Power Creep in XGTE

[Potato_Priest]

I've seen people bring this sort of thing up in unrelated threads, so while I personally don't own Xanathar's guide to everything yet (with luck I'll be getting it tomorrow) I'd like to present people with a place to discuss the power-creep (or absence thereof) in Xanathar's guide to everything.

For those who aren't aware, power creep is the gradually increasing power of splatbook options, which in previous editions apparently progressed to the point that the original players handbook content was almost obsolete.

5e has tried to reduce power creep by tying Adventurer's League to the PHB+1 rule (so that options from different splatbooks can't be combined in unexpected ways). Of course, some power creep is still likely to occur.



Here's my personal take on the worst power creep in the book, just from looking at what others have said.

From my (relatively uninformed) perspective, the source of the greatest power creep in Xanathar's is without question the Hexblade. The other warlock patrons are all pretty minimal in terms of unique free tools (most of the specialization from the different pacts comes from their special spell lists, which still consume spells known), but the Hexblade seems to be handing them out like candy.

[Jerrykhor]

If a problem can be solved by throwing in more dragons and beholders, its not really a problem now is it?

[Potato_Priest]

If a problem can be solved by throwing in more dragons and beholders, its not really a problem now is it?

Unless it makes players feel inadequate in comparison to their XGTE companions (which doesn't seem very likely, but it could happen), in which case it starts impacting fun, and that's a problem.

Even if it isn't yet a problem, I think it still might prove interesting to discuss.

[Naanomi]

There are some potent options in XGtE, but the disparity between the PHB classes and the XGtE ones are less than the difference between some of the PHB options and other PHB options. Nothing earth shattering from my perspective.

Of course, I’ve seen virtually none of it at the table so...

[Potato_Priest]

There are some potent options in XGtE, but the disparity between the PHB classes and the XGtE ones are less than the difference between some of the PHB options and other PHB options. Nothing earth shattering from my perspective.

Of course, I’ve seen virtually none of it at the table so...

Like I said, I don't have the book, so I cannot confirm or deny your statement, but it seems from the armchair like there's no disparity between phb warlocks equal to the disparity between a phb warlock and a hexblade.

I do think that nothing in XGTE is going to swing strawman optimizers away from the old bear totem barbarian for example, but surely there are some classes where the options were fairly well balanced before?

[Jerrykhor]

In all seriousness, nothing really stands out as obviously overpowered in XGTE. Wotc did listen to feedback and made the necessary changes. Hexblade is one of the most popular requests, and the general feedback is that it was too weak. It still doesn't look appealing to me, and I don't think it is that good. The main drawback is the Curse only usable on one creature per short rest, and cannot transfer to other creatures until level 14. It still boils down to the same old warlock adage: If you can get short rests every other fight, its good. Otherwise, meh. I do like the change to the level 6 feature though.

Just last session, my DM informed my party's Bard of the changes to her character based on XGTE, She was playing a College of Whispers bard, and it got some good buffs. We were struggling in a big fight. But in the end, she was the MVP by landing the final critical hit on the Vampire Lord with her Psychic Blades. Ranged smiting just got real, and I'm glad the buffs came just in time haha.

[OldTrees1]

Thesis: Power creep is essentially unavoidable

Premise 1: For any set of options the people selecting from that set will tend away from the bottom Nth of the options assuming all else equal (when all else is not equal, those other factors exist).
Premise 2: Any set of options created with a targeted power level, will have some degree of variance.
Premise 3: The Developers are designing new sets of options with the intent for them to be roughly of equal power level to the typical PCs being made with the existing options.

Conclusion 4 (2 + 3): Any new set of options will be a set with an average at roughly the old typical but with some variance.
Conclusion 5 (1 + 4): Since the typical is higher than the average, the addition of the new set skews the overall average upwards.
Conclusion 6 (1 + 5): Since the average was skewed upwards, the new typical is also skewed upwards.


But the unavoidable upwards trend might have a very small velocity, might not be a problem, and can be handled by DMs.



With regards to Hexblade in particular: While I considered it for my Paladin (Ancients) 1-9 / Warlock (Old One / Tome) 1-5, I find myself favoring the Old One / Tome over the Hexblade.

[Marcloure]

I think the Ranger Archetypes in XgtE are very much better than those in PHB. Also, I have a feeling the Fighter's Cavalier is just better than the Battlemaster too. But, maybe, nothing so serious for now. Well, that kind of thing, the power creep, is inevitable to some extent.
Not on the same topic, but it's similar to the scaling power of casters over martials as more books are released. If every martial class had Martial Maneuvers, and WotC released more maneuvers as it does with spells, than we would be more balanced in those terms (just like 4e did).
Well, it's the way the system works. Everything they release from now will be somewhat better or worse than what we had before. Usually, they balance upwards.

[LeonBH]

Elven Accuracy and Hexblade seem to be the two worst offenders of power creep.

It's not that the new options break the game. It's that any build for a Bladelock must now have Hexblade or be suboptimal. Any archer should now go Elf for Elven Accuracy (no need for a fighter dip anymore) or be suboptimal.

[Ogre Mage]

In some cases the power creep was arguably needed. I would agree that the ranger options in Xanthar's are clearly better than the (pre-revised) options in the PHB. The problems with the PHB ranger have been debated for years so I won't rehash them here. Ditto for the sorcerer -- I think the Divine Soul and Shadow Sorcerer are better than the options in the PHB (the Storm Sorcerer is perhaps not though). Again, the problems with the PHB sorcerer have been debated ad nauseam for a long time. It appears Xanathar's may be a response to these complaints.

[D.U.P.A.]

On the other hand, if Hexblade feels too powerful, it can be reasonable to ban it from table as Warlocks have tendency over evil and chaos is not suitable for many campaigns, along with Necromancer Wizards, Oathbreaker Paladins and Death Clerics.

[Chugger]

Vengeance Pal + Draconic Sorcadin is still very powerful. Conq + draconic would also be a great combo.

The Wiz schools from PHB are likely to continue to dominate, as War Wiz isn't overwhelming - appeals to some, sure - but very much inspires meh with others.

Death Clerics will dominate at least for a while, but not completely. Forge cleric is likely to be relegated to a dip for someone who really really wants a magic weapon plus a few cleric spells.

Lore Bard has not been surpassed. Two of the X bard classes really look more like home-game sub-classes and not nec. all that great for AL - though there are some AL modules that are heavy RP and would benefit from either (probably glam more than whisp, which I find a very weird subclass). Swords vs Valor ... not sure we're gonna see creep.

Sorc - there are some good options, but draconic and wild are not necessarily surpassed. Rather than a power creep I have a feeling we're going to see more of a "I wanna play something else now" creep.

Except yeah, hexblade. Any pal or bard can 1-dip into that and lose MADness, and it's a strong subclass in and of itself. So we'll see. I don't think the phb is necessarily eclipsed by X ... except hexblade allowing Cha use for melee stats.

[Mikal]

On the other hand, if Hexblade feels too powerful, it can be reasonable to ban it from table as Warlocks have tendency over evil and chaos is not suitable for many campaigns, along with Necromancer Wizards, Oathbreaker Paladins and Death Clerics.

Except that not all warlock subclasses aren't drawn towards chaos or evil. See celestial and...hexblade patrons.

[Specter]

Yeah, Hexblade is really making things sadfor other melee Warlocks. Using CHA to attack and still getting GWF on it is too much. I hear Valor Bard is now hard to pick if you have the option of Swords.

[Mikal]

Yeah, Hexblade is really making things sadfor other melee Warlocks. Using CHA to attack and still getting GWF on it is too much. I hear Valor Bard is now hard to pick if you have the option of Swords.

That's because other melee warlocks required multiclassing and sucked otherwise.
Now you can actually have a viable single class warlock.

[Quoxis]

Yeah, Hexblade is really making things sadfor other melee Warlocks. Using CHA to attack and still getting GWF on it is too much. I hear Valor Bard is now hard to pick if you have the option of Swords.

Throw in "elven accuracy" which can be used for Dex, Wis, Int or CHA attacks, and you get triple advantage on a Cha-powered Maul with GWM. Congratulations, the lvl 8 hexblade is the best weapon damage dealer in the world.

[Spacehamster]

On the other hand, if Hexblade feels too powerful, it can be reasonable to ban it from table as Warlocks have tendency over evil and chaos is not suitable for many campaigns, along with Necromancer Wizards, Oathbreaker Paladins and Death Clerics.

Hexblade is how powerful warlocks should of been from the start, at least when it comes to bladelocks which were barely even viable single class before.

[EvilAnagram]

The other warlock patrons are all pretty minimal in terms of unique free tools (most of the specialization from the different pacts comes from their special spell lists, which still consume spells known), but the Hexblade seems to be handing them out like candy.

Hard disagree. In fact, I would recommend against choosing your Patron based off of the spell list unless one of the spells is absolutely key to your build.

[Pex]

The new options will be getting a lot of hype because they are new. People will exalt in their awesomeness because they get to play and witness play of different stuff they've been seeing over and over. Enough with the great weapon master half-orc totem barbarian. Enough with the tiefling chain fiendish warlock with his agonizing blast and imp familiar. Enough with the halfling arcane trickster.

That is not to say your premise is unfounded, but I do think it's premature. Let the hype settle down and then see what new stuff keeps repeating itself to warrant the power creep label.

[Naanomi]

In a way though Id rather have small powercreep than what SCAG did, being so afraid of power-creep that several (most?) subclasses are notably weaker than the base options; making some conceptually cool ideas mechanically subpar (oath of Crown, Undying patron...)

[JustAMcGuffin]

Hexblade is definitely way too powerful. Warlock was already one of the strongest dips in the game, and the Hexblade just adds to it. Any charisma based melee benefits from it. Paladins, swashbucklers, sorcerers, bards, all for just one level. They're way too front-loaded. I'm also sad that swords bard got into the book as it doesn't just step on valor bards toes, it runs those toes over with a trailer truck.

So yes the powercreep is strong within this book. Still there is some great stuff in there, I'd rather have the book and just ban or change what needs to be banned and changed, than not have it at all.

edited to add second paragraph and this

[Dudewithknives]

In a way though Id rather have small powercreep than what SCAG did, being so afraid of power-creep that several (most?) subclasses are notably weaker than the base options; making some conceptually cool ideas mechanically subpar (oath of Crown, Undying patron...)

SCAG made up for Meh sub races by creating by far the most 2 most game changing cantrips in the game with BB/GFB.

That is not power creep, that is straight out boosting the melee damage of arcane casters by almost double, and adding in bonus rider effects.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Honestly, I'd say Fiend could rival Hexblade in overall power level, though they're suited to different things. All the Fiend features are very good, and unlike the GOO and Archfey aren't circumstantial in any way. Furthermore, it has some very nice spells on its expanded list - particularly Scorching Ray (combines excellently with Hex) and Fireball (fills a slot - damaging AoE) that Warlocks are somewhat lacking in.

Celestial is similar, having good abilities that are always useful, and having a fairly good expanded list (I'd call it a little worse than the Fiend's, but arguably better than the Hexblade's - Hexblade has too many spells that don't work well with pact magic, like Shield and the Smites). Personally, I'd put the 'tier list' of warlock pacts as Celestial=Fiend=Hexblade > Archfey = GOO > Undying.

Incidentally, the Ranger subclasses in XGE are all examples of power creep to an extent, being rather better than the core ones. However, since the core Ranger (particularly Beast Master) is so very meh anyway...

[mer.c]

I’m fine if Hexblade gives bladelocks a way of being competitive with EB spam without huge character-building hurdles. That’s good power creep IMO, although if they turn out overturned vs. other Warlocks that would be a problem.

My hesitations are with the power of a 1-level dip, and how much raw melee power Hexblades will have on top of all the other powerful features they have. Even if those features can wax or wane in power depending on DM.

[mephnick]

Hexblade may be the tipping point for me to not allow the option to multiclass. I was already annoyed by Warlock dips and WotC was like "oh man, Warlock dips already too popular? Hold my beer."

Outside of that, any new spells that are published will always be power creep for casters over martials. The more options you get, the more you can power-game. Martials get new subclasses. Casters get new subclasses and entire spell lists that any of them can pick apart. It's never balanced. I fully expect the Casters Rule/Martials Drool of other editions to continue if WotC keeps pumping out spell options.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

If you give a Bard Fireball as a native Bard spell it changes the balance so I say yes it is. They are in a tough position where they want to sell books for profit so some is needed from the WOTC pov.

[Dudewithknives]

Hexblade may be the tipping point for me to not allow the option to multiclass. I was already annoyed by Warlock dips and WotC was like "oh man, Warlock dips already too popular? Hold my beer."

Outside of that, any new spells that are published will always be power creep for casters over martials. The more options you get, the more you can power-game. Martials get new subclasses. Casters get new subclasses and entire spell lists that any of them can pick apart. It's never balanced. I fully expect the Casters Rule/Martials Drool of other editions to continue if WotC keeps pumping out spell options.

Like I have always said. The company is Wizards of the Coast not Warriors of the Bay.

[KorvinStarmast]

In a way though Id rather have small powercreep than what SCAG did, being so afraid of power-creep that several (most?) subclasses are notably weaker than the base options; making some conceptually cool ideas mechanically subpar (oath of Crown, Undying patron...) I prefer what SCAG did. I dislike power creep.
Hexblade may be the tipping point for me to not allow the option to multiclass. I was already annoyed by Warlock dips and WotC was like "oh man, Warlock dips already too popular? Hold my beer." Yeah. :smallbiggrin:

Like I have always said. The company is Wizards of the Coast not Warriors of the Bay. Indeed, however the power creep in Volo's wasn't even subtle with the Yuan Ti pureblood.

[mephnick]

Indeed, however the power creep in Volo's wasn't even subtle with the Yuan Ti pureblood.

Thankfully I don't have to deal with Yuan Ti since I don't play evil campaigns (Yes the races in my campaigns have forced racial alignments, fight me), but it's a lot harder to pick through ban individual spells or subclasses when there start being too many to keep track of. I have no idea why people thought we needed new spells in the first place, though, so maybe I'm just a grump.

[lunaticfringe]

I don't think Blade steps on Valor's toes. It's better at 1H & TWF. I'd still go Valor for Archer & Two Handed Bards. Valor is still better at Support, Blade wants his inspiration for himself.

[Spiritchaser]

I think that in many ways the hexblade is the strongest warlock, although fiend might still be a hair better all in all.

Hexblade certainly is by far the best bladelock

As far as I’ve seen in play with previous versions, it is still slightly inferior to a sorcadin as the best Gish

Does that constitute power creep? On a game wide scale definitely no.

The way it enables SOME bladelocks to work better than others is not great, but isn’t the topic here.

Does a 1-3 level warlock dip gain disproportional value for some builds?

Yes, but I can live with it

[rbstr]

I'd disagree that the new Rangers do much powercreep. Feature for feature they balance against the Hunter well. And while the extra spells are unfair I don't actually feel like they really add much in the way of power they mainly just enable play styles.

Overall the book is pretty good with balance I think. Most options are stronger than the "bad" options that existed before, but they're mostly on par with the good options. With a couple exceptions

Hexblade simply gets more than other patrons, particularly at first level. It clearly creeped warlocks. Against the whole game it's not really bad until you get to the combos with other stuff. In particular when it stacks with item #2
Elven Accuracy just exacerbates the imbalance of casters/dex/Sharpshooter in a bad way.
Swords Bard is a bit iffy. To me it doesn't actually seem that much more powerful than Valor but I'm not super familiar with either of them.

[alchahest]

I feel that a paladin who wants a hexblade level is still going to have at least 13 strength, usually no less than 15. and will still have a positive constitution modifier. and if for some reason you don't want heavy armor, you'll still need the 13 str to multiclass and you'll need to pump dex too. many have wisdom, as who better to dominate than a vengeance paladin? there's no "SAD paladin".

If the problem is sorlocks, well a sorc, even a dragon sorc, isn't tanky enough to melee anyways. not in the same way a fighter, paladin, or barbarian is. And eldritch blast is a significantly better use of warlock levels (a sorc is likely better served by another pact unless you really want to be wasting turns you could be casting spells to get into melee).

Bards are the case where I can see dipping as a big help, but bards can benefit greatly from a spread, as skill monkeys they generally want at least a little bit of everything, and will, for reasons similar to the paladin, usually use either dex or str for defense.

[D.U.P.A.]

SCAG made up for Meh sub races by creating by far the most 2 most game changing cantrips in the game with BB/GFB.

That is not power creep, that is straight out boosting the melee damage of arcane casters by almost double, and adding in bonus rider effects.

Arcane casters already have a lot of other melee options and usually do not want to be in melee in the first place. These cantrips are used more by martials, who dip into other classes, already have magical capabilities or use Magic initiate feat.

[stoutstien]

I really wish they at least added more options for the weaker options in the PH. I was looking forward to elemental monk options and high level battle master manuvers.

[Potato_Priest]

I really wish they at least added more options for the weaker options in the PH. I was looking forward to elemental monk options and high level battle master manuvers.

Yeah, that would've been great.

[mer.c]

I really wish they at least added more options for the weaker options in the PH. I was looking forward to elemental monk options and high level battle master manuvers.

I'm actually slightly surprised to hear it doesn't. Seems like pretty low-hanging fruit.

[SharkForce]

In some cases the power creep was arguably needed. I would agree that the ranger options in Xanthar's are clearly better than the (pre-revised) options in the PHB. The problems with the PHB ranger have been debated for years so I won't rehash them here. Ditto for the sorcerer -- I think the Divine Soul and Shadow Sorcerer are better than the options in the PHB (the Storm Sorcerer is perhaps not though). Again, the problems with the PHB sorcerer have been debated ad nauseam for a long time. It appears Xanathar's may be a response to these complaints.


I really wish they at least added more options for the weaker options in the PH. I was looking forward to elemental monk options and high level battle master manuvers.


Yeah, that would've been great.


I'm actually slightly surprised to hear it doesn't. Seems like pretty low-hanging fruit.

this is the wrong way to look at things.

if you're going to fix a class, then you should do it properly, in a way that improves the class to where it should be rather than just making the class better only for those who own the new book.

the power creep method means that now if you want to be a draconic sorcerer, you're forced to choose a less powerful option purely because you want to be a dragon sorcerer, and if they fix the base class they risk breaking the new subclasses. people who want to play draconic sorcerer should not be punished by by missing out on a huge spell list expansion or a substantially superior version of heighten spell.

[Potato_Priest]

this is the wrong way to look at things.

if you're going to fix a class, then you should do it properly, in a way that improves the class to where it should be rather than just making the class better only for those who own the new book.

the power creep method means that now if you want to be a draconic sorcerer, you're forced to choose a less powerful option purely because you want to be a dragon sorcerer, and if they fix the base class they risk breaking the new subclasses. people who want to play draconic sorcerer should not be punished by by missing out on a huge spell list expansion or a substantially superior version of heighten spell.

I agree, which is why I made this thread.

That doesn't mean that more battlemaster maneuvers or 4 elements abilities would have been bad, however, as long as they were relatively on par with PHB content.

[Sception]

I agree that the issue with both the hexblade and some of the other subclasses being more potent than their PHB equivalent is that the designers have decided not to errata core material for balance fixes, and are instead trying to sneak in balance fixes for the base classes into new builds. And yeah, that's a terrible way to handle things, because it means the core subclasses basically get obsoleted as a result, but there it is.

IMO, as is a hexbladelock is at more or less to the power level and play style a bladelock should be at, I don't think it's overpowered for the game as a whole, but it completely overshadows ever other patron for blade locks and any non-hex bladelock is left floundering, while at the same time the cool shadow-magic warlock theme is saddled with a melee leaning that doesn't fit. Blade pact for a shadow warlock should be just one option of several, same as for any other warlock pact.


So... yeah. If you want to change anything about the hexblade, change the patron from a nebulous yet specific sword to a general shadowfelly patron (perhaps a pact with one of the dark powers of ravenloft?), remove the proficiencies and cha-to-hit with melee attacks bit, and instead just add that to the blade pact to begin with. Heck, while you're at it, let bladelocks summon a matching pair of finesse weapons to allow dual wielding bladelocks, because there's no reason not to.

Then if people want the same shadow knight feel and mechanics as the hexblade, they can have it, but if they want to be a shadow warlock who isn't melee based, they can do that to, even if they have to rely on eldritch blast for a couple levels before their melee ability picks up. Or they can play a functional fey or fiend or star blades without tying themselves in knots. And if paladins or samurais or whoever want to dip for cha based melee attacks, they can do it, but it costs them a three level dip instead of a one level dip, just like it would for cha-shillelagh from booklock, so it's still an option while being far from a no brainer.



Oh, and probably make the warlock curse damage scale with warlock level rather than proficiency (damage equal to the level of your pact magic spell slots, maybe?), that's an odd choice even with the bad call of using a subclass to sneak in fixes to the base class.

[JustAMcGuffin]

I don't think Blade steps on Valor's toes. It's better at 1H & TWF. I'd still go Valor for Archer & Two Handed Bards. Valor is still better at Support, Blade wants his inspiration for himself.

Maybe it’s because I always saw it as “you want to focus on casting? Here’s lore! You want to focus on melee? Here’s valor!”
But hey that’s just me, either way I still see blades as the more powerful of the two. At least I still have my beautiful glamour and whisper bards :smallbiggrin:

[Tanarii]

SCAG made up for Meh sub races by creating by far the most 2 most game changing cantrips in the game with BB/GFB.

That is not power creep, that is straight out boosting the melee damage of arcane casters by almost double, and adding in bonus rider effects.
Yup. BB/GFB illustrate one of the ways power can get added indirectly. Just as GWM is far more powerful on a Barbarian due to Reckless, it's the combination of feature and/or spells that makes it. BB/GFB on a normal sorcerer or wizard? On par or even sub-par to other can trips, because they aren't likely to boost Dex to max. On a Str or Dex Bladelock or Baldesinger, it's roughly on par with Extra Attack until high levels. On an EK it's a straight upgrade due to War Magic, and on a Rogue (AT or Magic Initiate) or melee Cleric (Arcana or Magic Initiate) it's also a straight upgrade.

The one I chimed in about in another thread was Rangers, in regards to the extra spells. If the sub-classes are otherwise balanced, extra spells for nothing are a straight boost. I know a lot of people think the Ranger is lacking, but I'm not once of them. OTOH they aren't going to win the single-class top-tier award, so I'm probably being a bit reactionary on that. But if it's a needed upgrade to the basic Ranger, they could have easily added an variant rule option to retroactively add spells to the existing Ranger sub-classes without breaking anything. On the flip-side, space issues may have prevented that, and I can see if they wouldn't want to make it feel like an expansion book was required to play a PHB class.

[stoutstien]

Don't get me wrong, reading it now, this may be the best expansion in dnd in regard to lack of power creep. I Like the reprints of sub classes to consolidate them into one book. I like the flavor of a lot of the spells and the majority of them feel about right on power scale. I was just hoping for a handfull options for PH classes in a printed since.

[skaddix]

this is the wrong way to look at things.

if you're going to fix a class, then you should do it properly, in a way that improves the class to where it should be rather than just making the class better only for those who own the new book.

the power creep method means that now if you want to be a draconic sorcerer, you're forced to choose a less powerful option purely because you want to be a dragon sorcerer, and if they fix the base class they risk breaking the new subclasses. people who want to play draconic sorcerer should not be punished by by missing out on a huge spell list expansion or a substantially superior version of heighten spell.

At least the Rangers and Blade Locks get fixes...you could be a Sorcerer still getting screwed six ways till Sunday.

I posit another reason for Power Creep...money...aint no one spending money on a book that doesn't make their character stronger.

[Tanarii]

I posit another reason for Power Creep...money...aint no one spending money on a book that doesn't make their character stronger.I'm willing to bet a large percent of their sales go to people who want new options for new characters, not necessarily stuff to power up existing characters. Otherwise they'd just publish a book full of new spells and magic items, not new races and sub-classes.

[alchahest]

note: it'd just be spells. no way is the current house of D&D going to publish new martial options. like battlemaster maneuvers, or new fighting styles for champions only or whatever. the way it's set up the only way they're going to improve martials is by releasing new subclasses. they won't buff the existing ones the way they do with spellcasters.

[coyote_sly]

note: it'd just be spells. no way is the current house of D&D going to publish new martial options. like battlemaster maneuvers, or new fighting styles for champions only or whatever. the way it's set up the only way they're going to improve martials is by releasing new subclasses. they won't buff the existing ones the way they do with spellcasters.
Well yeah, they don't have any mechanism to do so. It's the reason a lot of people think the Battlemaster's whole schtick should have been a basic martial feature, so they COULD just add to the list easily and affect all existing martial characters.

[Tanarii]

Well yeah, they don't have any mechanism to do so. It's the reason a lot of people think the Battlemaster's whole schtick should have been a basic martial feature, so they COULD just add to the list easily and affect all existing martial characters.
Why can't they release new Battle Master Maneuvers or new Fighting Styles? Why do they have to release something that affects all existing martial characters any more than they have to add a new spell to all caster's spell lists?

[Byke]

Well there was little to no power creep for Sorcerers.....aside from getting absorb element...Divine and Shadow are pretty balanced.

On a tangent Steel Wind Strike ...reminds me of a 3.5 Sorcerer only spell...Dragon Wings...you basically chose all enemies in a 30ft radius and hit them with magical dragon wings (1d8/level?) force damage ...This should have been Sorcerer only...come on WoTC throw in some good Sorcerers only spells already :) Aside from Chaos bolt *EDIT*

*EDIT 2* guess the WotC artists didn't get the memo....Sorcerer don't have Find Familiar either....wonder why they portrayed one having a cat familiar vs the Wizard having a baby Phoenix/Dragon. Putting on the tin foil hat...maybe it's a subliminal message :)

[alchahest]

Why can't they release new Battle Master Maneuvers or new Fighting Styles? Why do they have to release something that affects all existing martial characters any more than they have to add a new spell to all caster's spell lists?

the only thing preventing them from doing it is people chomping at the bit that only spellcasters should be getting new things besides basic attacks. remember what Mearls' contribution to 4th was? taking away mechanical agency from fighters while keeping it for wizards. Mearls prefers the D&D where wizards are straight up more capable at all things due to spells.

[Big Papa Turnip]

Well there was little to no power creep for Sorcerers.....aside from getting absorb element...Divine and Shadow are pretty balanced.

On a tangent Steel Wind Strike ...reminds me of a 3.5 Sorcerer only spell...Dragon Wings...you basically chose all enemies in a 30ft radius and hit them with magical dragon wings (1d8/level?) force damage ...This should have been Sorcerer only...come on WoTC throw in some good Sorcerers only spells already :) Aside from Chaos bolt *EDIT*

Lord, Steel Wind Strike feels like such an enormous slap in the face. Bad enough that it's on the WIZARD spell list, but it's a fifth level spell, meaning Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters can never get it.

I can't believe it's not on the Hexblade expanded spell list. I can't believe it's not on any paladin subclass expanded spell lists.

But yeah, sure, give it to wizards, whatever. It's funny because Wizards of the Coast, am I right? (no)

[Byke]

the only thing preventing them from doing it is people chomping at the bit that only spellcasters should be getting new things besides basic attacks. remember what Mearls' contribution to 4th was? taking away mechanical agency from fighters while keeping it for wizards. Mearls prefers the D&D where wizards are straight up more capable at all things due to spells.


More like Wizard are more capable then everyone....hand over his toil foil hat.

This quote from Sorcerer section in Xander's made me laugh.....

PRACTICE AND STUDY ARE FOR AMATEURS. TRUE POWER
is a birthright.
—Hennet, scion of Tiamat

[Byke]

Lord, Steel Wind Strike feels like such an enormous slap in the face. Bad enough that it's on the WIZARD spell list, but it's a fifth level spell, meaning Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters can never get it.

I can't believe it's not on the Hexblade expanded spell list. I can't believe it's not on any paladin subclass expanded spell lists.

But yeah, sure, give it to wizards, whatever. It's funny because Wizards of the Coast, am I right? (no)

100% agree it should have been a Eldritch Knight/ Paladin spell makes absolutely no sense being a Wizard only spell.

*Edit and Bladelock*

[Dudewithknives]

the only thing preventing them from doing it is people chomping at the bit that only spellcasters should be getting new things besides basic attacks. remember what Mearls' contribution to 4th was? taking away mechanical agency from fighters while keeping it for wizards. Mearls prefers the D&D where wizards are straight up more capable at all things due to spells.

I do not remember if it was MM who said it, but I am 95% sure it was him, it was one of the designers during beta for sure:

Playtester: With the rules for casters and martials changed like this casters have a ton of new advantages and martials lost quite a few.

MM: That is why every class but barbarian has a casting subclass and barbarians get unoverideable resistance.

Playtester: But not everyone wants to play a caster.

MM: Well, I can't stop boring people from playing weak classes.

[alchahest]

Yeah. I don't know why we are able to throw out realism when it comes to magic users, but have to be strict when it comes to swordfighters. It percolates through all levels of the game, to the point where fighters are more scared of meleeing dragons than wizards (fear being a wisdom save, which wizards are proficient in, and fighters are not). Anything a fighter can do, a wizard can do a reasonable imitation of, or outright overpower, with spells. There shouldn't be "Weak" classes. there should be options for someone to play a dragon slaying badass fight guy who doesn't have spells. If wizards are based on gods or half-gods or half demons or whatever (merlin the cambion, gandalf the maiar, etc) why can't we have martials based on the great martials (Arjuna, Hercules, Gilgamesh, Gil-Galad, Beowulf, etc)?

it's especially bad when they cite these heroes as examples of fighters etc, but don't provide mechanical ways they can emulate them... and then when they use merlin, gandalf, etc as examples for wizards, the stuff those characters do in the fiction is far surpassed by the things that player wizards can do.

and that's my rant. I want a martials expansion book. all fighting and feats of might and derring do. Mechanically supported stuff.

[Byke]

it's especially bad when they cite these heroes as examples of fighters etc, but don't provide mechanical ways they can emulate them... and then when they use merlin, gandalf, etc as examples for wizards, the stuff those characters do in the fiction is far surpassed by the things that player wizards can do.

and that's my rant. I want a martials expansion book. all fighting and feats of might and derring do. Mechanically supported stuff.

I'm just poking for fun...but Merlin and Gandalf were Sorcerer mechanically, that why Wizard players are stronger :)

But yes I agree that martial need an expansion book, as do Sorcerer/Clerics/Druids. Maybe WotC can learn from Blizzard and D3 and bring up all classes to the same power level like they did in season 12..for those of you who still play D3.

[SharkForce]

Well there was little to no power creep for Sorcerers.....aside from getting absorb element...Divine and Shadow are pretty balanced.

how was there little to no power creep for sorcerers? both of the new subclasses get an extra spell known, one of them gets a free metamagic except way better than the actual metamagic plus super darkvision plus half of devil's sight (which is absolutely insanely powerful for dealing with enemy spellcasters), the other one goes from having a hyper-restrictive spell list to choose from to having an absolutely massive selection of spells, possibly even more than the wizard, and opens up an entire new character role in a way that core sorcerer can't even dream of (and no, twin haste is not even remotely close to making them as good at buffing as full access to the cleric spell list). and that's just in the first few levels.

balanced with the rest of the game? maybe. balanced with core sorcerer subclasses? not a chance.

[mgshamster]

I just made a melee sorc, and found it hard to justify taking the new sorc subclasses; Draconic is just flat out better.

I also found it borderline whether I wanted hexblade. While the cha to attack and damage was nice, losing out on the spell levels ended up not being worth it for me.

PGEE ended being a better resource than XGtE.

[Specter]

the other one goes from having a hyper-restrictive spell list to choose from to having an absolutely massive selection of spells, possibly even more than the wizard, and opens up an entire new character role in a way that core sorcerer can't even dream of (and no, twin haste is not even remotely close to making them as good at buffing as full access to the cleric spell list). and that's just in the first few levelse.

The bonus selection is good, but as Sorcerers get at best one spell per level (or 1 every 2 levels after 10), this is hardly a boon. Divine Souls get to pick one or two cool cleric spells without compromising their Sorcerer spells.

[Naanomi]

PGEE ended being a better resource than XGtE.
Wait, what? Aren’t all the spells reprinted in XGtE? Are Genasi the best melee-sorcerers and I just don’t realize it? SCAG I could get, those melee cantrips basically create a new archetype, but what in PGEE was so vital?

[mgshamster]

Wait, what? Aren’t all the spells reprinted in XGtE? Are Genasi the best melee-sorcerers and I just don’t realize it? SCAG I could get, those melee cantrips basically create a new archetype, but what in PGEE was so vital?

The genasi are nice for the +2 Con, giving them a boost for HP, which is more helpful in combat.

I also used SCAG for Greenflame Blade and Sword Burst.

I forgot that all the EE spells were reprinted in XGtE.

[Crusher]

There are some potent options in XGtE, but the disparity between the PHB classes and the XGtE ones are less than the difference between some of the PHB options and other PHB options. Nothing earth shattering from my perspective.

Of course, I’ve seen virtually none of it at the table so...

Yeah, this isn’t 3.5, things are pretty balanced. Not perfectly, but enough that everyone can shine. Heck, the single character I’ve played in 5e who was the most broadly dominant in combat was a non-UA Ranger, the class most commonly viewed as needing buffs.

You can make a powerhouse out of ANY class if you really try.

[SharkForce]

The bonus selection is good, but as Sorcerers get at best one spell per level (or 1 every 2 levels after 10), this is hardly a boon. Divine Souls get to pick one or two cool cleric spells without compromising their Sorcerer spells.

yeah, no.

they get to fill as many of their spells known with cleric spells as they want. there is no "compromising" their sorcerer spells. they pick the cleric spells that are better, they don't pick the cleric spells that aren't better, so any situation where they give up a sorcerer spell it is only because they are getting a *better* sorcerer spell, seeing as they are all sorcerer spells for the divine soul.

and there are some very good spells for sorcerers to grab. the cleric is blessed with a pair of combat spells that are almost one-size-fits-all. give that to a sorcerer, and you suddenly free up all kinds of options. it even frees up metamagic options, because when you have spiritual weapon, quicken really delays the need to grab quicken for damage purposes (quicken still retains some value in the form of allowing you to, say, cast a fireball after disengaging, but for damage output? completely obsolete to a divine soul).

divine soul is a major boost. it isn't enough of a boost to make everything else completely obsolete like they're gimped by not choosing that option, and it certainly doesn't break the overall game balance the way that, say... theurgist wizard would have if it made it into XGtE, but it is stronger than core options.

[Byke]

how was there little to no power creep for sorcerers? both of the new subclasses get an extra spell known, one of them gets a free metamagic except way better than the actual metamagic plus super darkvision plus half of devil's sight (which is absolutely insanely powerful for dealing with enemy spellcasters), the other one goes from having a hyper-restrictive spell list to choose from to having an absolutely massive selection of spells, possibly even more than the wizard, and opens up an entire new character role in a way that core sorcerer can't even dream of (and no, twin haste is not even remotely close to making them as good at buffing as full access to the cleric spell list). and that's just in the first few levels.

balanced with the rest of the game? maybe. balanced with core sorcerer subclasses? not a chance.

Hmm My table has only been playing with Shadow sorcerer since it came out...unless your playing AL, Shadow is the only subclass to play...I agree it blows core Sorcerer out of the water.

*Edit yes Divine is also good now that it has been finalised.*

[Easy_Lee]

How much more damage deals a Hexblade-blade than a normal agonizing EB warlock, and how many invocations and other options does he give up to do it?

Consider: a Hexblade must be in melee to deal his full damage. Also, he is forced to take many invocations. Finally, for optimal damage, he needs to be an elf with two or three feats (Eleven Accuracy, GWM, PM optional). This build brings damage, no doubt. It competes with barbarians. It's also significantly less resilient than a barbarian and loses versatility compared to a more typical warlock.

Unless Hexblade-blades deal significantly more damage than other damage-focused classes, I don't see a huge problem. We can say that they will if they can maintain their advantage, but the main way to do that is via Darkness + Devil's Sight, which requires concentration, another invocation, and can be countered by at least four spells (daylight, counterspell, dispel magic, antimagic field). It can also inconvenience allies and reduce total team damage if used incorrectly. Barbarian advantage is much more consistent and is not usable on a SAD Hexblade.

[Dudewithknives]

How much more damage deals a Hexblade-blade than a normal agonizing EB warlock, and how many invocations and other options does he give up to do it?

Consider: a Hexblade must be in melee to deal his full damage. Also, he is forced to take many invocations. Finally, for optimal damage, he needs to be an elf with two or three feats (Eleven Accuracy, GWM, PM optional). This build brings damage, no doubt. It competes with barbarians. It's also significantly less resilient than a barbarian and loses versatility compared to a more typical warlock.

Unless Hexblade-blades deal significantly more damage than other damage-focused classes, I don't see a huge problem. We can say that they will if they can maintain their advantage, but the main way to do that is via Darkness + Devil's Sight, which requires concentration, another invocation, and can be countered by at least four spells (daylight, counterspell, dispel magic, antimagic field). It can also inconvenience allies and reduce total team damage if used incorrectly. Barbarian advantage is much more consistent and is not usable on a SAD Hexblade.

95% of all Hexblades are going to be pact of the blade:

@ level 5:
Hexblade with Pact of the blade, Thirsting Blade, Eldritch Smite, and Improved Pact Weapon.

+1 Longbow Pact weapon: Charisma to hit and damage: To Hit: +8 (Cha 18, Prof 3, +1 weapon) Damage: 1D8 + 5 with 2 attacks.
- Could possible get a set of bracers of Archery, that would add + 2 damage per hit, they are uncommon so should not be too hard to find in most games.
- Could also take a level of fighter or 2 levels of ranger if you wanted to get Archery Fighting style, which in bound accuracy is crazy powerful, you have a flat 10% better to hit than anyone else.
- Can take sharpshooter if you want to boost damage to almost double what anyone without GWM/SS would be doing.
- Can take another invocation to add your CHA again to the damage.
- Due to idiotic rulings of people in charge, +X magic arrows stack with a magic bow, so you can stack up even more +damage and hit better than anyone in the game.
- Can take Eldridge Smite, which is amazing

This means you can get your to hit up to: +19 if you really need to, or +16 normally with fighting style, +14 without, with damage of 1d8 + 13, with just a +3 weapon, +16 if you use magic arrows, and then +10 more if you have sharp shooter.

Hexblade with Agonizing Blast, Devil's Sight, and one floating invocation of whatever you want.
Eldritch Blast: To hit +8 (Cha 18, Prof 3, assume +1 Rod of Pact Keeper) Damage of 1D10 + 4 because there is no +damage enhancement form cantrips.
- Gets free second shot at level 5 and another at level 11
- Does not need but 1 invocation, the others are nice but they are not required.
- Damage bonus will never be more than +5, and to hit will be capped @ Cha + Prof + magic so at most + 14

Damage with +1 Longbow: @ 20 CHA:
1d8 + 6 with 2 attacks or ~ 21 damage
with just an Uncommon item adds 2 damage a shot for ~ 25 damage

Damage with Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast @ 20 CHA
1d10 + 5 with 2 attacks ~ 21 damage
The big issue being that other than giving + to hit from a Rod of the Pact Keeper you will be getting almost no support from feats or fighting styles where Archery has TONS of support from feats and gear.

[MrFahrenheit]

I don’t have XGtE yet, but I saw some griping about elven accuracy. A couple points:
1. Is it *that* different from its UA version?
2. If not (too) different, then I don’t find it breaking bounded accuracy as badly as people worry: like most things in 5e, it’s situational. Vast majority of the time, you won’t have advantage in the first place (even getting that surprise round as an assassin is never a guarantee). You’d really need a party member who conjures creatures regularly (or is a mastermind) to regularly abuse this. Even if you do, they/their summons could be helping or doing something else. And you still need to burn a feat/ASI to get the ability.

[Dudewithknives]

I don’t have XGtE yet, but I saw some griping about elven accuracy. A couple points:
1. Is it *that* different from its UA version?
2. If not (too) different, then I don’t find it breaking bounded accuracy as badly as people worry: like most things in 5e, it’s situational. Vast majority of the time, you won’t have advantage in the first place (even getting that surprise round as an assassin is never a guarantee). You’d really need a party member who conjures creatures regularly (or is a mastermind) to regularly abuse this. Even if you do, they/their summons could be helping or doing something else. And you still need to burn a feat/ASI to get the ability.

Yeah it is even better than in the UA.

It gives you +1 to Dex, Int, Wis, or Cha
and
IF you have advantage on any roll that uses those stats for an attack you get to reroll 1 die.

It went from being dex only to dex and all mental stats.

[MrFahrenheit]

Yeah it is even better than in the UA.

It gives you +1 to Dex, Int, Wis, or Cha
and
IF you have advantage on any roll that uses those stats for an attack you get to reroll 1 die.

It went from being dex only to dex and all mental stats.

I mean...unless you have a summon-focused party member (or mastermind), meh. And even then...you’re burning a feat for it, so it seems like a reasonable trade off.

[alchahest]

*or have an easy source of advantage such as darkness/devil's sight

[SharkForce]

*or have an easy source of advantage such as darkness/devil's sight

or knocking someone prone, or having a wolf totem barbarian friend, or the mounted combat feat, or any of the numerous methods of applying the restrained condition...

advantage on attack rolls isn't that hard to get. it's a bit harder for ranged attack rolls, but still not that hard.

[mer.c]

I mean...unless you have a summon-focused party member (or mastermind), meh. And even then...you’re burning a feat for it, so it seems like a reasonable trade off.

You're also getting half an ASI out of it, which pushes it pretty far.

[EvilAnagram]

You're also getting half an ASI out of it, which pushes it pretty far.

I don't have the book yet, but does the feat give you the bonus to attacks with all of those stats, or only the one you get the bonus in?

[Dudewithknives]

I don't have the book yet, but does the feat give you the bonus to attacks with all of those stats, or only the one you get the bonus in?

All of them.

[MrFahrenheit]

It’s still dependent upon having advantage in the first place, which in my experience isn’t often to begin with.

[rbstr]

That's basically just sticking your head in the sand.
If you look for ways to gain advantage it's everywhere. Between class features and spells there's a dozen or more and people have listed many examples for you.

This ability is particularly strong when you think it out to combine with other stuff. And it's a half-feat on top of that.

[mer.c]

It’s still dependent upon having advantage in the first place, which in my experience isn’t often to begin with.

It isn’t really that often… until it is. Even discounting Reckless Attack (since it’s incompatible with this feat), there are a decent number of ways of getting advantage with decent to great reliability throughout an entire campaign.

For example, I’m currently DMing for a party with a Wolf Totem Barbarian. So every PC has had advantage for every major fight for the entire campaign. (We started at 3.) There’s also Warlock 3 for Devil’s Sight and Darkness, someone who can prone enemies for free, features that can doll out the Help action freely (familiars, Masterminds, maybe others), and many spells (Faerie Fire, the myriad spells that restrain, etc.).

They’re all conditional, but advantage hasn’t been at all hard to come by in my experience as a DM and as a player. Especially with DMs that are super lenient with handing out Inspiration (which we’re not). I think that highly polar nature of how powerful it is depending on outside circumstances is reasonable grounds for concern.

Plus, for all the other times, you’re still getting a half-ASI on what is almost certainly a key stat.

I’m not up in arms over it or anything; I just think it’s a lot more useful than you’re giving it credit for.

[Tanarii]

Anyone know why Elven Accuracy isn't limited to ranged attacks?

[stoutstien]

Yeah most players will have advantage on their attacks at least half the time the only time I don't is when a source of disadvantage cancels it out. All hail the power of prone.

[Spiritchaser]

Anyone know why Elven Accuracy isn't limited to ranged attacks?

I would hypothesize that elves are supposed to be equally adept with light melee weapons, and because all things considered, ranged plus SS isn’t more potent than Melee + GWM.

[Easy_Lee]

Advantage is more common on coordinated teams than in your standard AL. But Elven Accuracy's biggest beneficiary, the half-elf warlock, can easily generate his own advantage.

[Dudewithknives]

Anyone know why Elven Accuracy isn't limited to ranged attacks?

The more important question is why the hell it works on INT, WIS, and CHA attacks too.

Dex makes sense, ALL elves get +2 Dex.

There was no need to give an already VERY powerful feat the ability to be taken for 4 different stats and give 3 dice advantage essentially to 4 different stat based attacks.

[Tanarii]

The Int/Wis/Cha thing is probably so Elven Wizards get to use it with Cantrips. Although they could have gone with just Int there.

Restricting it to ranged attacks would have made the most sense to me in terms of balance. It's considerably harder to get Advantage of ranged attacks.

[Easy_Lee]

The Int/Wis/Cha thing is probably so Elven Wizards get to use it with Cantrips. Although they could have gone with just Int there.

Restricting it to ranged attacks would have made the most sense to me in terms of balance. It's considerably harder to get Advantage of ranged attacks.

I'm not sure. It's easier to get surprise from range, though you don't benefit from prone or wolf barbarians. But the darkness trick everyone talks about is also better from range where you won't inconvenience your allies.

[Bloodcloud]

How much more damage deals a Hexblade-blade than a normal agonizing EB warlock, and how many invocations and other options does he give up to do it?

Consider: a Hexblade must be in melee to deal his full damage. Also, he is forced to take many invocations. Finally, for optimal damage, he needs to be an elf with two or three feats (Eleven Accuracy, GWM, PM optional). This build brings damage, no doubt. It competes with barbarians. It's also significantly less resilient than a barbarian and loses versatility compared to a more typical warlock.

Unless Hexblade-blades deal significantly more damage than other damage-focused classes, I don't see a huge problem. We can say that they will if they can maintain their advantage, but the main way to do that is via Darkness + Devil's Sight, which requires concentration, another invocation, and can be countered by at least four spells (daylight, counterspell, dispel magic, antimagic field). It can also inconvenience allies and reduce total team damage if used incorrectly. Barbarian advantage is much more consistent and is not usable on a SAD Hexblade.

Darkness really shouldn't be your one trick too, cause not only do those spell counter it, but also Truesight (i.e. every dragon and most very high CR creatues) blindsight (suprinsingly common, including basically all spiders) and tremorsense. Also, all devils and most demons. If you entirelly rely on darkness, you'll be screwed on quite a few fight, including most legendary where everyone needs to ouput damage. And casting darkness is an action!

[Dudewithknives]

I'm not sure. It's easier to get surprise from range, though you don't benefit from prone or wolf barbarians. But the darkness trick everyone talks about is also better from range where you won't inconvenience your allies.

Most people make the mistake of casting darkness on the enemies.
You cast darkness on yourself.

They can't see you so they get disadvantage on their attacks against you, and you get advantage against them.
You do not innocence the rest of your party.
They can't just use their turn to leave the area.
It works on people no matter how spread out.
You can't be targeted by many things because no matter where the enemy is, they still can't see you normally.
You can take it with you if you decide to move.
You will not be taking any Opportunity Attacks if you move because people can't see you.
No smart caster is going to dispel darkness that only does not even hinder them if they just attack a different person do no getting it killed in one turn.

I do not think I have ever cast darkness on an enemy group.
I have cast it on my familiar and had it follow the enemy around.

The enemy got very confused and thought the darkness was HUGE, but really they just had an invisible darkness emitting Imp flying 10 feet above them.

[Spiritchaser]

Darkness really shouldn't be your one trick too, cause not only do those spell counter it, but also Truesight (i.e. every dragon and most very high CR creatues) blindsight (suprinsingly common, including basically all spiders) and tremorsense. Also, all devils and most demons. If you entirelly rely on darkness, you'll be screwed on quite a few fight, including most legendary where everyone needs to ouput damage. And casting darkness is an action!

The range on these is usually much shorter than longbow or EB range, especially with feat or invocation support.

At very high level you’ll have foresight
If you’re drow you’ll have Farie fire as well

Or just hex and spam EB

[Mikal]

Advantage is more common on coordinated teams than in your standard AL. But Elven Accuracy's biggest beneficiary, the half-elf warlock, can easily generate his own advantage.

Yup. Darkness at Warlock 3, and Shadow of Moil at Warlock 7. (seriously. a re-reading of Shadow of Moil makes it better in all ways except duration to Darkness for a Hexblade, it's nuts)

How so?
1) It works against creatures with Truesight or their own Devil's Sight. Truesight because nothing Truesight can penetrate works on the heavily obscured effect from Shadow of Moil. Ditto with Devil's Sight
2) You aren't creating magical darkness- Your party now hates you less, and you can get by with just Darkvision instead of Devil's Sight
3) Damage rider. Even if they get past the blinded condition against you, they still get whacked for damage.
4) Harder to remove since the regular ways of removing darkness such as light spells above 2nd level don't affect it.

[Dudewithknives]

Yup. Darkness at level 3, and Shadow of Moil at level 7. (seriously. a re-reading of Shadow of Moil makes it better in all ways except duration to Darkness for a Hexblade, it's nuts)

How so?
1) It works against creatures with Truesight or their own Devil's Sight. Truesight because nothing Truesight can penetrate works on the heavily obscured effect from Shadow of Moil. Ditto with Devil's Sight
2) You aren't creating magical darkness- Your party now hates you less, and you can get by with just Darkvision instead of Devil's Sight
3) Damage rider. Even if they get past the blinded condition against you, they still get whacked for damage.
4) Harder to remove since the regular ways of removing darkness such as light spells above 2nd level don't affect it.

It is great, but you only get 1 level 7 spell on a warlock, ever, so i am not sure if that one is my pick or not, but it is in the top 2.

[Mikal]

It is great, but you only get 1 level 7 spell on a warlock, ever, so i am not sure if that one is my pick or not, but it is in the top 2.

Sorry. Warlock Level 7. Not spell level.
The spell's a 4th level Warlock only Necromancy

[Dudewithknives]

Sorry. Warlock Level 7. Not spell level.
The spell's a 4th level Warlock only Necromancy

Yeah, I noticed that after I typed it, I have the book already and am actually playing a Warlock.

I was confused for a second because I was like, Wait, I already have that spell.

[Mikal]

Yeah, I noticed that after I typed it, I have the book already and am actually playing a Warlock.

I was confused for a second because I was like, Wait, I already have that spell.

Hoping to get it next session... once I figure out where to get the material component.

[Spiritchaser]

Yeah, I noticed that after I typed it, I have the book already and am actually playing a Warlock.

I was confused for a second because I was like, Wait, I already have that spell.

I just found a reference to that. Notwithstanding the duration, it looks potentially very good for a hexblade...

I need more spells known...

EDIT: I'll have to think about this more but... that one spell might significantly devalue the need to stay warlock until 17 for foresight... assuming a bladelock somehow lives long enough to make that choice...

[Mikal]

I just found a reference to that. Notwithstanding the duration, it looks potentially very good for a hexblade...

I need more spells known...

EDIT: I'll have to think about this more but... that one spell might significantly devalue the need to stay warlock until 17 for foresight... assuming a bladelock somehow lives long enough to make that choice...

Level 7 is much more attainable than level 17...
I think the best breakpoint for Hexblade Blade pacts are now 12 anyway.

[Easy_Lee]

Most people make the mistake of casting darkness on the enemies.
You cast darkness on yourself.

Yes, I'm aware. 15' range is exactly wide enough for you to move in, attack, and move out on a normal human. Reach weapons cut out an additional 10' of needed movement. On the downside, you probably won't get many opportunity attacks this way unless you're also a polearm master.

So it's good, just not as good as some higher level options that do the same thing (such as greater invisibility).