a round

then there is action surging for 130 damage in the first round making up for the damage comparable to the lock for the 3 rounds he can do the extra 10d8

Round 1---Fighter---Fighter w/hbow--Hexblade
--------------130----------146------------76
Round 2---130+65------219+73--------76+76
Round 3---195+65------292+73-------152+76
Round 4---260+65------365+73-------228+36
Round 5---325+65------438+73-------264+36
End---------390-----------511----------300

I agree with your point that it is just a second time, not infinite but i mean 5e does a great job of balancing the damage

It's not just about damage though.
Besides replicating what only a Champion fighter can do (19-20 Crits), it also comes with a 50% concealment defensive ability and the equivalent average healing per kill of a Cure Wounds cast with a 4th level slot.

Like I said earlier, there is just no way this was intended to be an at will/unlimited use ability.

[joaber]

Sorry folks but "again" doesn't state how many times. After I used "again", the ability keeps saying that I can use "again".

Like "we definitly should kiss again" or "I loved surf,I'll do this again", in none moment I'm thinking in do just onr more time.

[Mikal]

Seriously? The only ability that does go from Uses per Rest to Infinite is the Barbarian Rage ability. It tells you to go by the chart attached to the class.

Except that is once again an apples to oranges comparison.

All Barbarians get rage, which is why it's on the class chart, and is universal.

Hexblade's Curse is dependent on taking the Hexblade Patron, and is not part of the chart for that reason (along with the fact that few-to-no UA class archetypes receive a full chart).



Occam's Razor is "The simplest answer must be the right answer"

Which is Simpler:

Again before Rest is a new way for the Developers to describe Infinite Uses and they're doing it in an Unearthed Arcana with no other indication of it's meaning.

Or

It's an Unearthed Freaking Arcana and hasn't gone through the same polish as everything else and the use of "Again before Resting" means "Twice per Short Rest".

Gosh darnit I guess we'll never know!

Except that we can make logical guesses. The wording of other abilities matches the nomenclature of the books within UA articles. In addition, looking at similar abilities within UA such as superiority dice, they use the standard nomenclature.

As such, the OM argument is not what you're stating, because we have plenty of evidence to show that when they want to something within a class write up which is already established, they do so following the same wording as other items which are already established.

It's on you to prove otherwise, as you're making the claim. I've provided, once again, a myriad of examples. You've provided, once again, nothing but conjecture and opinion as if it were fact.

[Mikal]

Headshake time son.
And just for the record, unless you're more than 33 years old, I've been DMing longer than you have been alive.

DMing does not equate to knowing game balance. And age does not equate to knowledge or mastery of a game system which has only been out a few years.

If I want your opinion on 1E balance, then maybe your age would matter more.

As for the numbers, they've already been worked on by others so I won't comment.

Regarding the ability- yes, it does what several lower level abilities do, rolled into one.

I don't see a problem with a level 14 ability replicating a level 3 ability against a single opponent while also providing a weaker example of a level 1 ability while also enhancing an existing level 10 ability.

The only invocation really worth discussion tied to the Curse would be the Relentless Hex. The Chilling and Burning provide such a poor return on resource at 14th level that if you're using your bonus action on that, as well as 1/2 invocations well... more power to you, I guess?

[jaappleton]

Headshake time son.
And just for the record, unless you're more than 33 years old, I've been DMing longer than you have been alive.

I'll be brutally honest... This is some of the most condescending BS that I've come across here. There's no reason for that.

[FinnS]

I'll be brutally honest... This is some of the most condescending BS that I've come across here. There's no reason for that.

Normally I would agree, however, it was clearly a response to...



Game balance is not your strong suit, friend.

I'm sorry but that pissed me off a little so I ended up being too heavy handed in my response how I have 33 years of actual D&D Table experience, not just D&D Theorycraft.

I mean c'mon, multiple posters cooly and logically explained how it being unlimited use clearly doesn't fit.

I'll try one more time to hammer home my/our point though.

Unlimited use would essentially become a permanent buff of:
*Being a 3rd level Fighter Champion
*Being a level 14 Fiend Pact Warlock, only better cause it's an actual heal, not non-stacking temporary hit points
*Adding a permanent flat 25-50% more damage per swing than a raging level 16 Barbarian
*Having a permanent non-dispellable single Mirror Image (50% miss chance)
*Having an unlimited Misty Step (Level 18 Wizard anyone?)
*Having ZERO restrictions on any of it other than it costs you a Bonus action to Curse a new creature


As shown earlier, Bladesong has a similar progression/power curve except Bladesong has one major difference. It comes with a price...No heavy or medium armor, no shield, no 2-handed weapons and being incapacitated in any way ends/wastes the Bladesong.
The price of getting all of the above from Hexblade's Curse?
Yeah, one Evocation (Relentless Hex).

Does it honestly seem like I have issues identifying game balance?

I mean at this point I am basically debating with someone whose counterpoints have been obliterated and his only argument involves wording semantics.

[Mikal]

Unlimited use would essentially become a permanent buff of:
*Being a 3rd level Fighter Champion
*Being a level 14 Fiend Pact Warlock, only better cause it's an actual heal, not non-stacking temporary hit points
*Adding a permanent flat 50% more damage per swing than a raging level 16 Barbarian
*Having a permanent non-dispellable single Mirror Image (50% miss chance)
*Having an unlimited Misty Step (Level 18 Wizard anyone?)
*Having ZERO restrictions on any of it other than it costs you a Bonus action to Curse a new creature


As shown earlier, Bladesong has a similar progression/power curve except Bladesong has one major difference. It comes with a price...No heavy or medium armor, no shield and no 2-handed weapons.
The price of getting all of the above from Hexblade's Curse?
Yeah, one Evocation (Relentless Hex).

Incorrect on several points
1) It's not a permanent buff. It requires a Bonus Action to activate, which can be used elsewhere. That's like saying Shillelagh if a permanent buff.

2) The Bladesinger ability is usable against everyone. Curse is usable against a single target only.

3) The above negates the "ZERO restrictions", and weakens the permanent Mirror Image, and permanent Misty Step arguments, so technically this could be incorrect steps 1-4, but they're a but redundant, so I'll limit it to just 1.

4) While the Bladesinger is comparable, it is also a full caster, where Warlock's aren't. The full wizard casting ability vs. the Warlock's extremely limited spellcasting ability (more limited if you use Curse Bringer) is balanced by the Bladesinger limited use, in addition to the above.

5) Hexblade by default does not come with Heavy Armor, and its Charisma to hit and damage (barring invocation for Curse Bringer) by default does not use 2-handed weapons. 2-handed weapons are only usable with a subpar MAD build, unless you spend the invocation tax to make it better.

6) The ability comparison to Fiend should be based on the level both receive it- 1st. Hexblade is heavily limited compared to Fiend through the majority of its life, and only gets a boost to it at 14th level, the same level Fiend gets an no-save 10d10 psychic damage attack that also takes the enemy out of the fight (albeit once per short or long rest)

7) The self healing can be argued to be slightly better or weaker than the Fiends, as one can argue temp HPs which can carry over to other fights is stronger than once in awhile self heals.
7-a) As an addendum, this is a bit of a false comparison, as temp HP are lost before regular, so any kills made by a Fiend would either increase the existing THP pool or refill the THP pool if damaged (i.e. a THP 'heal'). The only time this would be better using the Hexblade over the Fiend is a critical situation where your regular HP are extremely low and the THP pool won't help.

8) As already shown elsewhere, the damage a Hexblade does is comparable to others while using the Curse.



Does it honestly seem like I have issues identifying game balance?


When you can't see the above points? Yes, honestly, a little a bit.



I mean at this point I am basically debating with someone whose counterpoints have been obliterated and his only argument involves wording semantics.

Counterpoints are only obliterated if you can provide evidence. The only thing that has been provided is a long and useless treatise on the English language which ignores the fact that even using that argument the unlimited usage is still backed up, and a flawed counterargument on the strengths and weaknesses of the Hexblade Curse vs. Bladesong.

And what you call semantics others would likely call pertinent information.

Edited to Add:
In addition, Bladesong several more bonuses compared to Curse, though admittedly none are overwhelming.
This includes but is not limited to:

Second Attack (which the Warlock requires an invocation to use)
Bonuses to Constitution Saving Throws
Advantages on Acrobatics.

[jaappleton]

Here's how I think the lv14 Hexblade feature works.

It allows one additional use of Hexblade's Curse per short or long rest. However, you can never have two instances of the curse going on simultaneously.

So if during round 1, I curse a Kobold, and then a Hobgoblin shows up, and I place a new curse on the Hobgoblin, the curse on the Kobold ends and I've expended both uses.

I do believe as its written, its a bit poorly worded. Should be "Twice per short rest", etc. However, UA stuff is... Look, we all know that its not ready for print. That includes how things are phrased.

[Mikal]

Here's how I think the lv14 Hexblade feature works.

It allows one additional use of Hexblade's Curse per short or long rest. However, you can never have two instances of the curse going on simultaneously.

So if during round 1, I curse a Kobold, and then a Hobgoblin shows up, and I place a new curse on the Hobgoblin, the curse on the Kobold ends and I've expended both uses.

I do believe as its written, its a bit poorly worded. Should be "Twice per short rest", etc. However, UA stuff is... Look, we all know that its not ready for print. That includes how things are phrased.

Ok, but do you have anything new to bring to the table beyond English lessons?

Not saying you've provided any such lessons, I'm just sick of them being trotted out as "evidence".

[joaber]

As always, there is 3 ways to see this:
RAW
RAI
My opinion (house rule)

RAW, there isn't a real limit, after you did again, text let you do "again again"
RAI, we really can't know until have at least some pronuntiation of game designers or something like that
My opinion, is good debate why, and this is really important for UA content.

In the end, is just UA, so is perfext to test both ways to see how fit better (or if we nees another option).

[FinnS]

Incorrect on several points
1) The Bladesinger ability is usable against everyone. Curse is usable against a single target only.
Which I agreed with earlier in the thread to which I suggested how I was going to have it work at my table to alleviate both points.
-Make it usable a flat 2 per short rest to start
-Change the level 14 ability to be able to affect up to your charisma mod worth of creatures within 30'
-I would also look closely at changing Curse Bringer to allow any weapon to carry the Curse over to while leaving the "Smite" option tied to the Greatsword


2) The above negates the "ZERO restrictions", and weakens the permanent Mirror Image, and permanent Misty Step arguments, so technically this could be incorrect steps 1-4, but they're a but redundant, so I'll limit it to just 1.

These restrictions only have meaning when you only have 1 or 2 uses per short rest.
Under your unlimited use interpretation, these restrictions are almost meaningless


3) While the Bladesinger is comparable, it is also a full caster, where Warlock's aren't. The full wizard casting ability vs. the Warlock's extremely limited spellcasting ability (more limited if you use Curse Bringer) is balanced by the Bladesinger limited use, in addition to the above.

Warlocks are only limited casters with limited short rests. Every short rest a party takes during the day brings the Warlock one step closer to the Wizard.
Also, the Bladesinger's level 10 defensive ability isn't free, it's powered by spell slots.


4) Hexblade by default does not come with Heavy Armor, and its Charisma to hit and damage (barring invocation for Curse Bringer) by default does not use 2-handed weapons. 2-handed weapons are only usable with a subpar MAD build, unless you spend the invocation tax to make it better.

So definitely no heavy armor, no medium armor, no shield and no 2-hander is equal to maybe no heavy armor and no 2-hander some how?
Taking the Heavy Armor feat that also comes with a +1 to STR is not exactly a poor choice to eliminate DEX from your MAD list.


5) The ability comparison to Fiend should be based on the level both receive it- 1st. Hexblade is heavily limited compared to Fiend through the majority of its life, and only gets a boost to it at 14th level, the same level Fiend gets an no-save 10d10 psychic damage attack that also takes the enemy out of the fight (albeit once per short or long rest)

Hurl Through Hell is a long rest ability.
Hmmm...long rest once per day ability vs your unlimited use perma buff at level 14...sounds...fair :smallconfused:


6) The self healing can be argued to be slightly better or weaker than the Fiends, as one can argue temp HPs which can carry over to other fights is stronger than once in awhile self heals.
6-a) As an addendum, this is a bit of a false comparison, as temp HP are lost before regular, so any kills made by a Fiend would either increase the existing THP pool or refill the THP pool if damaged (i.e. a THP 'heal'). The only time this would be better using the Hexblade over the Fiend is a critical situation where your regular HP are extremely low and the THP pool won't help.

Singularly, I'd agree it could go either way. HOWEVER, it's not a singular thing, that Heal also comes with a damage boost, a doubling of your crit range and 50% to be missed chance.


7) As already shown elsewhere, the damage a Hexblade does is comparable to others while using the Curse.

That may be true but do those others also have a defensive ability, a free heal and possibly an unlimited Misty step every round to go with it?
They most certainly do not.



When you can't see the above points? Yes, honestly, a little a bit.

You my friend simply can't see the forest for the trees.
Individually some of your points almost make sense but you you're missing the rather large overall point.
Namely that you're still arguing 4-5 different abilities (some of the high level variety) against the same SINGLE one ability over and over.
I'm sorry but when exactly is that going to finally sink in for you?


Counterpoints are only obliterated if you can provide evidence. The only thing that has been provided is a long and useless treatise on the English language which ignores the fact that even using that argument the unlimited usage is still backed up, and a flawed counterargument on the strengths and weaknesses of the Hexblade Curse vs. Bladesong.

Hate to break it to you but you're right back at obliterated again :smalltongue:

[Steampunkette]

Nah.

See, whether a person intends to continue in perpetuity or engage in a single instance and stop has to do with context.

'I will wield my mother's sword, again." Can mean "use it for an extended period of time" because wield represents a concept which is not limited by explicit instances. A man can wield a weapon for years without constantly swinging it. He can even go to sleep with the weapon in another room and it still be considered a single instance of wielding because of how that concept works in English.

But to do so, again, you must at some point stop wielding the weapon and then start wielding it... a second time. Once more.

If it had said Time and Again or Again and Again this limited expression of power which has explicit duration could be used again and again and again. It doesn't. So one extra use.

Mikal. I don't care about your logic anymore, where a single rebuttal repeated in a dozen ways and addressed directly is, somehow, myriad examples of evidence. You have been condescending, rude, presumptive, and dismissive this whole conversation. Goodbye.

[Mikal]

Mikal. I don't care about your logic anymore, where a single rebuttal repeated in a dozen ways and addressed directly is, somehow, myriad examples of evidence. You have been condescending, rude, presumptive, and dismissive this whole conversation. Goodbye.

The irony in this statement with regards to a single rebuttal repeated a dozen ways and address directly is overwhelming.

Also, incorrect, as I've shown several items which have not actually been contradicted beyond "English!", and have countered every piece of argument against me. But, I've come to expect that.

[jaappleton]

The irony in this statement with regards to a single rebuttal repeated a dozen ways and address directly is overwhelming.

Also, incorrect, as I've shown several items which have not actually been contradicted beyond "English!", and have countered every piece of argument against me. But, I've come to expect that.

The argument of "proper sentence structure" gets tossed out the window when dealing with Unearthed Arcana articles. Balance aside, they're simply poorly written. That's simply a fact.

[Mikal]

Which I agreed with earlier in the thread to which I suggested how I was going to have it work at my table to alleviate both points.
-Make it usable a flat 2 per short rest to start
-Change the level 14 ability to be able to affect up to your charisma mod worth of creatures within 30'
-I would also look closely at changing Curse Bringer to allow any weapon to carry the Curse over to while leaving the "Smite" option tied to the Greatsword


As an aside I actually like Curse Bringer being two-handed and non charisma-able. It makes you actually have to choose between the two, since both are viable.

The weakness comes with multi-classing into Paladin or Sorcerer or Bard, but that's going to require some finesse to figure out.



These restrictions only have meaning when you only have 1 or 2 uses per short rest.
Under your unlimited use interpretation, these restrictions are almost meaningless

I disagree. You are more often going to face several enemies vs. a single enemy. As such, I'd think at high levels having the ability to use it several times would be more important vs. one mook and it's out. Or two as the case may be.


Warlocks are only limited casters with limited short rests. Every short rest a party takes during the day brings the Warlock one step closer to the Wizard.
Also, the Bladesinger's level 10 defensive ability isn't free, it's powered by spell slots.

So in other words, the Warlock's are limited casters. Thanks.
True point on the level 10 ability. I'll trade you the useless Shadow Hound level 6 and we can call it even if you want.



So definitely no heavy armor, no medium armor, no shield and no 2-hander is equal to maybe no heavy armor and no 2-hander some how?
Taking the Heavy Armor feat that also comes with a +1 to STR is not exactly a poor choice to eliminate DEX from your MAD list.

Well every feat investment is another resource that has to be spent to be used, so yes, in general I think that the two are more equal because of this.


Singularly, I'd agree it could go either way. HOWEVER, it's not a singular thing, that Heal also comes with a damage boost, a doubling of your crit range and 50% to be missed chance.

That may be true but do those others also have a defensive ability, a free heal and possibly an unlimited Misty step every round to go with it?
They most certainly do not.

No, but the other classes (barring Fighter) get other abilities to augment it. Which leads me to...


You my friend simply can't see the forest for the trees.
Maybe I'm just looking at different trees.


Individually some of your points almost make sense but you you're missing the rather large overall point.
Namely that you're still arguing 4-5 different abilities (some of the high level variety) against the same SINGLE one ability over and over.
I'm sorry but when exactly is that going to finally sink in for you?

None of the abilities discussed were high level. Which ones were high level beyond the damage boost (potentially)?




Hate to break it to you but you're right back at obliterated again :smalltongue:

Really? Cause no one has actually countered my arguments yet with anything beyond, once again, guesses (some better than others), and attempts to teach me grammar I learned back in the 80s.

[Mikal]

The argument of "proper sentence structure" gets tossed out the window when dealing with Unearthed Arcana articles. Balance aside, they're simply poorly written. That's simply a fact.

Which is why "English!" just isn't a valid argument.

[Xethik]

Surprised this tweet from Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/834838075104645120) hasn't been linked yet. Seemed to have been created by this discussion.

It's unlimited in uses.

[jaappleton]

Surprised this tweet from Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/834838075104645120) hasn't been linked yet. Seemed to have been created by this discussion.

It was linked when I made an entirely new topic about it. :smallbiggrin:

[Xethik]

It was linked when I made an entirely new topic about it. :smallbiggrin:

Heh, just saw that. My mistake.

[Steampunkette]

Nice!

Cruddy way to communicate it. But nice!

[jaappleton]

Nice!

Cruddy way to communicate it. But nice!

I find the best way to go about getting an answer is to... y'know.

Ask.

[Xethik]

I find the best way to go about getting an answer is to... y'know.

Ask.

I assume Steampunkette is referring to the less-than-ideal wording of the class feature. They aren't even trying to copy-fit, so they should just use as clear wording as possible.

[Mikal]

I find the best way to go about getting an answer is to... y'know.

Ask.

Thank you sir, very appreciated.
Not what I was expecting as an answer... but yeah.

[jaappleton]

I assume Steampunkette is referring to the less-than-ideal wording of the class feature. They aren't even trying to copy-fit, so they should just use as clear wording as possible.

Yeah its incredibly poorly worded.

Like.... Simply bad. Even as a rough draft, it should've been worded better than this.

[joaber]

Surprised this tweet from Jeremy Crawford (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/834838075104645120) hasn't been linked yet. Seemed to have been created by this discussion.

It's unlimited in uses.

Well, class dismissed!

[FinnS]

It was linked when I made an entirely new topic about it. :smallbiggrin:

Not the first bad UA ruling and won't be the last.

My table will be running it as I stated earlier and suggested the same in the feedback Survey.