Blaster class ability; looking for second opinions

I call it the HELLION. It started as a pretty straightforward 5E conversion of the 3E warlock -- an unreformed mage-punk who tosses around explosions all day and doesn't bother with any of that "spell" nonsense. Mechanically, it's supposed to fill the niche of the beginner/low-complexity class for players who want to wield magic rather than a sword.

But then I had to start tinkering. Here's what the core class ability currently looks like:

Hex Blast


Rather than shape your magic into spells, you simply hurl it as raw destructive energy. If you have a free hand, you can use your action to attack with this hex blast. Choose one creature or object within a range of 60 feet, and make a ranged attack roll with a modifier of your proficiency bonus + your Charisma modifier. On a hit, the target takes force damage equal to your Charisma modifier (minimum 1).

Your magic feeds on conflict and strife. If you damage an enemy with your hex blast, you gain one hex die, a d6. You can accumulate multiple hex dice, up to [a maximum that is some function of your level]. Whenever you hit with a subsequent hex blast, roll all your hex dice and add the result to the damage. You do not expend your hex dice by dealing damage with them – your power only grows as you keep throwing hex blasts.

If you have not attacked an enemy with your hex blast for 1 minute, you lose all your hex dice.


So there are a lot of variables to balance here, but first a couple of conceptual questions:

(1) Is this ability fundamentally too complex for what the class is trying to accomplish? Does having to "build up" your blast add flavor to the original warlock, or is it just a hassle?

(2) Does having to do damage with the blast screw you over too hard if you get a bad roll or two at the beginning of the fight, or is that an acceptable risk? Should you build up whether you hit or miss?

Okay, now, math. Here's my thinking. The most obvious number in this ability is the hex die cap, but it's actually the least important unless it is very low; for most of combat you will be below the cap. There are two other numbers that can be adjusted for a more significant impact on the play experience: the number of dice you start with, and the number of dice you gain when you attack.

Here's a sketch of how I'm thinking it could scale by level:
Code:
Level  Start  Gain   Cap
1      0      1      2
2      0      1      2
3      1      1      3
4      1      1      3
5      2      1      4
6      2      1      4
7      2      2      5
8      2      2      5
9      3      2      6
10     3      2      6
11     3      2      7
12     3      2      7
13     4      2      8
14     4      2      8
15     4      3      9
16     4      3      9
17     5      3      10
18     5      3      10
19     5      3      11
20     5      3      11

And this is the math that I really want feedback on. Oh, I can crunch the numbers and figure out how much damage an Xth-level hellion can be expected to do over Y rounds against an opponent of AC Z, but I'm struggling to contextualize it. Compared to other classes, are these numbers too low, or too high? (Keep in mind that this class is all about damage output, so I do want to push the limit -- just not too much.) Do the first couple of rounds feel bad -- should the start numbers be higher? Or can they be lower and allow for a more exciting ramp up? Right now there's only two steps of gain between the start and the cap -- should it be more for longer fights, or would that mean you feel cheated during the shorter ones? Is the cap too low? Could this class conceivably be capable of 20d6 damage per round at 20th level -- a scary prospect, but also an exciting one, and since you have to earn it, perhaps it's acceptable?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Redthistle

Explorer
Supporter
For clarification, I'm assuming the Hex Blast Warlock is still limited to 1 spell slot at 1st level, going up to 4 spell slots at 20th-level, before needing a short or long rest, and that cantrips would still accumulate at the standard rate.

Also, like the expanded spell list feature from other Warlock archetypes, Hex Blast would still require the use of spell slots.

As long as the Hex Blast Warlock faces the same spell slot limitations as regular Warlocks, then this may be workable, and I kind of like it.

1. This is not too complex. The table/sketch you provided is good and should stay as is; the "build-up" is an enticing feature. I would advise against increasing the damage cap beyond what is listed.

Warlocks have only a single spell slot at 1st level. For a Hex Blast Warlock to even use this at low level, the spell would need to have a Duration of Concentration. Since your description specified that the extra hex dice would vanish if no attack was made within 1 minute of casting it, then "Concentration, up to 1 minute" seems to be implied. Should a successful attack with the maximum number of hit dice then end the spell, or should more attacks be possible within the duration? It seems to me that, in terms of level-balance, that ending the spell would be the fairer option.

A 1st level Hex Blaster could do up to (1 + Cha mod) + (1d6 + Cha mod) + (2d6 + Cha mod) damage (if I understand the build-up correctly) with three successful attacks in a single encounter. That, plus cantrips and better-than-a-wizard melee/ranged attack combat capacity, seems reasonable to me.

With Duration as described above, a 20th level Hex Blaster with three successful attacks could do (5d6+ Cha mod) + (8d6 + Cha mod) + (11d6 + Cha mod) damage in a single fight with a single use of Hex Blast. Given the length of most combats and the likelihood of a few misses, one spell slot might be all that's needed for a single fight, and with three more slots available, this Warlock is still good to go.

2. I like the idea of increasing the number of Hex Dice even with a miss; the idea of that energy being pent up appeals to me. Or perhaps the increase should only occur with a missed attack? Hmmm ...

Suppose that each successful attack spent all of the accumulated starting plus hex dice damage, and as long as Concentration was still maintained, the build-up from missed attacks began all over again?
 

First of all, [MENTION=6778305]Redthistle[/MENTION], thank you for the thoughtful response!

For clarification, I'm assuming the Hex Blast Warlock is still limited to 1 spell slot at 1st level, going up to 4 spell slots at 20th-level, before needing a short or long rest, and that cantrips would still accumulate at the standard rate.
I'm sorry, when I mentioned that this idea started life as the 3E warlock I just sort of blithely assumed that people would understand the reference. That was wrong of me. In case you don't know, the 3E warlock has no spells, no spell slots, and no usage limits on any of the handful of things it can do. Same goes for the hellion. Hex Blast is at will. This is its core combat ability, at least as important to it as the rogue's sneak attack.

And you might be able to see that I based its damage curve more on sneak attack than on any spell. The 2d6 → 11d6 progression of the hex dice cap matches a rogue sneak attacking with a shortsword or shortbow. My concern is that the rogue is actually able to get sneak attack more often than the hellion is able to get max hex dice, and the hellion is consequently too weak. Hence my question of whether we should push it a bit more.

Warlocks have only a single spell slot at 1st level. For a Hex Blast Warlock to even use this at low level, the spell would need to have a Duration of Concentration. Since your description specified that the extra hex dice would vanish if no attack was made within 1 minute of casting it, then "Concentration, up to 1 minute" seems to be implied. Should a successful attack with the maximum number of hit dice then end the spell, or should more attacks be possible within the duration? It seems to me that, in terms of level-balance, that ending the spell would be the fairer option.
Concentration is an interesting balance possibility that I didn't think about, and it is worth keeping in mind if we decide we need to increase the risk-reward element of the ability. Right now, though, like I said, I'm concerned that the risk-reward element is already too strong, and that we might want to improve its consistency instead.
 

The dice-building mechanic seems problematic. It provides too much incentive for the character to buff up before a big fight, for those times when you know what's coming.

You could just have it deal the same damage as a short bow with sneak attack. There's nothing wrong with that.
 

The dice-building mechanic seems problematic. It provides too much incentive for the character to buff up before a big fight, for those times when you know what's coming.
Is that a problem? You do have to hit enemies with it -- you can't just blow up a suspicious-looking wall sconce and call that a charge. But if the circumstances allow you to "warm up" on some mooks less than a minute before engaging the big boss, then to me it seems pretty reasonable in-universe that you would do so.
 

Is that a problem? You do have to hit enemies with it -- you can't just blow up a suspicious-looking wall sconce and call that a charge. But if the circumstances allow you to "warm up" on some mooks less than a minute before engaging the big boss, then to me it seems pretty reasonable in-universe that you would do so.
I mean things like "warming up" on the party barbarian (who is subsequently patched up by the healer), or possibly on some torch-bearers. Unless you have fairly rigid guidelines on who counts as an enemy, it encourages paranoid blasters who see everyone as an enemy.

All else being equal, it should be a matter of personal preference whether you want to play a delusional character. When it comes down to a significant difference in power during important encounters, it seems counter-productive that the "crazy" blaster should be the smart pick for the team that doesn't want to die. It just sets bad precedent, especially for the new players who might otherwise want to play this class. I don't really see the point of using this sort of scaling mechanism, when a rogue with a bow can do all this with greater consistency and without jumping through hoops to get there.
 

the Jester

Legend
That building hex dice mechanic is way too fiddly for my taste. If my players can't keep track of something when they're drunk and high, it's out the window (because sometimes at least some of them are one, the other or both).
 

I mean things like "warming up" on the party barbarian (who is subsequently patched up by the healer), or possibly on some torch-bearers. Unless you have fairly rigid guidelines on who counts as an enemy, it encourages paranoid blasters who see everyone as an enemy.
As a DM, would you allow that? Because I wouldn't. If you're traveling with someone as a member of their party, it seems pretty self-evident to me that you don't see them as an enemy.

That building hex dice mechanic is way too fiddly for my taste. If my players can't keep track of something when they're drunk and high, it's out the window (because sometimes at least some of them are one, the other or both).
Okay. Sounds like it's not really a hit so far. Does the it help with the bookkeeping at all that I made it a dice count, and therefore you can physically add and remove dice from the pile in front of you? Because 5E seems to like doing that, and I wanted to take advantage of that design philosophy.
 

the Jester

Legend
Okay. Sounds like it's not really a hit so far. Does the it help with the bookkeeping at all that I made it a dice count, and therefore you can physically add and remove dice from the pile in front of you? Because 5E seems to like doing that, and I wanted to take advantage of that design philosophy.

Not much. Dice get passed around, swept up and rolled by the whole group, so "don't touch these dice" is really unreliable for us.
 

As a DM, would you allow that? Because I wouldn't. If you're traveling with someone as a member of their party, it seems pretty self-evident to me that you don't see them as an enemy.
As a DM, I would look at the rules in the book and conclude that it's a silly mechanic, given that it encourages the playing of delusional characters. I'm not going to fault the players for the fact that the game mechanics encourage this behavior. If I didn't want that sort of thing to happen in my game, I would just ban the class, or figure out some house rule to make it work in a less disruptive manner.
 

Remove ads

Top