Warlock Magic Initiate Feat for a Warlock?

[Zaltman]

Q1. For the Magic Initiative Feat, can you take the same class you already are?

Q2. Assuming yes to Q1 and you have already maxed out your Charisma, I thought this might be a good way to stretch the spells per day and cantrip limitation of the Warlock. Might be extra useful for a Warlock built around Hex/Maddening Hex since you can take Hex for the first level spell known. Thoughts?

[nickl_2000]

Q1. For the Magic Initiative Feat, can you take the same class you already are?

Q2. Assuming yes to Q1 and you have already maxed out your Charisma, I thought this might be a good way to stretch the spells per day and cantrip limitation of the Warlock. Might be extra useful for a Warlock built around Hex/Maddening Hex since you can take Hex for the first level spell known. Thoughts?

1) Absolutely yes.
2) Yes, you can certainly do this. You get 1 free casting of 1st level hex per day. Also doing this will give you an extra spell known (since hex is known through MI not the warlock list).

whether it is worth it is completely up to you though and your character.

[Corpsecandle717]

Q1. For the Magic Initiative Feat, can you take the same class you already are?

Q2. Assuming yes to Q1 and you have already maxed out your Charisma, I thought this might be a good way to stretch the spells per day and cantrip limitation of the Warlock. Might be extra useful for a Warlock built around Hex/Maddening Hex since you can take Hex for the first level spell known. Thoughts?

Indeed you can. I don't think it's 'optimal' but I can definitely understand the allure. I had a Drow do this at 4th, then I pointed out he would learn additional spells if he took Drow High Magic as well and free usages of those spells.

[Man_Over_Game]

Most people would just recommend something like a single level into Bard or Sorcerer, though. Not only does this reward you with more cantrips and low level spell slots, but you also get a class feature that normally scales with Charisma or the caster playstyle.

[Willie the Duck]

You certainly can, and more than a few classes who have lots of nifty cantrips might consider it (particularly if it frees up a valuable spell known slot). However, I have not actually seen it happen all that much, probably having more to do with the Cha-based classes having so many options other than Variant Human (this feat being extra useful at 1st level). Another reason probably being that Warlock/other cha class MC is so common (and any of those giving plenty of extra cantrips and those tasty, tasty 1st level spell slots which help facilitate always having hex available without spending a precious 1 of 2 (higher level) slots. In a feat-bearing, but MC-free game, I can see it occurring a lot. Rather niche situation though.

Do I think it is a good use of an ASI? Well, if you have 20 Cha, War caster, and Resilient already, maybe? by the time you get that, you are likely high enough level that the benefit fades. Actually, even then I might consider Lucky instead, as one more last-method of preserving concentration on Hex instead of one more daily way of getting it up for a combat.

[Vogie]

Q1. For the Magic Initiative Feat, can you take the same class you already are?

Q2. Assuming yes to Q1 and you have already maxed out your Charisma, I thought this might be a good way to stretch the spells per day and cantrip limitation of the Warlock. Might be extra useful for a Warlock built around Hex/Maddening Hex since you can take Hex for the first level spell known. Thoughts?

Yes.

However, you may not want to use Hex for that. Because it scales up duration over time, Hex actually gets better as you get higher up, even if you have to ask your DM for a Bag of Tricks to toss out a rat, hex it, and kill it before a short rest to hold that concentration over the rest. I'd personally prefer a non-scaling spell like Shield take that MI slot, because spending a 5th level spell slot for a 1st level spell just feels awful.

[Chronos]

An upcast Hex only lasts all day if you can maintain concentration that long. You may well find yourself either getting concentration knocked out of you, or deciding that some other concentration spell is more useful for the situation you find yourself in. In that case, having an extra cast of it (or a few, if multiclassing) at low level might be more useful than casting it at a high level.

[Willie the Duck]

An upcast Hex only lasts all day if you can maintain concentration that long. You may well find yourself either getting concentration knocked out of you, or deciding that some other concentration spell is more useful for the situation you find yourself in. In that case, having an extra cast of it (or a few, if multiclassing) at low level might be more useful than casting it at a high level.

And there's the rub of it. This feat is most useful if you pick it up at level one. You get it at level one by being a vuman. Being a vuman means not being a tiefling, aasimar, half-elf, yuan-ti, or the many other things people tend to pick for warlocks. It also delays picking up things like Resilient: Con or Warcaster, which would be about preserving your concentration. That's why I referred to it as rather niche, although perfectly good. I think if MC were not allowed (and sorlocks and the like so popular), this feat choice would be more common.

[Sception]

You can do this, but picking a different class might up your versatility a bit, by granting access to a couple cantrips and a level 1 spell you wouldn't otherwise have access to. Minor illusion, mage hand, find familiar from wizard (for bladelocks who don't get familiars otherwise), for instance. Or guidance, thaumaturgy, bless from cleric (for non-divine locks).

[Zaltman]

In this situation, no MC. If the goal is to Hex more (ranged blastlock build, 8th lvl ASI) then what is better between war caster, resilient, lucky and magic initiate? Con =14. I am now leaning towards lucky because I figure being at range means getting hit only a few times, but when I do I want maximum chance of success. I am not a math wiz, but adding a D20 to a roll seems better than advantage from war caster or proficiency from resilient. My original reasoning was regardless of fate, having an extra Hex in my back pocket for an hour from Magic Initiate was the most reliable investment.

Thanks for the feedback.

[Chronos]

Lucky doesn't let you add an extra d20. It lets you roll another d20 and then use it instead of the first one. Advantage is better, both because it always works (not just a few times per day), and because it's always whichever one is better, not the second one.

[Contrast]

Lucky doesn't let you add an extra d20. It lets you roll another d20 and then use it instead of the first one. Advantage is better, both because it always works (not just a few times per day), and because it's always whichever one is better, not the second one.

You chose which to use with Lucky. Its actually better than Advantage given the interaction with Disadvantage.

[Chronos]

If you go by Rules As Written or Rules As Aren't Completely Stupid (as opposed to Rules As Misinterpreted in a Really Silly Way), then Lucky combined with disadvantage effectively lets you roll three dice and take the middle one. Whether that's better or worse than just one (like you'd get from combining advantage and disadvantage) depends on how good your chances were a priori: It makes it more likely to get the expected value, so if you were more than 50% likely to succeed on a single roll, then three dice is better, but if you were less than 50% likely to succeed, then the single die is better.

[Contrast]

If you go by Rules As Written or Rules As Aren't Completely Stupid (as opposed to Rules As Misinterpreted in a Really Silly Way), then Lucky combined with disadvantage effectively lets you roll three dice and take the middle one. Whether that's better or worse than just one (like you'd get from combining advantage and disadvantage) depends on how good your chances were a priori: It makes it more likely to get the expected value, so if you were more than 50% likely to succeed on a single roll, then three dice is better, but if you were less than 50% likely to succeed, then the single die is better.

Are you arguing for this as a houserule or that its RAW? I could see arguing that [you can roll three die and choose one] or [roll two die, take the lowest then roll another die and choose one of those two] was RAW but I have no idea how you could argue that roll 3 and choose the middle one is RAW.

Another thing to consider is that normally multiple sources of adv/dis don't stack whereas this is a separate thing so there's still the potential for turning a check with disadvantage into advantage (cancel out using another source of advantage, then use a luck point).

We are going a bit off topic of course :smallbiggrin:

[Willie the Duck]

You chose which to use with Lucky. Its actually better than Advantage given the interaction with Disadvantage.

For the OP's purposes, that will rarely come up (how often does one roll a spell concentration check with disadvantage?).

[Chronos]

With Lucky and Disadvantage, you start by rolling two dice, A and B. Then, you choose one of them (presumably the lower of the two) to use Lucky on: Without loss of generality, let's say that it's B. Roll a third die, C, and compare it to B, and take whichever of those two is higher (because of Lucky). Then take the better of B and C, and compare it to A, and take whichever is worse (because of disadvantage).

You can't end up with the best of the three dice, because disadvantage throws that one out. And you can't end up with the worst of the three dice, because lucky throws that one out. So the net effect is that you always end up with the middle one.

[Rukelnikov]

With Lucky and Disadvantage, you start by rolling two dice, A and B. Then, you choose one of them (presumably the lower of the two) to use Lucky on: Without loss of generality, let's say that it's B. Roll a third die, C, and compare it to B, and take whichever of those two is higher (because of Lucky). Then take the better of B and C, and compare it to A, and take whichever is worse (because of disadvantage).

You can't end up with the best of the three dice, because disadvantage throws that one out. And you can't end up with the worst of the three dice, because lucky throws that one out. So the net effect is that you always end up with the middle one.

I agree that's how it should work.

However the wording "You choose which of the d20s is used for the attack roll, ability check, or saving throw." means RAW you get trivantage when normally at disadvantage.

[Chronos]

"choose which of the d20s" means the new one you just rolled, or the one you're hoping to replace. It doesn't mean "choose one d20 out of all of the d20s ever". Similarly, if your whole party gets hit by a fireball, you don't get to replace one of their saves (even though it was another d20 rolled at the same time), because that's not the one you chose to try to replace (and in fact, couldn't have chosen).

[Contrast]

With Lucky and Disadvantage, you start by rolling two dice, A and B. Then, you choose one of them (presumably the lower of the two) to use Lucky on: Without loss of generality, let's say that it's B. Roll a third die, C, and compare it to B, and take whichever of those two is higher (because of Lucky). Then take the better of B and C, and compare it to A, and take whichever is worse (because of disadvantage).

You can't end up with the best of the three dice, because disadvantage throws that one out. And you can't end up with the worst of the three dice, because lucky throws that one out. So the net effect is that you always end up with the middle one.

You're using the general disadvantage rule to override the specific Lucky rule. You should be doing it the other way round. (I have no problem with this as a houserule to be clear)

On topic, Lucky is good but usually as a finishing off feat and I agree that Warcaster is generally the better option for maintaining concentration. I would definitely class it as better than MI, particularly if you're taking MI in the class you already are. Between maxing Cha, improving Con, Warcaster, Res Con and any flavour feats you want I don't see MI having a place in most warlock builds (of course as with all things, take it if you want it you'll be fine...ish).


Edit - if it matters to you, the Sage Advice compendium (https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf) has an entry on Lucky which agrees that disadvantage+Lucky=3d20 choose one but offers your approach as an alternative for DMs who don't like that.