Pact of the Blade using an existing weapon

[Hiro Quester]

As a hexblade warlock, I have been using a family heirloom weapon as my Hex Warrior weapon (use Cha for attack and damage).

I just got to Hexblade 3, taking pact of the blade.

This means you can perform a ritual with a particular weapon over an hour and make it your pact weapon (with Improved Pact Weapon it it is your spellcasting focus and gains +1).

You can choose to wear it and draw it as normal, or you can shunt it into an extradimensionsal space, but it takes an action to summon it from there.

You can also create a pact weapon as an action, which can be any weapon you choose (with Improved pact weapon it can also be a longbow or crossbow), with which you are automatically proficient, that would disappear if its separated from you or if you dismiss it (no action required).

So what happens if I perform this ritual with my family heirloom longsword as my pact weapon, but wear it normally and don't shunt it into that extra-dimensional space?

The crucial text describes how you summon that ritually attuned weapon from the extra dimensional space:


You can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon by performing a special ritual while you hold the weapon. You perform the ritual over the course of 1 hour, which can be done during a short rest. You can then dismiss the weapon, shunting it into an extradimensional space, and it appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter. You can’t affect an artifact or a sentient weapon in this way. The weapon ceases being your pact weapon if you die, if you perform the 1-hour ritual on a different weapon, or if you use a 1-hour ritual to break your bond to it. The weapon appears at your feet if it is in the extradimensional space when the bond breaks.

Can I dismiss the longsword when it's not in the extra dimensional space as my pact weapon (it would lose the +1 bonus, but remain a hex weapon, using Charisma to wield), so that I can summon a different pact weapon as needed (e.g. a longbow or maul).

Or am I limited by that ritual to only having the longsword as my pact weapon, and cannot summon a different weapon without performing the one hour ritual again?

If that's the case, it would make sense not to use any existing weapon as my pact weapon, but only take an action to create a weapon as needed (then carry it around for quickly drawing).

It would only make sense to perform the ritual with a weapon with very special properties (a +2 Scimitar of Speed, for example).

[Abracadangit]

Or am I limited by that ritual to only having the longsword as my pact weapon, and cannot summon a different weapon without performing the one hour ritual again?

This, at least by my understanding, is the correct interpretation.

You either get the effectively metamorphic pact weapon that can change form each time you summon it, OR you get the pact-bonded magic weapon that already exists as an object independent of your abilities. If you want the metamorphic one but already have the physical one, you gotta do the 1-hour ritual to sever your pact with the physical one first. Now you've got access to the metamorphic one, and of course you keep the physical one as well, but lose out on the extradimensional shunting/conjuring hijinks with it.

Generally you're probably correct (in that why wouldn't you just hold the physical and have the metamorphic pact weapon on call), but sometimes people like having the pact link to the rad magic weapon because it means they can infiltrate galas/balls, end up imprisoned, or any other number of scenarios where weapons are typically prohibited or taken away, and then bring their snazzy signature weapon back with a snap of their fingers. Plus character flavor/fluff, and all that.

[Hiro Quester]

It makes sense, but also doesn't make sense.

My aim is to be a bit of a switch hitter. Have a pact of the blade longsword, but be able to summon a ranged or bludgeoning weapon if a particular encounter needs it.

But I have also inherited a family heirloom longsword, that is part of my bond to my patron. The sword belonged to my best friend, who was murdered in front of me, and whose spirit had been allowed to linger to help me as a patron. the sword appeared to me in a dream, given by my dead friend, when I took the hexblade pact, and then appeared to me in person when I woke.

It seems that if I want to be effective as a switch-hitter, I should just keep the longsword as a Hex weapon, and summon a different longsword to use with Pact of the Blade (as spellcasting focus and +1 weapon), since then I would also have the option of creating a longbow.

But that seems to defeat the story-theme of the longsword as sealing the bond with my patron.

[meandean]

Well, you really don't want to spend the first action of a combat summoning your weapon. I definitely think it's contemplated from a flavor perspective that both a "Hexblade" and a "pact weapon" are about having one favorite weapon. (In fact, it never occurred to me before now that your Hex Warrior weapon could be different than your pact weapon, even though it clearly can be.) But having your go-to weapon on hand is also just a more practical thing to do as a player.

[solidork]

I think a compromise would be reasonable. Performing the ritual turns your friends old weapon into a shapeshifting version of itself, as long as you don't try to have your cake and eat it too - you've gotta follow the drawbacks of the shapeshifting version until you break the bond. Limit yourself to a fixed appearance for the longsword version, and describe alternate weapons as having a similar style so that no matter what kind of weapon it's clear you're using your original sword in a different form.

Instead of gaining the ability to summon any weapon, you've bonded more deeply with your sword so that you can always call it to your side and it can take whatever form you need.

[Abracadangit]

I know this is the stock thing to say to anyone playing a Warlock. But if you're looking to couple your pact longsword with ranged capability -- is there a reason you wouldn't use Eldritch Blast? (Or Chill Touch, if it's more your thing?)

If you're concerned about having different damage types, force damage is notably one of the least resisted damage types in the entire game, it's got 120 feet of range, keys off of your Charisma, etc. Unless your character concept specifically hinges on having weapons instead of spells, I think it checks your "switch-hitter" boxes tidily.

[RSP]

I think a compromise would be reasonable. Performing the ritual turns your friends old weapon into a shapeshifting version of itself…

Instead of gaining the ability to summon any weapon, you've bonded more deeply with your sword so that you can always call it to your side and it can take whatever form you need.

This is a valid reading of the RAW. Basically, a Pact Weapon has certain features (one of which is choosing its form, another is being proficient with it, etc). You transform a magic weapon into your pact weapon, so that now has the features of a Pact Weapon (choosing its form, being proficient with it, etc).

@ OP:

You can, if you care to, have the longsword be your Hex Warrior weapon, and just summon other weapons with Pact of the Blade, however, you will only get the Thirsting Blade extra attack with your Pact Weapon and not the longsword, if you go this route. Likewise later with Lifedrinker.

I’d suggest seeing if your DM is good with the above RAW…And probably just use EB when you need a ranger attack.

[Tanarii]

Rather than the highly controversial shapeshifting bound-as-a-pact-weapon reading of the RAW, let me suggest that it's possible to read it as you can summon the bound-as-a-pact-weapon from the extra dimensional space or a pact weapon the normal way. But one or the other, you can't have both 'out' at once. Because if the bound-as-a-pact-weapon is brought out, it IS your Pact Weapon, and you only get one at a time.

Still a pretty iffy interpretation, but one less likely to make a DM balk at it as an obvious attempt to cheese the RAW. Consider it as offering some mild cheddar instead of stinky Stilton blue. (Which is delicious but no analogy is perfect. Otoh if your DM agreed to the shifting version, maybe it is perfect!)

[RSP]

Rather than the highly controversial shapeshifting bound-as-a-pact-weapon reading of the RAW, …but one less likely to make a DM balk at it as an obvious attempt to cheese the RAW.

Not sure why you think it’s cheese: it literally says it “transforms” into the Pact Weapon. If that transformation doesn’t give the weapon the qualities of a Pact Weapon, what does it do?

[solidork]

Also, I could be wrong but I'm getting the vibe that the heirloom weapon is mostly an ordinary longsword except for the narrative significance placed on it - if so I don't see whats so cheesy about fictionally framing it as transforming.

If it eventually gets some kind of enchantment then yeah, you're getting an advantage, but otherwise you're not.

[Chronos]

By the RAW, as I read it, a warlock can transform any weapon into any other kind of weapon, by first bonding to it. If, say, the party found a really nice magical greataxe, but nobody had the right build to use a greataxe, and the warlock had Polearm Master, he could bond to the axe and reshape it into a halberd.

Now, this is an area where you definitely want to check with your DM, because different folks interpret those rules differently, and might disagree with the effect even if they do read them the same way. Personally, I think it's fine: Being able to reshape a weapon isn't all that powerful, and the "how" is just "magic". But ask your DM.

[Monster Manuel]

Now, this is an area where you definitely want to check with your DM, because different folks interpret those rules differently, and might disagree with the effect even if they do read them the same way.

This is a case where the rules are a bit ambiguous, and can be interpreted in a couple of ways, so I'll add to the "ask your DM" chorus here.

To play devil's advocate, the counter-argument that you can only summon the specific bound item is as follows: the wording of Pact of the Blade says that you "create a pact weapon in your hand. You can choose the form it takes each time you create it". However, when it later gives the option to transform an existing magic item into your Pact Weapon, the interpretation there is that you are no longer creating a weapon, you've bound an existing one which "appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter (emphasis mine)". It's not that the pact weapon has a special property to change form, it's that you can create any weapon you want, and it's a new weapon each time. If you bond an existing weapon as your Pact Weapon, you're locking yourself into only one, which is likely much better given its' other magical properties, but losing the ability to create different types of weapon unless you decide to dismiss the specific weapon, in which case creating new forms is back on the table.

Personally, I'm in the camp that the RAI is as described above, but I allow Warlocks to shapeshift their pact weapon anyway because it's cool, and the case can be made for RAW.

[Valmark]

Worth it to note that as far as the text is concerned (unless I missed an errata) you cannot turn a non-magical weapon into your pact weapon with the ritual.

So if the family heirloom isn't magical you can't pact it.

Assuming the heirloom is magical instead (otherwise the question is kinda moot) ask your DM. I always red it as you cannot change the shape of a magic item bonded, but it seems like it's open to interpretation- if your DM gives it any validity, Sage Advice states a magic item bonded as a pact weapon cannot change shape.

[meandean]

Given that Hexblade wasn't in the Player's Handbook, none of the original Warlock subclasses were intended to have martial weapons proficiency. But allowing an already-magical pact weapon to become any other weapon, would essentially provide that proficiency to Pact of the Blade.

More significantly, you could make e.g. a Vorpal Net or a Longbow of Disruption. That's... pretty wild. I agree that it's not an altogether crazy thing for a DM to allow, but I can't imagine it's RAI.

(If the heirloom sword is magical, I honestly don't think allowing this makes sense to accommodate a character whose story is "My dead friend gifted me this one special sword." Even if I would allow it in other circumstances, I'm pretty sure not in that particular one.)

[Tanarii]

Also, I could be wrong but I'm getting the vibe that the heirloom weapon is mostly an ordinary longsword except for the narrative significance placed on it - if so I don't see whats so cheesy about fictionally framing it as transforming.

If it eventually gets some kind of enchantment then yeah, you're getting an advantage, but otherwise you're not.
You can only bind magical weapons as Pact Weapons in the first place, so it must be.

I agree non-magical specific weapons would be a non-issue, except for establishing precedent on how a table is going to interpret the rule.

[Gignere]

Given that Hexblade wasn't in the Player's Handbook, none of the original Warlock subclasses were intended to have martial weapons proficiency. But allowing an already-magical pact weapon to become any other weapon, would essentially provide that proficiency to Pact of the Blade.

More significantly, you could make e.g. a Vorpal Net or a Longbow of Disruption. That's... pretty wild. I agree that it's not an altogether crazy thing for a DM to allow, but I can't imagine it's RAI.

(If the heirloom sword is magical, I honestly don't think allowing this makes sense to accommodate a character whose story is "My dead friend gifted me this one special sword." Even if I would allow it in other circumstances, I'm pretty sure not in that particular one.)

Pact of the blade does say you are proficient with your pact weapon, so I can see a reason for ruling any weapon that becomes your pact weapon the warlock will be proficient in.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

It's kind of a talk to your DM thing.

I can read the Pact Weapon both ways. In my table and my spouse's you can still summon your morphic regular pact weapon on top of whatever you bind to it. There's been no significant balance issues that we've seen. If your DM doesn't rule that way you can always keep your heirloom blade on your hip unbound and your Pact Weapon is a second option.

As an aside for those asking why Ranged Pact Weapon vs Eldritch Blast. Here's the relevant math. Let's assume Variant Human or Custom Lineage. 17 Cha at level 1, 19 at level 4, 20 at level 8. For the side using the bow we're also going to invest in the Sharpshooter Feat.

It all comes down to Invocation and Feat spending. If you really want invocations for other things, Eldritch Blast wins hands out. If you're going to be a melee lock you'll want all three of the weapon invocations anyway though, so it makes it so EB only wins before level 3 and after level 17. But, if we add in Sharpshooter...

Eldritch Blast is going to be the following with just Agonizing Blast
Level 1: To Hit: +5, Damage: 6 (1d10)
Level 2: To Hit: +5, Damage: 11 (1d10+5)
Level 5: To Hit: +7, Damage: 22 (2d10+10)
Level 11: To Hit: 9, Damage: 33 (3d10+15)
Level 17: To Hit: +11, Damage: 44 (4d10+20)

Pact Weapon Longbow with Improved Pact Weapon, Thirsting Blade, Life Drinker
Level 1: N/A
Level 3: To Hit: +6, Damage: 11 (1d8+6)
Level 5: To Hit: +8, Damage: 22 (2d8+12)
Level 12: +10, Damage: 32 (2d8+22)

Pact Weapon Longbow with Improved Pact Weapon, Thirsting Blade, Life Drinker AND Sharpshooter
Level 1: N/A
Level 3: To Hit: +1, Damage: 21 (1d8+16)
Level 5: To Hit: +3, Damage: 42 (2d8+32)
Level 12: To Hit: +5, Damage: 52 (2d8+42)

You'll notice if you're actually building around the idea of being an Archer you can skip way ahead of EB's Damage output starting at level 4 and never looking back. A Feat spent at level 12 or a Fighter Dip adds Archery Style and brings those attack rolls back up as well.

[RSP]

In my table and my spouse's you can still summon your morphic regular pact weapon on top of whatever you bind to it. There's been no significant balance issues that we've seen.

The only issue, balance-wise, with this is Thirsting Blade’s description: “You can attack with your pact weapon twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.” Assuming one dual wields both Pact Weapons, and at some point uses the Attack Action during their turn, they could get 2 attacks with each weapon.

So long as that’s not trying to be exploited, there shouldn’t be any issues.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

The only issue, balance-wise, with this is Thirsting Blade’s description: “You can attack with your pact weapon twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.” Assuming one dual wields both Pact Weapons, and at some point uses the Attack Action during their turn, they could get 2 attacks with each weapon.

So long as that’s not trying to be exploited, there shouldn’t be any issues.

I believe that's covered in the core description of the Pact Blade. "Your pact weapon disappears if it is more than 5 feet away from you for 1 minute or more. It also disappears if you use this feature again, if you dismiss the weapon (no action required), or if you die."

So, while Hexblade means you could pick one Non-Bound weapon to attune to use Charisma and then summon your pact blade to dual wield. But if you have a Weapon bound as your pact weapon but the DM allows you to summon the basic, you can't use them both. If I'm wielding the magic sword my DM gave me that I bound as a pact weapon, and then my character wants to summon the whip for some range and maneuverability the sword unsummons.

[Hiro Quester]

The point about archery is in part where I’m heading. But also melee. I’m trying to avoid the typical polearm and /or agonizing eldritch blast shenanigans, as a challenge.

My character is actually bard 1/ hexblade 3. Aiming for whisper bard 5/hexblade 5, and then progress one or the other class to 15 from there.

The general idea is to have hex, booming blade, hexblade’s curse, etc. (and maybe lifedrinker, or spirit guardians from magical secrets) for decent sustained damage, and Elven Accuracy, eventually with Eldritch Smite and bard’s Psychic Blades for nova damage on crits.

While I get hexblade to 5, I also have Bard’s first level spells for shield and/or hex, faerie fire, etc.

And either great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter after I get my CHA to 20, depending on how the campaign plays out.

Another reason for avoiding agonizing blast is because I want to use Eldritch Mind invocation along with Improved Pact Weapon right now.

So I want to have a ranged option that uses a pact weapon, for after I get extra attack.

Before then using the longsword, often with booming blade and misty step to provoke movement (especially after character level five (bard1/hexblade4), when I don’t yet have Extra Attack).

And I do have eldritch blast as a cantrip. But I’m not taking agonizing blast. So I will still be able to make an extra attack at character level 5. But not as powerful as a longbowpact weapon with thirsting blade at warlock 5.

I was hoping to be able to make the longsword my default pact weapon. The longsword is magical, but not (yet?) enchanted. But be able to dismiss it for a longbow pact weapon (keeping it as a hex weapon though), when ranged attacks might be more called for.

DM has just told me that if I have the longsword as pact weapon, I would have to take the hour to unbind it before I could create a different pact weapon. But he’s also said that he has plans we will play out next game. So we’ll see. He’s implying I’ll like what he has in mind.

Worst case, I have the longsword as my pact weapon, and acquire a regular longbow to make a hex weapon. But then I could not use IPW’s +1, or smite or thirsting blade with the longbow (they only work with the pact weapon). Though bard’s Psychic Blades would work on the longbow. But that won’t apply for a while.

[Chronos]

I think that they just didn't add the option of bonding a nonmagical weapon because, mechanically, there'd be no reason to: Bonding to an existing nonmagical weapon is no better than conjuring a weapon from thin air. So if a character has a sentimental reason for wanting to do so, I'd say to just allow it.

RSP, even if you do somehow manage to dual-wield pact weapons, you still only get one extra attack from Thirsting Blade. It says "When you take the attack action", which you're only doing once per turn. The offhand attack is a bonus action, and so doesn't get the benefits of Thirsting Blade (nor of Extra Attack nor whatever the artificer's version is called).

[RSP]

RSP, even if you do somehow manage to dual-wield pact weapons, you still only get one extra attack from Thirsting Blade. It says "When you take the attack action", which you're only doing once per turn. The offhand attack is a bonus action, and so doesn't get the benefits of Thirsting Blade (nor of Extra Attack nor whatever the artificer's version is called).

I’m not trying to argue for exploit: was just pointing out an issue.

“When you take the Attack Action” refers to the turn, not a singular moment in time. For instance, the Two-Weapon Fighting rules has the same statement:

“When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand.”

You’re not “Attack Action-ing” for 3 seconds, then doing other stuff the other ~3 seconds: the Attack Action is occurring throughout your ~6 second turn, though other stuff occurs over that same time.

Further, BA’s occur at any point during the Action (unless specified otherwise), so one could “take the Attack Action” for their turn, and resolve the BA attack first.

Or, if you prefer (again under the premise that a magical weapon can be made a Pact Weapon and you can still summon a Pact Weapon, thereby having 2 Pact Weapons at the same time): take the attack action and your first attack with main-hand PW, now take BA attack with off-hand weapon. Then finish the 2nd attacks with each weapon.

You’ve fulfilled the requirement of “When you take the Attack Action…” which is what’s needed here.

[Hiro Quester]

I just found the Sage Advice entry (under warlock here. https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SA-Compendium.pdf#page=5) which says you can’t change the form of a specific weapon you make your pact weapon:


If a warlock uses Pact of the Blade to bond with a magic weapon, does that weapon have to be a melee weapon, and can the warlock change the weapon’s form? The warlock’s Pact of the Blade feature (PH, 107–8) lets you create a melee weapon out of nothing. Whenever you do so, you determine the weapon’s form, choosing from the melee weapon options in the Weapons table in the Player’s Hand- book (p. 149). For example, you can create a greataxe, and then use the feature again to create a javelin, which causes the greataxe to disappear.You can also use Pact of the Blade to bond with a magic weapon, turning it into your pact weapon. This magic weapon doesn’t have to be a melee weapon, so you could use the feature on a +1 longbow, for instance. Once the bond is formed, the magic weapon appears whenever you call your pact weapon to you, and the intent is that you can’t change the magic weapon’s form when it appears. For example, if you bond with a flame tongue (longsword) and send the weapon to the feature’s extradimensional space, the weapon comes back as a longsword when you summon it. You don’t get to turn it into a club. Similarly, if you bond with a dagger of venom, you can’t summon it as a maul; it’s always a dagger.
The feature initially allows the conjuring forth of a me- lee weapon, yet we allow more versatility when it comes
to magic weapons. We didn’t want a narrow focus in this feature to make a warlock unhappy when a variety of magic weapons appear in a campaign. Does this versatility extend outside the melee theme of the feature? It sure does, but we’re willing to occasionally bend a design concept if doing so is likely to increase a player’s happiness.

[Chronos]

RSP, that exact same argument also applies to the Extra Attack ability. Does a dual-wielding 11th-level fighter get to attack three times each with her short sword and her dagger?

I agree with your reasoning that the precise timing doesn't matter, and that you can take your offhand attack and your two mainhand attacks in any order (though some disagree on that point). But the "when you take the attack action" is meant to mean "you attack twice, instead of once" on the attack you get as a result of taking the Attack action.

[RSP]

RSP, that exact same argument also applies to the Extra Attack ability. Does a dual-wielding 11th-level fighter get to attack three times each with her short sword and her dagger?

I agree with your reasoning that the precise timing doesn't matter, and that you can take your offhand attack and your two mainhand attacks in any order (though some disagree on that point). But the "when you take the attack action" is meant to mean "you attack twice, instead of once" on the attack you get as a result of taking the Attack action.

I disagree: the wording is such that EA gives 2 attacks instead of 1 (which is a specific rule overriding the general rule), regardless of however many weapons are held (TWF gives a different specific over general rule; a rule that can interact with EA).

TB’s wording specifically allows 2 attacks instead of 1 with the Pact Weapon. That wording is what’s different, as, if you somehow get two Pact Weapons, the rule applies to each because they’re no restriction stated.

Whereas there is a restriction stated for EA and TB working together, there is no such restriction with TB working with two Pact Weapons.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Thankfully you can't summon 2 pact weapons even if you did allow both the morphic and the bound weapon like I do.

Every time you summon a new pact weapon any old one disappears.

Now I think a more interesting question. Do we feel there's any harm or imbalance if we change summoning the blade to a Bonus Action instead of an Action?

Reason I ask is because I mostly used a Blade Pact to mimic a Knight Radiant from Stormlight. If you've read the book you know their weapons are 100% morphic weapons. The first big fight scene with someone who's mastered having a bound weapon is it starting as a greatsword, the character mutters they're not used to it and the spirit says "Oh, you want me to spear, huh?" And it turns to a longspear. As the fight continues the weapon rotates into a shield, a flail, a great axe, etc.

Now flavor wise, sure, go nuts, you summoned it as a Flail so mechanically it's always doing 1d8 Bludgeoning. But flavor and fluff it can shift all over the place with DM permission. But it would be nice to be able to make a single shift while still fighting.

[RSP]

Do we feel there's any harm or imbalance if we change summoning the blade to a Bonus Action instead of an Action?


I’ve always felt the full Action summon was a huge disservice to the Pact of the Blade Warlock. EKs do it as a BA, as essentially a ribbon feature, yet, the much-more-class-defining Pact of the Blade takes a full action.

Also, if you’re looking to emulate a Windrunner, I’d actually suggest DS Sorcerer.

Use Shadow Blade to form what weapon you like (as you say, “fluff” can be whatever you like, but the RAW description doesn’t give it a description of the created weapon, so describe it as you wish: spear, great sword, etc.: it doesn’t change the properties). You can likewise use Mage Armor as Shardplate: again, the spell effect doesn’t describe what the “protective magical force” created looks like. Want it to look like shardplate? The RAW doesn’t object! (Obviously if you’d DM does, that’s a different story, but, RAW, any in-game description is as valid as another).

SB with GFB/BB will be fine for damage (and Quicken for a 2nd attack when wanting to “nova”).

Grab some thematic spells that will help in melee: Shield (actually form a shield for a second, again, RAW doesn’t describe the in-game effects), CW (Stormlight healing), Fly (until level 14 when it’s free - just ask if you can lose the wings…), Aid (added durability).

It starts a little slow but picks up in T2. But that’s pretty consistent with how long it can take a Radiant to develop anyway.

[Keravath]

I disagree: the wording is such that EA gives 2 attacks instead of 1 (which is a specific rule overriding the general rule), regardless of however many weapons are held (TWF gives a different specific over general rule; a rule that can interact with EA).

TB’s wording specifically allows 2 attacks instead of 1 with the Pact Weapon. That wording is what’s different, as, if you somehow get two Pact Weapons, the rule applies to each because they’re no restriction stated.

Whereas there is a restriction stated for EA and TB working together, there is no such restriction with TB working with two Pact Weapons.

Since having two pact weapons is homebrew ... it will be up to the DM to homebrew how the two pact weapons interact with Thirsting Blade. Citing how Thirsting Blade only specifies what happens with regards to the pact weapon and then saying you could get two attacks with each pact weapon if you had more than one is assessing how RAW might interact with a homebrew allowing multiple pact weapons which doesn't really make much sense since as soon as homebrew is involved, the DM makes a call on how the rules are modified to deal with the homebrew.

[RSP]

Since having two pact weapons is homebrew ... it will be up to the DM to homebrew how the two pact weapons interact with Thirsting Blade. Citing how Thirsting Blade only specifies what happens with regards to the pact weapon and then saying you could get two attacks with each pact weapon if you had more than one is assessing how RAW might interact with a homebrew allowing multiple pact weapons which doesn't really make much sense since as soon as homebrew is involved, the DM makes a call on how the rules are modified to deal with the homebrew.

Sure. Again, not advocating for it, just pointing out a potential exploit, were it to be allowed.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I’ve always felt the full Action summon was a huge disservice to the Pact of the Blade Warlock. EKs do it as a BA, as essentially a ribbon feature, yet, the much-more-class-defining Pact of the Blade takes a full action.

Also, if you’re looking to emulate a Windrunner, I’d actually suggest DS Sorcerer.

Use Shadow Blade to form what weapon you like (as you say, “fluff” can be whatever you like, but the RAW description doesn’t give it a description of the created weapon, so describe it as you wish: spear, great sword, etc.: it doesn’t change the properties). You can likewise use Mage Armor as Shardplate: again, the spell effect doesn’t describe what the “protective magical force” created looks like. Want it to look like shardplate? The RAW doesn’t object! (Obviously if you’d DM does, that’s a different story, but, RAW, any in-game description is as valid as another).

SB with GFB/BB will be fine for damage (and Quicken for a 2nd attack when wanting to “nova”).

Grab some thematic spells that will help in melee: Shield (actually form a shield for a second, again, RAW doesn’t describe the in-game effects), CW (Stormlight healing), Fly (until level 14 when it’s free - just ask if you can lose the wings…), Aid (added durability).

It starts a little slow but picks up in T2. But that’s pretty consistent with how long it can take a Radiant to develop anyway.

I'd be all over the place depending on what I was making. In this case the character is a Hexblade/Oath of the Crown Paladin and the only aspects I kept were the concept of the Morphic weapon and the Windrunner Oaths.

If I was trying to make a specific Windrunner it'd probably be a Warlock 3/Graviturgy Wizard X, though it does become MAD, generally I'd forgo Hexblade since we probably want to dump Cha at 13 and not worry on it much. For Race it's up in the air, pick one with weapon profs, or maybe the Dhampir for SpiderClimb.

[RSP]

I'd be all over the place depending on what I was making. In this case the character is a Hexblade/Oath of the Crown Paladin and the only aspects I kept were the concept of the Morphic weapon and the Windrunner Oaths.

If I was trying to make a specific Windrunner it'd probably be a Warlock 3/Graviturgy Wizard X, though it does become MAD, generally I'd forgo Hexblade since we probably want to dump Cha at 13 and not worry on it much. For Race it's up in the air, pick one with weapon profs, or maybe the Dhampir for SpiderClimb.

There’s different ways to do it, and nothing wrong with just picking select imagery to add to a 5e character.

I didn’t like using Wizard for a Windrunner (assuming staying close to their book powers) as Windrunners don’t associate with spellbooks or studying too well, and Wizards just get too many spells known: you’ll have a bunch of spells that don’t really emulate anything from the books.

If I were to go Wizard, I’d probably go Bladesinger.

But I really like the idea of straight DS: it gets CW, Regeneration and Concentration-less flight (@14), Deathward, Aid, Heal, their DS heal ability at 18. Fly if you want to take to the skies before 14th. I did go Half Elf Variant and take Elven Weapon Training for a few sword profs.

Pretty much can cover everything you need to model a Windrunner, without extra stuff, while staying effective.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

There’s different ways to do it, and nothing wrong with just picking select imagery to add to a 5e character.

I didn’t like using Wizard for a Windrunner (assuming staying close to their book powers) as Windrunners don’t associate with spellbooks or studying too well, and Wizards just get too many spells known: you’ll have a bunch of spells that don’t really emulate anything from the books.

If I were to go Wizard, I’d probably go Bladesinger.

But I really like the idea of straight DS: it gets CW, Regeneration and Concentration-less flight (@14), Deathward, Aid, Heal, their DS heal ability at 18. Fly if you want to take to the skies before 14th. I did go Half Elf Variant and take Elven Weapon Training for a few sword profs.

Pretty much can cover everything you need to model a Windrunner, without extra stuff, while staying effective.

It fits and makes a bunch of sense. The one time I ran a Windrunner I decided I was going to play as hard into the Gravity bit as I could, hence the Graviturge. I didn't actually have a Spellbook. I had super complex, elaborate tattoos all over that were my spells. And it was only a one shot, was more an experiment than a developed character. But using that halving and doubling people's wait, shoving them around and a spell that mimics immovable rod was a lot of fun.