If there was a warlocky-themed 1/3 pact caster fighter archetype; would you play it?

[cutlery]

There are a number of attempts at this out in homebrewland, but none of them have a lot of interest, other than perhaps one particular Blood Hunter subclass (which is, of course, not a fighter martial archetype). It would be easy enough to toss another one out there, but I'm curious about the broader ideas. None of them seemed to catch fire, is it because pact magic is just weak relative to what an EK can do?

(1) If by some random chance there was an official 1/3 pact caster archetype, would you play it?

(2) Would you benchmark it against the Eldritch Knight, The Hexblade+blade pact, or both? What about fighter/warlock multiclasses?

(3) What tweaks, if any, to pact casting would you add?

Is simple pact magic with two slots up to level 4 spells (with new spell levels at the same time) enough?

Should it gain more slots as the warlock does? With up to 4th level slots that seems too strong, on the other hand only two spell slots for its entire career seems a bit light.

Would it be more appropriate to cap casting at 2nd or 3rd with those additional slots, with 3rd-4th level spells as arcanums? Or instead add level-restricted invocations, perhaps from a cut-down list?

Assume a re-written agonizing blast (if it were even available) so as to discourage dipping three levels for action surge, heavy armor, and EB+AB.

[TrueAlphaGamer]

1. Personally, nope. Having snails-pace pact magic progression isn't particularly interesting to me.

2. Compare against all of them, but mainly blade warlocks. What would make gimped spell level progression better than just playing normal melee warlock? Blade pact already has lifedrinker at 12 to make up for the fact that they only get two attacks with their attack action, which keeps them on pace with Fighter until 20th, especially if the warlock has PAM. What would make someone want to play Fighter instead? A whopping TWO extra ASI? A fighting style or action surge they can get from a dip? Indomitable?

3. Maybe have the martial archetype features grant Mystic Arcanum for 2nd/3rd/4th/5th level spells? Or give them more slots as they increase in levels, as there is no way another 4th level slot would be "too strong" at 19th level.

[jojosskul]

The thing there are so many different ways to build Warlock, I'm unsure if the demand for 1/3 pact caster fighter is really there. There's alredy the pact of the blade itself, which already lets you get multiattack and even smites, on top of thirsting blade while still eventually getting 9th level spells.

That can be tacked onto ANY Warlock subclass, to different levels of affect. So you'd run into the problem where any 1/3 pact magic fighter would have a hard time not being overshadowed by the full Blade Pact Warlock.

The subclass features would have to be amazing to make up that difference. And I'm not sure how you get the unique patron flavor mixed in using a single subclass. Maybe do like Genie Warlock and have subclasses within subclasses? Actually that might work, have features that are slightly different depending on your "patron." Like one feature gives a bonus die of damage to your weapon strikes, but the damage type is Psychic for GOO, Fire for Fiend, and slashing (?) for Archfey?

Also, giving a "1/3" caster the same number of spell slots that Warlocks get their entire career is somewhat unfair to the Warlock class.

What if they had no spell slots at all? What if all they had were invocations, and it was a mix of invocations from Warlock and some unique ones from the class? And of course you still pick a Pact Boon when you choose the subclass at 3, but make them different than standard warlock pacts. Gives the customization feel of Warlock without stepping on Warlock's toes.

[BerzerkerUnit]

No, I could get more mileage out of Warlock 12 Fighter 8 these days.

[Dork_Forge]

It'd really depend on what else there was, gimped Pact Magic progression isn't enough to fill the design space or be interesting enough to be tempting. IMO it'd have to give some limited access to invocations, maybe even a limited access to a pact or patron abilities.

It'd have to be really well done to be worth a damn when next to a Bladelock and Eldritch Knight (or a MC of them together).

[cutlery]

And I'm not sure how you get the unique patron flavor mixed in using a single subclass.

I don't think this would really require more than one flavor set/patrons. There could just be the one, more or less like there is with Eldritch Knight.

2. Compare against all of them, but mainly blade warlocks. What would make gimped spell level progression better than just playing normal melee warlock? Blade pact already has lifedrinker at 12 to make up for the fact that they only get two attacks with their attack action, which keeps them on pace with Fighter until 20th, especially if the warlock has PAM. What would make someone want to play Fighter instead? A whopping TWO extra ASI? A fighting style or action surge they can get from a dip? Indomitable?

I think the durability (and simplicity of a monoclass) would be the draw, in some of the same way the eldritch knight looks attractive when pondering a fighter/wizard. However, I agree that being locked to two slots might feel somewhat punishing in Tiers 3 and 4.

There are people that play pure eldritch knights, after all.

3. Maybe have the martial archetype features grant Mystic Arcanum for 2nd/3rd/4th/5th level spells? Or give them more slots as they increase in levels, as there is no way another 4th level slot would be "too strong" at 19th level.

I've seen a few variations on this; everything from sprinkling arcanum on top of what looks like plain 1/3 caster progression to capping pact slot levels (but increasing slots). An EK only gets 1 level 4 slot per day; a pact fighter having 2 or 3 per short rest seems like a lot (granted, the EK has c4331 long rest slots).

Pact slots that max out at 2 or 3 and arcanum would require a healthy dose of something like invocations or other features, I think.


1/3 Long Rest casters should have 38 spell points at level 19;

A pact 1/3 caster with 2 slots capping at level 4 would have the equivalent of 12 spell points per SR, so 36 assuming 2 short rests per long rest. That seems pretty close to the way warlocks and full casters are balanced.

A full pact caster at 20 has 4*5th level slots for 28 points per short rest and then one 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th "slot", so with 2 SRs, the equivalent of 4*7*3 + 9+10+11+13 = 127 spell points.

Full casters at 20 have 133.

What if they had no spell slots at all? What if all they had were invocations

That's a neat idea, but I think also a fair bit more work.

[Sception]

personally, no. Pact magic is already so slow that a 1/3 progression of it isn't interesting to me.

On the other hand, I'd be all over a 1/2 pact caster stand alone class, as a replacement for the warlock's various melee pretentions. Ie, remove the hexblade patron, the blade boon, possibly also reduce the regular warlocks hit die size, maybe remove the warlock's light armor proficiency. In exchange you can build up the warlock's casting ability a fair bit. For instance, give the base warlock a 1/3 progression of regular daily spell slots, so they can work better as a support caster by maintaining some use of their lower level utility spells as their pact slots outgrow them.

Maybe also change the invocations that let them cast a spell once per day using their pact slots to let them cast the spell once per day as if from a spell slot equal to their pact slot level, but without actually using one of their pact slots.

Make eldritch blast a class feature while you're at it, scaling with warlock level, so that it can't be so easily sniped by multiclassing. Also that lets you assume all warlocks have it, so you could maybe have the subclasses augment it in unique thematic ways.

Maybe give warlocks a choice of casting stat, too. Like, move boon down to first level to reflect how you contacted your patron. Either bargaining with a strange minor spiritual entity sent by the patron (chain boon, cha casting), or studying the inscrutable characters of a mysterious book (tome boon, int casting). Then move patron choice to 3rd level, with the flavor that the warlock only gains the insight necessary to realize what exactly it is they've been dealing with at that point, at which point it's too late to break off the bond, which imo could lead to some fun/compelling role play situations. To be clear, it would be the player's choice, not something random or forced on them by the DM, but they character may not know until level 3.

....

Then the separate 'hexblade' class is for patrons looking for a more martial servant - a knight or hunter or enforcer. These forge their bond through a special weapon which then they can summon in a variety of forms. They'd have proficiencies & hit die appropriate for a melee character, have a 1/2 progression of pact magic, don't gain any daily slots, and get a unique set of invocations. Still might have a choice of casting stats, maybe based on the nature of their boon weapon (ranged/finesse weapons & int casting for light/medium armor builds, or thrown/strength weapons & cha casting for medium/heavy armor builds). Subclasses would be the same set of patrons as warlock, but with features tailored to a melee character. Patron choice at 3rd level again, because I still like the role play opportunities of the character possibly not even knowing the nature of the entity they've formed this bond with until it's too late to back out of it.

[MaxWilson]

There are a number of attempts at this out in homebrewland, but none of them have a lot of interest, other than perhaps one particular Blood Hunter subclass (which is, of course, not a fighter martial archetype). It would be easy enough to toss another one out there, but I'm curious about the broader ideas. None of them seemed to catch fire, is it because pact magic is just weak relative to what an EK can do?

(1) If by some random chance there was an official 1/3 pact caster archetype, would you play it?

(2) Would you benchmark it against the Eldritch Knight, The Hexblade+blade pact, or both? What about fighter/warlock multiclasses?

(3) What tweaks, if any, to pact casting would you add?

Is simple pact magic with two slots up to level 4 spells (with new spell levels at the same time) enough?

Should it gain more slots as the warlock does? With up to 4th level slots that seems too strong, on the other hand only two spell slots for its entire career seems a bit light.

Would it be more appropriate to cap casting at 2nd or 3rd with those additional slots, with 3rd-4th level spells as arcanums? Or instead add level-restricted invocations, perhaps from a cut-down list?

Assume a re-written agonizing blast (if it were even available) so as to discourage dipping three levels for action surge, heavy armor, and EB+AB.

Hmmm. I probably wouldn't play it, just because if I were in the mood to play a warlocky Fighter/mini-Warlock I could already play an Eldritch Knight 11/Hexblade 9, and get more SADness and more spellcasting, more uses for War Magic, and more invocations.

However, if 5E-style multiclassing were disallowed I could imagine playing that subclass occasionally, depending on its details.

[clash]

I have interest in this. I have even drafted up what the spellcasting looks like and some rough ideas for the subclass.
Spellcasting
Warlock spellcasting
level cantrips spells kn number slots slots level
3 2 2 1 1st
4 2 3 2 1st
7 2 4 2 2nd
10 3 5 2 2nd
13 3 6 2 3rd
16 3 7 2 3rd
19 3 8 2 4th

[MrStabby]

I think there are two seperate questions kind of coming together...

1) Would a 1/3 spell progression work based of pact magic rather than spellcasing feature

2) Would a lower spell progression class based of warloc spell list work



So pact magic progression... yeah. Interesting but it really depends on the spell list. I mean I could see the druid rocking this as they have some really great low level spells: farie fire, entagle, heat metal, dispel magic, watery sphere. The kind of spells that are still pretty good even when they come onine a lot later. Likewise if you were to take the paladin spell list you could do something there - the number of bonus action spells makes is attractive to a primary fighter. On the other hand... what's the point? It is mechanically interesting but doesn't really allow that much more in terms of concepts.


As to the warlock spell list working... oh yes. Hex, misty step, counterspell/hypntic pattern, banishment/dimension door. Lots of spells that stay very relevant at high levels and can make the progression interesting - especially the ones that don't need anaction so you can still attack.

So yeah - it really comes down to the available spells.

Obviously it also comes down to the other class abilities as well. My preference would be for a deeply supernatural class with the spells just being part of it - lots of other wierd and wonderful abilities rather than a more mundane martial fluff. Someone empowered by a patron to be a great warrior.

[cutlery]

Hmmm. I probably wouldn't play it, just because if I were in the mood to play a warlocky Fighter/mini-Warlock I could already play an Eldritch Knight 11/Hexblade 9, and get more SADness and more spellcasting, more uses for War Magic, and more invocations.

Yeah; having both low level utility slots and pact slots on tap is pretty enticing, I agree. (As is having superiority die and pact magic, etc).

I have interest in this. I have even drafted up what the spellcasting looks like and some rough ideas for the subclass.

I think 3rd slot at 11 makes more sense than 10, but otherwise yeah, getting to 3 but not getting to 4 seems right; though that would net out to more effective spell points than the EK or AT.

I think there are two seperate questions kind of coming together...

1) Would a 1/3 spell progression work based of pact magic rather than spellcasing feature

2) Would a lower spell progression class based of warloc spell list work

I think that makes sense - the full warlock list is pretty great.

I guess part of the thinking is, if it is invocations that make warlock awesome, would a martial (or half caster martial) base class that gets a couple of them with a smattering of pact magic do the melee warlock thing better than the base class where you're sort of stuck either going hexblade or fighter-dipping and spending the bulk of your invocations making melee good (unless going for a 50/50 MC, as above).

[MaxWilson]

I think 3rd slot at 11 makes more sense than 10, but otherwise yeah, getting to 3 but not getting to 4 seems right; though that would net out to more effective spell points than the EK or AT.

The way I read clash's table, he suggested 3 cantrips known at level 10, not 3 spell slots.

10 3 5 2 2nd

means "10th level, 3 cantrips, 5 spells known, two 2nd level slots".

[cutlery]

The way I read clash's table, he suggested 3 cantrips known at level 10, not 3 spell slots.

10 3 5 2 2nd

means "10th level, 3 cantrips, 5 spells known, two 2nd level slots".

Ah, so indeed.

I'm not sure even a 3rd pact slot at 11th would do the trick (it would help, but it would be a deviation from how 1/3 casting seems to work in other cases).

[Mr Adventurer]

Short rest spell slot recovery on a Fighter? Hell yeah I'd be interested in playing that.

Balance around Eldritch Knight.

Skip invocations altogether. Cuts out Agonising Blast and other tricky combos.

Instead replace the current Eldritch Knight features with variants on the Patron features, with the same selection of patrons to choose from. Spell list improvements are yes. Probably need new thematic features rather than taking Warlock ones.

[clash]

Ya the table didn't translate well. The spells known is likely too low and should probably match ek but that is straight up 1/3 warlock casting. What appeals to me about it is basically getting one big concentration spell per encounter. It would play much different than ek

[cutlery]

Ya the table didn't translate well. The spells known is likely too low and should probably match ek but that is straight up 1/3 warlock casting. What appeals to me about it is basically getting one big concentration spell per encounter. It would play much different than ek

Right, you'd be pressed into a more offensive role as you don't have a pile of slots for shield or absorb elements. OTOH, without a tailored list of spells to add to the warlock list, you wouldn't have haste, either. Maybe that doesn't matter late game as Shadow of Moil shows up, but 19th is pretty late.

If invocations are off the table (and thus, EB+AB is off the table), what could this do that an EK couldn't do?

[MaxWilson]

Short rest spell slot recovery on a Fighter? --- yeah I'd be interested in playing that.

Balance around Eldritch Knight.

Skip invocations altogether. Cuts out Agonising Blast and other tricky combos.

Instead replace the current Eldritch Knight features with variants on the Patron features, with the same selection of patrons to choose from. Spell list improvements are yes. Probably need new thematic features rather than taking Warlock ones.

Y'know, Arcane Archer gets short rest "spell" recovery, plus a bonus action attack, plus a fantastic action economy for its "spellcasting" (the ability to use its "spells" as part of an Attack action after a hit). Is Arcane Archer underrated, or are its arrows simply crummy and underpowered compared to 1st/2nd-level warlock spells?

[clash]

Y'know, Arcane Archer gets short rest "spell" recovery, plus a bonus action attack, plus a fantastic action economy for its "spellcasting" (the ability to use its "spells" as part of an Attack action after a hit). Is Arcane Archer underrated, or are its arrows simply crummy and underpowered compared to 1st/2nd-level warlock spells?

They are just as good or better than first level spells. Much less versatile than second level spells and no where as useful as 3rd and 4th level spells

[Foxhound438]

I feel like the arcane archer gives a pretty good taste of exactly this, and no one that I know actually likes the arcane archer in play. Maybe having the flexibility of actually having spells known that aren't tied into longbow attacks would make it feel better.

Personally I would stick to eldritch knight if I wanted casteryness on a fighter.

[Dork_Forge]

I think the problem with the Arcane Archer is that you get invested in the idea of being able to do cool magical shots, then you can only do it twice per rest and then you're even restricted to once per turn. Whereas with a Warlock, you have cantrips, invocations and pact/patron boons to fill out when you're not casting (not to mention your slots still progress up to 5th, then you get more slots and once per LR higher spells. Arcane Archer has scaline once, at 18th level so it might as well not even be there).

Arcane Archer would benefit great imo to changing how the shots are decided, move to a number of shots per LR equal to your Int mod for example and remove the once per turn restriction to give the player more control over their ability. Ideally some more scaling should also be insterted, but that's a taller order than just changing how shot uses work.

[Foxhound438]

I think the problem with the Arcane Archer is that you get invested in the idea of being able to do cool magical shots, then you can only do it twice per rest and then you're even restricted to once per turn. Whereas with a Warlock, you have cantrips, invocations and pact/patron boons to fill out when you're not casting (not to mention your slots still progress up to 5th, then you get more slots and once per LR higher spells. Arcane Archer has scaline once, at 18th level so it might as well not even be there).

Arcane Archer would benefit great imo to changing how the shots are decided, move to a number of shots per LR equal to your Int mod for example and remove the once per turn restriction to give the player more control over their ability. Ideally some more scaling should also be insterted, but that's a taller order than just changing how shot uses work.

If not all but one of the effects lasted less than a full round then it might feel a little better to have only two uses. If shadow arrow had a minute of distant blindness attached to it, it would feel a lot better than having the rest of your attack action to take advantage of the effect for yourself. More options would also be pretty cool... But that's kind of a tangent.

[Kane0]

One of said homebrew subclasses may be mine, but cant be sure.
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthre...s-and-homebrew

But yes, I would play one. I’ve always considered hexblade a better fit in this manner rather than a warlock patron but alas.

[cutlery]

One of said homebrew subclasses may be mine, but cant be sure.
https://forums.giantitp.com/showthre...s-and-homebrew

But yes, I would play one. I’ve always considered hexblade a better fit in this manner rather than a warlock patron but alas.

Ah, I hadn't seen this one!

[MaxWilson]

I think the problem with the Arcane Archer is that you get invested in the idea of being able to do cool magical shots, then you can only do it twice per rest and then you're even restricted to once per turn. Whereas with a Warlock, you have cantrips, invocations and pact/patron boons to fill out when you're not casting (not to mention your slots still progress up to 5th, then you get more slots and once per LR higher spells. Arcane Archer has scaline once, at 18th level so it might as well not even be there).

Arcane Archer would benefit great imo to changing how the shots are decided, move to a number of shots per LR equal to your Int mod for example and remove the once per turn restriction to give the player more control over their ability. Ideally some more scaling should also be insterted, but that's a taller order than just changing how shot uses work.

Sounds like maybe the Arcane Archer should have been written with more magic but worse action economy.

What if Arcane Archer had the at-will ability, at 7th+ level, to make fire one magic arrow as an action WITHOUT it costing a magic arrow usage or being part of an Attack action? E.g. if your action is "Fire Enfeebling Arrow", you make only one arrow attack (with Curving Shot bonus action if needed) and get no normal weapon damage on a hit, but do get the normal Enfeebling effects (2d6 necrotic and Con save to avoid halved weapon attack damage for a round).

It's the Arcane Archer equivalent of a cantrip. The higher your Fighter level the more attacks you are giving up by doing it instead of Attacking.

How many DMs would call that OP? How many players would feel more like an Arcane Archer if they had that at-will option on top of the 2/short rest ability to use arrows as part of a successful Attack?

[Dork_Forge]

Sounds like maybe the Arcane Archer should have been written with more magic but worse action economy.

What if Arcane Archer had the at-will ability, at 7th+ level, to make fire one magic arrow as an action WITHOUT it costing a magic arrow usage or being part of an Attack action? E.g. if your action is "Fire Enfeebling Arrow", you make only one arrow attack (with Curving Shot bonus action if needed) and get no normal weapon damage on a hit, but do get the normal Enfeebling effects (2d6 necrotic and Con save to avoid halved weapon attack damage for a round).

It's the Arcane Archer equivalent of a cantrip. The higher your Fighter level the more attacks you are giving up by doing it instead of Attacking.

How many DMs would call that OP? How many players would feel more like an Arcane Archer if they had that at-will option on top of the 2/short rest ability to use arrows as part of a successful Attack?

I don't know if worse action economy is necessarily needed, but for example compare it to a Battle Master. The player wants to make a cool trickshotting archer, one option provides 4 per short rest initially, with more uses and scaling damage die throughout it's progression (and the option of limited feat support). The other offers more powerful individual shots, but only twice per short rest (with no increased limit besides the 15th level one) and with an unnecessary restriction on how often you can use it.

A cantrip option could make that feel better, choose one or two of your shot options and you can do them as an action like you suggested, personally I'd rather have a bigger pool of shots to draw from (I like Int mod for this) and move the ever ready ability to 10th like the Samurai's, then include some intermediate damage scaling, maybe just upping the die size of the damage.

[GooeyChewie]

I would probably try it, if for no other reason than the fact that I like to give everything a try. I would compare it to Eldritch Knight, since both would fulfill the "fighter who dabbles in magic" role (as opposed to Hexblade's similar-but-not-quite-the-same "magic user who dabbles in weapon fighting" role). In fact, if I wanted to play a character with that type of story arc, I would probably ask my DM if I can fluff Eldritch Knight in such a way that my magic comes from a patron. It wouldn't be perfect (especially noting the lack of short-rest spell slot regeneration), but it wouldn't be too far off either.

[Spiritchaser]

From a purely fluff point of view? Sure, it sounds great

But:

Mechanically there is precious little room left between the hexblade, warlock-fighter multiclass and the eldritch knight.

I guess the devil would be in the details.

[MrStabby]

From a purely fluff point of view? Sure, it sounds great

But:

Mechanically there is precious little room left between the hexblade, warlock-fighter multiclass and the eldritch knight.

I guess the devil would be in the details.

I think it depends on how broadly you are looking.

If your view is you X amount of class power and it is divided up between martial prowess and casting prowess, then sure EK, Hexblade and multiclass pretty much span that...

On the other hand if you consider not only spellcasting but martial ability as being a bit more varied then you can get some interesting results. Imagine a 1/3rd pact caster using the druid list but their abilities are themed more around moon druid style shape-shifting but with additional benefits. Sure you will be a melee class with some spells for flavour but actually quite different in practice to the ranger.

Or you could go further an say that 1/3rd level casting is only the start of magical power. Imagine arcane recovery as an action X times per day to refresh your slots as another class ability - you are a low level spell-spammer, potentially quite powerful caster but with a very different feel to the warlock.

A "support Paladin" might be more of a challenge - but imagine more auras, more lay on hands, more cleansing touch but fewer spells and fewer attacks. Really play into the unique elements to create a distinct support class.

Or you could add utility/control. 1/3rd caster but with the enchanter wizard's hypnotic gaze as a bonus action or other control abilities - you will be a weak caster and a weak "martial" but with the right creative creation of other abilities you could maybe explore a less 1 dimensional space than a line between fightery caster and castery fighter. And all this has been without getting into skills or out of combat elements.

[MoiMagnus]

Probably not, because to balance it, you would have to get rid of all the things I find interesting in the class.

However, I'd maybe play a warlock themed caster fighter archetype that get invocations at a reasonable rate but never get more than level one spell slots in exchange.

[Snowbluff]

This is a hard nope. Bloodhunter tried something similiar, it was horrible. Being limited to only 1 or 2 slots for basically your whole career is miserable. Having more slots at least would be nice, but a lot of games I've played haven't given warlocks enough short rests.