I'm putting together a "Hellknight" Character and need some feedback

[WarpedAcorn]

http://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/UAPaladin_SO_20161219_1.pdf

Oath of conquest and Oath of Treachery are much more hell knight than other paladins, you might not even need to multi-class.

Yeah, Oath of Conquest is one I was specifically looking at previously...they're even named as "Hellknights". I appreciate the suggestion, and it *sorta* fits on its own, but my vision for the character is a heavier focus on Warlock than Paladin. Paladin is mainly there thematically because he was part of an order of Knights (base training), and the concept of a disgraced purity. Mechanically I want the split because I want Heavy Armor and [to a lesser extent] Smite options.

 

[neogod22]

I'm not sure what you mean by your first question, but if it is in regards to why its taking so long to level then that is because of how we play. We meet weekly and play for about 2-3 Hours. We alternate campaigns with me running one and another guy running the one I play in, and some of his sessions just involve plot or talking with no XP given out (which to be fair, so do some of mine).

As for the UA suggestion, I have and I haven't found a lot that interesting to me. Hexblade sounds mechanically close to what I'm after, but thematically I don't like the idea of gaining power through a powerful sentient item. The other issue I have with UA material in general is that its there for playtesting, and the group of friends I play with don't do the same sort of digging that I do. The DM also tries to stick with the core books, so I don't really want to make things harder on him by requesting a bunch of UA stuff. If something from the UA REALLY stood out, I would make a case, but I haven't seen anything super great yet.

You're right, it is playtest material and it needs to be playtested. I have a feeling that this stuff will be coming out in the next player's guide and they need help with finding balancing issues before the book is printed and nothing can be done (i.e. the "warlock smites"). I know, because I'm in one of the official playtest groups. I can tell you I playtested Volo's guide, and the Aasimar was way over powered in the playtest. I've played and ran some of the AL adventures and some stuff that I can't talk about, but hope to see my name in that book when it does come out, but I digress.

If all you really want is heavy armor, then why not just take fighter at 1st level and take the knight background? Looking at the UA stuff, I have my own concept of what I think a Hellknight should be and when this book comes out with these archetypes and invocations, I'm redesigning my lvl 15 warlock.

Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk

 

[WarpedAcorn]

If all you really want is heavy armor, then why not just take fighter at 1st level and take the knight background? Looking at the UA stuff, I have my own concept of what I think a Hellknight should be and when this book comes out with these archetypes and invocations, I'm redesigning my lvl 15 warlock.

Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk

Like I mentioned previously, I am going with Paladin over Fighter because I thematically like the idea of a "Holy" Warrior that is being used by dark forces. Could Fighter work? Absolutely. I have another build (Fighter/Warlock) in that vein, but that is a different character with a different concept (and a backup in case my current character dies in the campaign I currently play in). Mechanically, I'm going with Paladin over Fighter because of having access to Smites sounds fun and useful, plus Lay on Hands can be clutch (not to mention future Paladin abilities should I continue down that path).

Knight is a background I was considering, but my current character is a Noble and I really wanted to have a different character. I was also considering Acolyte or Folk Hero. Based on the backstory, Xynthoros had a great suggestion because the Haunted One background fits this character perfectly.

My only question now is whether to go Pact of the Chain or Blade...although after discussing it and the character with my group, I am leaning more towards the Chain because that Imp sounds like something I could have a lot of fun with. If my character ends up being more severe and stoic, then the Imp can let me do some funny and antagonistic things that the rest of the group can play off of.

 

[neogod22]

So are double making a Paladin with Warlock levels, or a Warlock with Paladin levels? When I build a character, I like to have an idea of his path through all 20 levels. This way, I can picture what he will and will not be able to do and adjust my plan accordingly. It makes sense knowing what feats you want him to have and when you want to get them, this way you don't make a mistake while leveling, or make adjustments if you feel you need to.

Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk