Hexblade Concerns

[Easy_Lee]

While Xanathar's isn't out yet, we do know a few things about the Hexblade:

They will be able to use charisma for their weapon attacks, making them potentially the only SAD Gish (a character who uses both spells and weapons effectively).
Moon Bow and invocations for pact weapon to-hit bonuses are confirmed.
A Freedom of Movement invocation is confirmed, as well as one for seeing through walls.

All of this is in addition to darkness / devil's sight combo still working, short rest casting, near full-caster progression including access to foresight, detect magic at will with Eldritch Sight, and so on.

With everything together, I can't help feeling that Hexblades will be the overall best, and by far the most versatile, Gish. Does anyone else get that feeling?

[Eragon123]

While Xanathar's isn't out yet, we do know a few things about the Hexblade:

They will be able to use charisma for their weapon attacks, making them potentially the only SAD Gish (a character who uses both spells and weapons effectively).
Moon Bow and invocations for pact weapon to-hit bonuses are confirmed.
A Freedom of Movement invocation is confirmed, as well as one for seeing through walls.

All of this is in addition to darkness / devil's sight combo still working, short rest casting, near full-caster progression including access to foresight, detect magic at will with Eldritch Sight, and so on.

With everything together, I can't help feeling that Hexblades will be the overall best, and by far the most versatile, Gish. Does anyone else get that feeling?

Why is this a concern? It is thought but concern connotes a sense of worry or dread. What's wrong with warlock being the best Gish?

[Kryx]

I wrote off hexblades long ago. They are a horrible patch to the Pact of the Blade with no flavor. They are abomonations that should never have been created.

[Eragon123]

I wrote off hexblades long ago. They are a horrible patch to the Pact of the Blade with no flavor. They are abomonations that should never have been created.

Maybe. I'll mostly agree with the initial iteration. It might get fixed by release, especially if they move the focus to curse moving and the weapon mostly flavor to refluff. Hell medium armor on a caster is still good.

Another interesting thing to see is if these new invocations help bridge the gap for non-hexblade blade locks. If so I'll appreciate Xanathar's for that at the very least.

If not. Well, it's not like you or I are strangers to home-brew.

[miburo]

Do we know if they get Charisma to all weapon attacks (melee, ranged, great weapons, etc.)? Or is it still the same "one-handed weapon only" restrictions? If it is restricted, I don't think it is that big a deal. And even with Short Rest casting you're still getting only 2 spells cast per short rest for the vast majority of your adventuring career. If you're lucky and your DM actually gives you 2 short rests per day, that's 6 spells per day which is not crazy huge.

There's still a lot of room for other gishes. Paladins as a whole (if you are okay with the Divine thing). Ftr 1/Bladelock X for GWF gish (and I'd strongly consider Fiend Pact for this, for scalable temp HP and some blasting spells), AT/Bladesinger for single weapon fighting, etc.

[Easy_Lee]

Why is this a concern? It is thought but concern connotes a sense of worry or dread. What's wrong with warlock being the best Gish?

I'm not concerned for the Hexblade but for the health of the game. If every Gish got casting stat to weapon attacks, I'd be fine with it. I'd prefer that to the current system, in fact. But if only Hexblades can do it, and they're the most versatile on top of that, I worry that they'll be the go-to archetype for every Gish concept.

[UrielAwakened]

4e did Gishes so much better.

They SHOULD be SAD classes. All of them.

I think this Hexblade will hopefully allow for future fixes to other Gishes.

[Kryx]

if they move the focus to curse moving and the weapon mostly flavor to refluff.
That would add more flavor and it'd be a welcome direction, but I quite disagree with the whole direction. What about a Fey Warlock who is gifted a blade by his patron? Or any other Patron?

Tying melee to 1 patron and 1 patron only defeats the whole purpose of the 5e structure. No thank you.

[Eragon123]

That would add more flavor and it'd be a welcome direction, but I quite disagree with the whole direction. What about a Fey Warlock who is gifted a blade by his patron? Or any other Patron?

Tying melee to 1 patron and 1 patron only defeats the whole purpose of the 5e structure. No thank you.


I 100% agree with that. However I do appreciate the difficulty of wizards trying to avoid extensive errata since that's what led 4th edition to its grave (it may have been well on its way anyway but that's a different topic).

I see this as more of a compromise. Those who hate the hex blade flavor can strip it down into invocations and pact of blade perks. Those who like it can go to hell still have fun with it.

[lunaticfringe]

I wrote off hexblades long ago. They are a horrible patch to the Pact of the Blade with no flavor. They are abomonations that should never have been created.

Indeed. Woo! Talky Words

[Desteplo]

Well... it’s effectively a permanent cantrip. I don’t see too much problem
.
-like college of swords to college of valor, there’s a higher versatility with valor in combat potential while swords is very specific with what it does
-same with hexblade and fiend pact
-you can still use standard bladelock to great effect using duel wield or two handed
-but if you are going to be single hand combat, now you have a patron specifically for that

[Spiritchaser]

While Xanathar's isn't out yet, we do know a few things about the Hexblade:

They will be able to use charisma for their weapon attacks, making them potentially the only SAD Gish (a character who uses both spells and weapons effectively).
Moon Bow and invocations for pact weapon to-hit bonuses are confirmed.
A Freedom of Movement invocation is confirmed, as well as one for seeing through walls.

All of this is in addition to darkness / devil's sight combo still working, short rest casting, near full-caster progression including access to foresight, detect magic at will with Eldritch Sight, and so on.

With everything together, I can't help feeling that Hexblades will be the overall best, and by far the most versatile, Gish. Does anyone else get that feeling?

I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that it won’t fundamentally surpass a sorcadin... though taken as a whole, it might match one.

This is based only on the one hexblade bladelock at my table, so hardly good data but I wouldn’t dismiss it either.

I’ll make no comment or guess on a hexblade-Paladin MC until I’ve read the final version.

[UrielAwakened]

Honestly the solution here was make cantrips like Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade use your spellcasting stat as their attacking modifier instead of Str/Dex.

Then just let these Gish classes take those.

[Chugger]

I wrote off hexblades long ago. They are a horrible patch to the Pact of the Blade with no flavor. They are abomonations that should never have been created.

I pretty much agree with you.

I'm guessing that we're going to see entire parties of hexblades.

[Chugger]

Honestly the solution here was make cantrips like Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade use your spellcasting stat as their attacking modifier instead of Str/Dex.

Then just let these Gish classes take those.

Or belt of x giant str, or gauntlet of ogre power. Or what we need is a dex-boosting item besides the book and the ion stone.

[Rebonack]

I don't mind SAD gishes TOO much. We already had Shillelagh hovering around filling that spot, too.

What does bother me, though, is more or less the same problem Kryx has expressed. Using a Patron to patch a Boon is awful design. I still think something as simple as Blade Boon allowing the Warlock to use Eldritch Blast as a melee spell that can be Opportunity Attack'd with would have filled the fantasy of a Doctor Strange style magewarrior bopping things with conjured eldritch weapons.

Though I am curious how Lifedrinker interacts with Hexblade. If I recall correctly, you never add an ability score to a damage roll more than once unless the ability specifically states that you do.

[Eragon123]

Though I am curious how Lifedrinker interacts with Hexblade. If I recall correctly, you never add an ability score to a damage roll more than once unless the ability specifically states that you do.

At 1st level, you gain proficiency with medium armor, shields, and martial weapons. In addition, when attacking with a melee weapon that you are proficient with and that lacks the two- handed property, you can use your Charisma modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, for the attack and damage rolls.

You probably just use strength/dexterity and then re-add charisma. Or at least that'd be an option.

[alchahest]

maybe the cha to attack/damage is now an invocation tied to a level and pact of the blade.

[Eragon123]

maybe the cha to attack/damage is now an invocation tied to a level and pact of the blade.

Maybe but if I were a gambling man I'd but money down on that not happening as it raises questions as to why the other invocation is at 12 for one and raises complications and contradictions.

[alchahest]

Maybe but if I were a gambling man I'd but money down on that not happening as it raises questions as to why the other invocation is at 12 for one and raises complications and contradictions.

could be just a specific pact of the blade invocation for level 5 or whatever that replaces str/dex with cha for your attack rolls.

then the hexblade doesn't need to be overpowering at all, and you've got to dip at least five levels into warlock for cha to hit, and 12 for cha to damage. it also means that a hexblade won't be double dipping cha for damage by taking lifedrinker.

[Mortis_Elrod]

When you hit a creature with your pact weapon, the creature takes extra necrotic damage equal to your Charisma modifier (minimum 1).

seems pretty obvious that it stacks to me.

[alchahest]

yes, exactly. what I'm suggesting is that if hexblade DOESN'T get an ability to use cha for attack and damage, then there's no need to worry about it stacking.

have an invocation for swapping charisma to your attack stat, and then lifedrinker functions for damage later on.

[Mortis_Elrod]

yes, exactly. what I'm suggesting is that if hexblade DOESN'T get an ability to use cha for attack and damage, then there's no need to worry about it stacking.

have an invocation for swapping charisma to your attack stat, and then lifedrinker functions for damage later on.

Well, that might work to mitigate mcing thats kinda bad for a single classed warlock. Also the hexblade is confirmed to still have the cha to hit and damage, the level in which it gets the ability might be different though, but i doubt it. waiting 6 levels to switch stats is.....just bad.

[rbstr]

Hexblade's biggest problem, as I see it, is that no other 1st-level Patron feature is close to being so strong. It's silly that they simply get more than the rest of the patrons.
It's a massive melee survivability bonus on top of a great damage booster. And that's regardless of melee vs. Eldritch-Blaster. Armor and the Curse are useful in either case.
The ability-score-economy bonus of Cha for melee is an afterthought at that point. (I find that more unfair in the larger context of Spellcasting being so strong and then allowing a jack-of-all-trades master-of-all-too).

Since we know they're keeping Cha-melee they better have pared back the rest of it very heavily at level 1.

[alchahest]

it's almost as bad as if rogues could use dex for most of their relevant skills, their attack and damage, their armor class, and a very common save!

[Mortis_Elrod]

Hexblade's biggest problem, as I see it, is that no other 1st-level Patron feature is close to being so strong. It's silly that they simply get more than the rest of the patrons.
It's a massive melee survivability bonus on top of a great damage booster. And that's regardless of melee vs. Eldritch-Blaster. Armor and the Curse are useful in either case.
The ability-score-economy bonus of Cha for melee is an afterthought at that point. (I find that more unfair in the larger context of Spellcasting being so strong and then allowing a jack-of-all-trades master-of-all-too).

Since we know they're keeping Cha-melee they better have pared back the rest of it very heavily at level 1.

i kinda agree, but i think the thing to change is the curse itself. curse does too much for most peoples taste. if the only thing they got was armor shields and cha to melee one handed weapons it be fine. Sadly thats more blade and less hex. Its just a strong patron, and the whole thing is kinda messed up.

This is the way i see it anyway, or rather i think its mostly fine and this is my solution for other peoples concerns.


it's almost as bad as if rogues could use dex for most of their relevant skills, their attack and damage, their armor class, and a very common save!

agreed. if rogues could do that it be stupid strong. game breaking even.

[rbstr]

The rogue doesn't get to cast level 9 spells with Dex. Is a Bladesinger that can cast using dex similarly acceptable to the rogue?
What it gets down to is that physical stats just aren't nearly as powerful as casting stats. Particularly when it comes to versatility.

Something that's SAD and has baked-in extra-attack-type melee and is also a full caster is just getting too good at too much for me. (And the game, until Hexblade, for that that's worth)

[tkuremento]

I still think something as simple as Blade Boon allowing the Warlock to use Eldritch Blast as a melee spell that can be Opportunity Attack'd with would have filled the fantasy of a Doctor Strange style magewarrior bopping things with conjured eldritch weapons.

Sorta reminds me of the Warlock archetype for Vigilante in Pathfinder and their class feature Mystic Bolts. I never thought of using that to make a Doctor Strange style character until now, thank you! :smallsmile:

[B0nes]

yes, exactly. what I'm suggesting is that if hexblade DOESN'T get an ability to use cha for attack and damage, then there's no need to worry about it stacking.

have an invocation for swapping charisma to your attack stat, and then lifedrinker functions for damage later on.

Bladelocks already have a ton of invocation tax compared to blastlock. Maybe the CHA to hit/dmg should be tied into Pact of the Blade instead of Hexblade.

[D.U.P.A.]

Problem is that then some Cha classes like Paladin are much better with that level in Warlock to be more SAD.

[Eragon123]

Problem is that then some Cha classes like Paladin are much better with that level in Warlock to be more SAD.

I know this is a really unpopular opinion but reading comments like these I feel validate my decision to bar multiclassing at my table. Seriously so many wrinkles in 5e just disappear once you just have single-classed characters.

[alchahest]

stats cap out at twenty, I'm not sure of any class that's unable to max it's main stat by level 8 unless they specifically didn't take a race capable of it (in which case it'd be 12). is SAD actually a detriment to the game? Do SAD gishes suddenly not need CON? or dex/str for AC?

[Deleted]

I'm not concerned for the Hexblade but for the health of the game. If every Gish got casting stat to weapon attacks, I'd be fine with it. I'd prefer that to the current system, in fact. But if only Hexblades can do it, and they're the most versatile on top of that, I worry that they'll be the go-to archetype for every Gish concept.

The current game isn't balanced so adding more unbalanced things won't change much.

Little late to be worried about issues like this. As long as it looks like 3e, everything is fine after all.

[Zalabim]

There's so much concentrated Wrong in this thread it'd be easy to just write the whole thing off.


While Xanathar's isn't out yet, we do know a few things about the Hexblade:

They will be able to use charisma for their weapon attacks, making them potentially the only SAD Gish (a character who uses both spells and weapons effectively).
Moon Bow and invocations for pact weapon to-hit bonuses are confirmed.
A Freedom of Movement invocation is confirmed, as well as one for seeing through walls.

All of this is in addition to darkness / devil's sight combo still working, short rest casting, near full-caster progression including access to foresight, detect magic at will with Eldritch Sight, and so on.

With everything together, I can't help feeling that Hexblades will be the overall best, and by far the most versatile, Gish. Does anyone else get that feeling?
My main concern is that they didn't make the balance changes necessary to prevent Hexblade from being the patron with the least excuse for using a weapon. Warlocks can already use Cha to deal all their damage and cast many useful spells with a lot of their spell slots recovering on a short rest. That doesn't stop people from calling them a dip-only class right now. Maybe adding more higher-level-required invocations will change that opinion. Maybe it won't.

could be just a specific pact of the blade invocation for level 5 or whatever that replaces str/dex with cha for your attack rolls.

then the hexblade doesn't need to be overpowering at all, and you've got to dip at least five levels into warlock for cha to hit, and 12 for cha to damage. it also means that a hexblade won't be double dipping cha for damage by taking lifedrinker.
That would be awful. I hope I don't have to explain this.

Hexblade's biggest problem, as I see it, is that no other 1st-level Patron feature is close to being so strong. It's silly that they simply get more than the rest of the patrons.
It's a massive melee survivability bonus on top of a great damage booster. And that's regardless of melee vs. Eldritch-Blaster. Armor and the Curse are useful in either case.
The ability-score-economy bonus of Cha for melee is an afterthought at that point. (I find that more unfair in the larger context of Spellcasting being so strong and then allowing a jack-of-all-trades master-of-all-too).

Since we know they're keeping Cha-melee they better have pared back the rest of it very heavily at level 1.
This is completely true. Based on other level 1 patron features, the UA gives way too much. If they have to keep them all, then I'd hope they at least drop shield proficiency, make the curse weaker, scale only with warlock levels, and change it so that the curse doesn't favor EB so heavily.

I'm not concerned for the Hexblade but for the health of the game. If every Gish got casting stat to weapon attacks, I'd be fine with it. I'd prefer that to the current system, in fact. But if only Hexblades can do it, and they're the most versatile on top of that, I worry that they'll be the go-to archetype for every Gish concept.
According to every "EB is better than blade all the time and twice on sundays," warlocks should already attack with Charisma. So giving the class that already attacks with CharismaSHOCK the ability to attack with CharismaHORROR in meleeREVULSION is not giving them anything special. This change changes little.

[Lombra]

I wrote off hexblades long ago. They are a horrible patch to the Pact of the Blade with no flavor. They are abomonations that should never have been created.

My thoughts exaxtly. My favourite gish will always be a fighter 1/GOO bladelock x regardless of the affinity between pact and patron. MADness is part of the character in many ways, if you see what I mean.

[Submortimer]

Bladelocks already have a ton of invocation tax compared to blastlock. Maybe the CHA to hit/dmg should be tied into Pact of the Blade instead of Hexblade.

This right here.

Do this, and then also change Agonizing blast to have a prereq of 5th level. Bam, NOW you have a solid reason to choose Blade at third.

[EdwardCross]

I am currently playing a Variant Human Hexblade. My current breakdown includes the following:

War Caster
Prodigy

Devil's Sight
Improved Pact Weapon
Thirsting Blade (currently the only part member who gets an extra attack too)
Cloak of Flies

I went with a decent mix of scaling spells and utility spells (have Invis, Fly, and Dispel Magic, one smite spell, and AoA.

After 7 levels playing this gish, I am perfectly fine with using CHA (+4) for my weapon attacks. Thematically I use a spear (the patron is also a spear so hey why not RP it that way) and I do fine holding my own and tanking effectively. I think folks get blindsided by the fact that Hexblades are SAD. I find it to be a great boon. I don't ever have to bicker over weapon drops since I can make whatever I want, I don't ever need to worry about taking a STR or DEX ASI unless I feel like my skills are lacking (AC is decent) nor do I ever have to bicker about potions or items that others would want because I don't have to worry about the primary melee damage stats. I think its GREAT. My DM has no experience with them until now and I keep throwing him for a loop with my abilities. Hexblade's are unpredictable even if they are limited by spells slots.
I'm having a blast playing mine, and don't really see many problems. You can argue that it's a dip class for a lot of reasons but when you stick with it they can really mess with encounters, even outside of combat. The patron makes great Chainlocks, Bladelocks, and Booklocks to me. The curse always makes you hit harder regardless of playstyle and grants later game advantages for even the frailest of book or chain users (hopefully they keep in that 50% miss chance on a cursed target), plus access to armor
most arcane casters need to burn feats to acquire.
I think the speculative problems most people are talking about and theorycrafting out are negligible. It's not really just a patch for Bladelocks to be better melee frontliners. It takes all the boons into consideration and makes them a bit more stalwart based on an individuals style. At anytime I could switch out all my invocations and go blastlock. As a tomelock I could have ranged based healing using curse with kills and get all of those other benefits. A chainlock can even tank well with his pet at his side by being a Hexblade.
I think it's the perfect addition to the base class that is known to have the most customization options. Now crucify me all you folks want ;)

[skaddix]

Problem is that then some Cha classes like Paladin are much better with that level in Warlock to be more SAD.

Plus EB for a reliable ranged option.

[Deleted]

Plus EB for a reliable ranged option.

It's ok to be SAD with attack and damage, your primary thing in D&D.

This just means that when you build a charactwr you can do so much more than if you needed to pick up 2 or 3 ability scores.

Build flexibility is amazing.

Being SAD doesn't make something broken, what features you have and can do makes your character broken.

So people complaining about SAD should be complainging about the base abilities and not a feature that lets you make a variety of different characters within one class.

[Cybren]

The biggest problem with the Hexblade subclass is that apparently you aren't a hexblade, your patron is.

[Mikal]

The biggest problem with the Hexblade subclass is that apparently you aren't a hexblade, your patron is.

... thats like saying the biggest issue with the fiend subclass is that apparently you aren't a fiend, your patron is.
Same for Archfey, Old Ones, etc.

Hexblade, Fiend, etc. are not subclasses. They're patrons. What you get at 3rd level is your subclass

[Cybren]

... thats like saying the biggest issue with the fiend subclass is that apparently you aren't a fiend, your patron is.
Same for Archfey, Old Ones, etc.

Hexblade, Fiend, etc. are not subclasses. They're patrons. What you get at 3rd level is your subclass
Except that there was no 3.5 class called "fiend" that it is meant to be adapting. (also, no, the patron is the subclass. You're thinking of pact boons. Which are not subclasses)

[Mikal]

Except that there was no 3.5 class called "fiend" that it is meant to be adapting. (also, no, the patron is the subclass. You're thinking of pact boons. Which are not subclasses)

1) This is 5e. Not 3.5. The Hexblade patron abilities in 3.5 don't mesh at all to 5e.

2) I'd say the pact is the one which is the subclass. After all, invocations are sometimes pact locked, but not patron locked, which makes sense if the pact is the subclass and not the patron. If you wanted to stretch it, you could say both pact and patron make the subclass since you do get unique abilities and/or access to unique abilities from both.

[Cybren]

1) This is 5e. Not 3.5. The Hexblade patron abilities in 3.5 don't mesh at all to 5e.

2) I'd say the pact is the one which is the subclass. After all, invocations are sometimes pact locked, but not patron locked, which makes sense if the pact is the subclass and not the patron. If you wanted to stretch it, you could say both pact and patron make the subclass since you do get unique abilities and/or access to unique abilities from both.

1) That doesn't change that shifting "hexblade" from a term used to describe a person to a term used to describe a talking sword is bad, especially since the framing of the rules will mean everyone will just refer to their character as "a hexblade", as everyone in this thread has been doing.
2) You can say whatever you want. You're wrong. The patrons are the subclasses. Calling a pact boon a subclass is like calling a fighting style a subclass.

[Mikal]

1) That doesn't change that shifting "hexblade" from a term used to describe a person to a term used to describe a talking sword is bad, especially since the framing of the rules will mean everyone will just refer to their character as "a hexblade", as everyone in this thread has been doing.

Why is it bad? Definitions change.
And people also say they're a fiend warlock, or fey, or GOO... so again. Why is it bad? Besides you not liking it, so objective reasons only.


2) You can say whatever you want. You're wrong. The patrons are the subclasses. Calling a pact boon a subclass is like calling a fighting style a subclass.

Show me in the rules where I'm wrong.

[Cybren]

Why is it bad? Definitions change.
And people also say they're a fiend warlock, or fey, or GOO... so again. Why is it bad? Besides you not liking it, so objective reasons only.



Show me in the rules where I'm wrong.

In the PHB. Where it says warlock. Pact boon is presented as a class feature. Patron is presented as a subclass. Look at the SRD. Every class is given one subclass. The Warlock entry in the SRD only offers fiend pact warlocks, but still shows all the pact boons. Because patrons are the subclass and pact boons are just a regular class feature.

[Mikal]

In the PHB. Where it says warlock. Pact boon is presented as a class feature. Patron is presented as a subclass. Look at the SRD. Every class is given one subclass. The Warlock entry in the SRD only offers fiend pact warlocks, but still shows all the pact boons. Because patrons are the subclass and pact boons are just a regular class feature.

Eh, looking at it you're right about it.
But that still doesn't mean you're right about the rest

[Cybren]

I mean, part of my comment was meant to illustrate that we don't actually know anything about the Xanathar's Hexblade so i was pointing out the only concrete thing we can criticize is incredibly superficial, but I'm still annoyed at it. (also, sure, people say they're playing fiendlocks or fiend pack warlocks, but they don't say they're playing a fiend)

[Foff]

Honestly I don't see what all the fuss is about, I like multiclassing, it makes sense.
What I don't like is multiclassing just to have stronger abilities for the hell of it.
(you guys level up after a fight inside a dungeon, ding! I just decided I wanna be a sorcerer from now on because my character starts farting magic missiles)
if a player wants his character to multiclass he should work for it, he should invest resources and time into learning new tools and skills, but more importantly he should have a reason and the opportunity to do so.

I also happen to like hexblades, I played one in STK until a few days ago when she died fighting a vampire.
being all about charisma was useful, mechanically wise and roleplay wise, she was fair and frail, until she summoned her inner rage and strenght to destroy her enemies.
She was useful inside and outside of fights for the party, she had versatility sure (she could fly when nobody could, she could turn the rogue invisibile while being invisible herself, she held out her own in a fight both in melee and at range, she could even kiss of mephistopheles somebody from 90 yards),
but my experience is also that while you may have many options you're incredibly limited as well, moreso than a sorcerer.

I believe that balanced and unbalanced characters ultimately have to deal with a dungeon master, who should be able to play with, against and around the party strenghts and weaknesses but most importantly, if you're playing d&d just to roll dices and deal big damage, you're probably failing in the first place.

[Mortis_Elrod]

Show me in the rules where I'm wrong.


You mean how subclasses have abilities gained at specified levels, that’s also shown on the class table? How subclasses can be chosen at first level depending on the class (cleric/Sorcerer)? How the patron is a defining aspect of the warlock eg where they get power from which is how all other subclasses are? How any boon can go with any patron just like any fighting style can go with any martial archetype yet fighting style isn’t a subclass for the fighter even though that can dictate play style?

Subclasses in UA and the more recent books have a table where features are shown at which level, if pact booms are subclasses where is their table?

[Mortis_Elrod]

You wanna look up a few posts?

Sorry bro, was typing before they posted

[Mikal]

Sorry bro, was typing before they posted

Ha, no worries. I'll delete mine if you delete yours :smallbiggrin:

[Deleted]

Ha, no worries. I'll delete mine if you delete yours :smallbiggrin:

If I wasn't so lazy I would make a damn good joke right now.

[Shriketalon]

The thing that bothers me about the Hexblade's SAD melee attacks is that it isn't necessary. All they need to do is create a single cantrip to handle the problem, like so:

Eldritch Strike
-1 action, 5 feet, instantaneous, material component (weapon)
As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creation in the spell's range. This attack roll uses your spellcasting modifier. On a hit, you deal your weapon's damage die.
If you make this attack using a pact weapon as defined by the Pact of the Blade class feature, you add your spellcasting modifier to the damage roll.
If you possess the Thirsting Blade invocation, you can make a second attack as part of this action.

Need to clean up the semantics a bit, of course, but you get the idea. Give them an attack cantrip that scales with warlock class features, and every bladelock in the game has a way to use CHA to hit without further invocation taxes. It's also pretty well multiclass proof, since the classes that want to use it rely on Extra Attack.

[Cybren]

The thing that bothers me about the Hexblade's SAD melee attacks is that it isn't necessary. All they need to do is create a single cantrip to handle the problem, like so:

Eldritch Strike
-1 action, 5 feet, instantaneous, material component (weapon)
As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creation in the spell's range. This attack roll uses your spellcasting modifier. On a hit, you deal your weapon's damage die.
If you make this attack using a pact weapon as defined by the Pact of the Blade class feature, you add your spellcasting modifier to the damage roll.
If you possess the Thirsting Blade invocation, you can make a second attack as part of this action.

Need to clean up the semantics a bit, of course, but you get the idea. Give them an attack cantrip that scales with warlock class features, and every bladelock in the game has a way to use CHA to hit without further invocation taxes. It's also pretty well multiclass proof, since the classes that want to use it rely on Extra Attack.

"All they need to do is create an incredibly convoluted attack cantrip with multiple exceptions and conditionals built into it" isn't really an elegant design solution.