Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Wizards & Warlocks -- Hexblades, Raven Queens, and Lore Mastery!

Master of Hexes
Starting at 14th level, you can use your
Hexblade’s Curse again without resting, but
when you apply it to a new target, the curse
immediately ends on the previous target.

Does this mean you can cast it one more time, or over and over again? And does the 1 minute duration reset upon a new target, or does it continue from the previous target?

 

[Mercule]

That's what I'm going to say in the follow-up survey: just let warlocks graft the invocation's properties onto any weapon they want.

While I agree that there is no real need to lock the invocation with a specific weapon, I did find it not stupid, but rather flavorful that they chose a flail to mimic a property inspired by tentacle attacks, with the reach and "grabbing" (i.e. 0 move) thing.

I would generally agree with Barolo. While I've been known to complain about too much flavor in the rules, Warlock Invocations is one place I don't take too literally. They should be reflavored ad hoc to make things work for the character.

In my Eberron game, I reworked the Dragonic Bloodline from Sorcerer into a Warlock Patron so the PC could serve a member of the Chamber. Things like Devil's Sight were renamed Dragon's Sight and other adaptations were made to emphasize the draconic nature of the pact. Worked great.

So, as far as Warlock Invocations go, I say have at it with that level of flavor text. Any specific/named patrons probably don't actually exist in my game, so I'll swap out certain aspects, anyway.

 

[Barolo]

Given all the other features that wizards have over sorcerers, this is somewhat of a straw man argument. If a wizard had some of the things the class was expected to do, its main shtick, tied to a resource that also used Arcane Recovery, would you consider that an upgrade? Like say, to use some of the cool subclass features that wizards have, perhaps--I don't know--Portent, would your consider that an upgrade? It depends on how it was implemented, if the ability allowed more uses of Portent by sacrificing Arcane Recovery slots, then certainly. But if it was an either or situation? Not so much of an upgrade. What if you had to spend Arcane Recovery slots to power Sculpt Spells, Empowered Evocation, Potent Cantrip, and Overchannel? Is that an "upgrade"? No, it is not.

Look, I am not really comparing the whole of the both classes, but I am trying to gauge the price of the lore master "metamagic" with the sorcerer's. This is what I was originally aiming at, and it seemed that, as spell slots and sorcery pool are the resources that enable both features, and both sorcery pool and arcane recovery impact spell slots, they should be part of the comparison. How should I proceed? I definitely do not agree that 1 lvl 1 spell = 1 sorcery spell point. The way spell slots are created from sorcery points seem to back me up. If you think they are, I would be very pleased if you could share your thoughts about it.

If I was playing a sorcerer and was given the option of joining all my sorcery points and my spell levels into one big pool, just by adding the totality of both, and then I could choose to use this pool (the same number) as either a pool of spell levels that I can convert to sorcery points via sorcerer rules or a pool of sorcery points that I can convert to spell levels also using the sorcerer rules, I am pretty sure to which side I would be on. This is also why, if ever, somebody would just add the sorcery points to the total spell points in the DMG, this would have a significant impact on how much a sorcerer can (ab)use metamagics. It also makes self-evident that draining this same pool of one "sorcery point" definitely does not equal draining this pool of one level one spell.

Moreover, the lore master will not benefit of any other wizard tradition, right?

EDIT - Just to make myself more clear, I am not arguing whether this new tradition is fully balanced. I don't even know if I like wizards doing metamagic-like stuff in this edition. Moreover I have already expressed that I am displeased by options such as elemental substitution. I did not comment on the save-changer feature before, but for me this is the lowest spot of the whole package, as it distorts in very acrobatic ways the in-game fiction. All I wanted was to point out that the way some features were being compared (namely the prices between the metamagic-like features, given by alchemical casting, and the sorcerer metamagic) seemed inappropriate, or unfair.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

If the switching stat save only applied to one spell that could do damage per long/short rest, that would be bad enough, but, I would be shocked if it wasn't primarily used on save or suck spells (unless the wizard can cast meteor swarm).

 

[Blue]

Do the new Pact of the Blade features seem strictly better than the Paladin's Divine Smite?
Is there enough of an opportunity cost in taking one of those invocations that this is okay?
I'm not certain.

Yes, especially when you consider that the warlock advances spell level at a full caster rate, and with 2 short rests has 6 slots of highest level per day. That's a lot more d8 damage to add.

3rd level
Paladin: 3x1 = 6d8 per long rest
Warlock: 2x2 = 8d8 per SHORT rest, ~24d8 per long rest

5th level
Paladin: 4x1 + 2x2 = 14d8
Warlock: 12d8/short rest, ~36d8 long rest.

It get worse from there.

I'm also conflicted on the Hexblade being able to use Charisma for attack/damage. My favorite character I played in 4th edition was a Tiefling Paladin with a feat that let him use Charisma for melee weapon attacks and granted the largest mass taunt the Paladin could get (burst 5/25 feet Divine Smite, I believe it was). Even though I loved playing this character, I and everyone in my group recognized how unbelievably silly it was for the character to be using his Charisma as the attack stat with basic weapon attacks (of course, some of the encounter/at-will/daily powers let you use Charisma as well but they were clearly showing some magic being used in the process).

Also agreed. And I can also see this getting cherry-picked via multiclassing a single level by paladins, valor bards, even the new Stone sorcerer they released last week. The only redeming thing is that it doesn't stack with Great Weapon Master (no heavy that aren't 2 handed) or Sharpshooter (melee only).

 

[Blue]

So, Moon Bow, Mace of Dispater, Curse Bringer and Claw of Acamar can do 18d8 of damage for a 9th spell slot? By paladin, we have a new class for the new ultimate nova combo.
And Curse Bringer can critical with 19-20.

a hexblade/paladin with lance and mount looks interesting with his 1d12 weapon that only need Cha.

Guaranteed 18d8? Wow, what a huge debuff for a 9th level spell. Averages 81 points of damage for your only 9th level spell of the day? Have you seen what 9th level spells can do? Not worth it in the slightest.

On the other hand, +10d8 for 3-4 attacks per short rest, so 90d8 @11th (120d8 @ 17th) per day assuming 2 short rests, that adds up. Or worse, if you grab 3 levels of warlock to get the invocation and then go up some other full caster that has more slots available right now so you can nova better.

 

[Blue]

Oh my word, you still don't get it. It's not enough to make some very vague, general ideas for new warlock pact boons.

I was inspired by his suggestions. I don't think it's a valid stance to state that it is impossible to come up with new pacts and then dismiss all ideas out of hand because they haven't been fully developed on the same day.

Pretty much, he's shown enough variation to demonstrate that there is still plenty of room for more pacts. Which is all he needed to do to rebuff the idea that the current ones already provided 100% coverage of mythos and archetypes.

 

[zaratan]

Guaranteed 18d8? Wow, what a huge debuff for a 9th level spell. Averages 81 points of damage for your only 9th level spell of the day? Have you seen what 9th level spells can do? Not worth it in the slightest.

On the other hand, +10d8 for 3-4 attacks per short rest, so 90d8 @11th (120d8 @ 17th) per day assuming 2 short rests, that adds up. Or worse, if you grab 3 levels of warlock to get the invocation and then go up some other full caster that has more slots available right now so you can nova better.

18d8, but crit for 36d8, great weapon fighter RAW this is 189 avarage, after the attack hit and you saw the crit.

about nova, completely disregarding hit chance. Isn't playable, I'm just thinking in highest nova possible:

fighter 2/hexblade3/assassin3/old favored soul 6/paladin 2/mystic 1/whispers bard 3
half-orc, 27 point buy
Str 16, Dex 13, Con 13, Int 13, Wis 8, Cha 13
great weapon master

9d6+28d8+4d10+20
5d6+26d8+4d10+20
5d6+22d8+20
5d6+22d8+20
5d6+22d8+20
quick green flame blade blade 5d6+24d8+20 (+8d8 in another creature)

rerolling 1 and 2, total avarage of +8d8 in another creature
141,44 + 756 + 50,4 + 126 = 1073,84 avg + 36 in another creature

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I don't think the warlock actually has spell slots for spells level 6-9:

"At 11th level, your patron bestows upon you a magical secret called an arcanum. Choose one 6th- level spell from the warlock spell list as this arcanum. You can cast your arcanum spell once without expending a spell slot (emphasis mine). You must finish a long rest before you can do so again."

As such I think the warlock invocations that give you extra damage for a spell slot stop off at level 5 unless you multiclass (since the invocations don't specify warlock spell slots).

 

[Mercule]

I don't think the warlock actually has spell slots for spells level 6-9:

"At 11th level, your patron bestows upon you a magical secret called an arcanum. Choose one 6th- level spell from the warlock spell list as this arcanum. You can cast your arcanum spell once without expending a spell slot (emphasis mine). You must finish a long rest before you can do so again."

As such I think the warlock invocations that give you extra damage for a spell slot stop off at level 5 unless you multiclass (since the invocations don't specify warlock spell slots).

I would agree with this. If you're trying to count raw firepower, you need to count those slots -- a 20th level Warlock gets to cast 12 5th level spells, 1 6th, 1 7th, 1 8th, and 1 9th each day.

They can't actually do anything with those 6-9th level "slots" besides those specific spells. It's really more like they get a handful of spell-like abilities, usable once per day, each.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Not sure I like using Cha as a hit/dmg modifier, seems to lead down the path of subclasses that tailor everything to a specific ability stat, and to me is the worst kind of power creep. That said, I'm willing to have an open mind if someone can show me how being charming leads to hitting harder in combat.

Everything else I love. I do hope that WoC has structured these UA releases to hide some surprises for us. Sorcerer could really use something similar to the new Wizard tradition, so perhaps we could see a version of that in the same way there is a Fighter and Rouge Scout.

Charisma is force of will/personality. It *can* manifest as being charming, but it certainly doesn't have to. Charisma as ability to project one's will is also how the warlock accesses magical power, so it makes sense that they can channel that to guide their hand in combat, and to make their attacks hit harder/do more damage via eldritch energy.