D&D 5E Warlock and Repelling Blast

[Noctem]

I'm at work so I can't look up the link, but there's some Lars guy that fires 3 arrows accurately in the time it takes him to jump and land. A round is 6 seconds, so... no problem, as long as they are willing to admit they are prancing around like a fairy.

Yes, I've seen the videos you're talking about with Lars Andersen and it is impressive in the video. However there's been reports that debunk his claims of having recovered a sort of "lost art". So take his claims with a grain of salt. However, it is still impressive to be able to fire arrows as he does.

BUT, I would seriously avoid using real life to justify an argument when it comes to DND. This is a fantasy table top game. What we can or can't do in real life should not be used to justify what we can and can't do in the game.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Explain how it is easily countered? It's not saving throw. Legendary Resistance doesn't work against it. Ability check doesn't. Nothing works against except immunity to spells, immunity to force damage, or immunity to knockback. It is not easily countered and that is the problem. A coordinated group take advantage of it to neutralize any creature that does primary melee damage, which is a lot of creatures.

There are a variety of ways that monsters can counter this tactic: ranged attacks, spells, having a high enough movement speed that it can catch up to you regardless, teleportation, and, easiest of all, having allies. A warlock can't keep more than one creature away at a time with this tactic. It doesn't do much good to push one monster away when you're being swarmed by its allies. Repelling blast can only be used to win an encounter by itself if the party is fighting a single, slow enemy that lacks ranged attacks. There are also times when repelling blast simply can't do anything because of the circumstances (fighting in cramped spaces, for example).

That said, I do have one issue with repelling blast as written - there's no size limitation. It seems a bit excessive that warlocks can push around huge and gargantuan monsters with this ability. IMO, if there's any fix needed for this power, it should be limited to Large and smaller creatures. That would prevent warlocks from cheesing encounters with the kinds of huge, hulking brutes that are sometimes used as boss monsters.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I'm at work so I can't look up the link, but there's some Lars guy that fires 3 arrows accurately in the time it takes him to jump and land. A round is 6 seconds, so... no problem, as long as they are willing to admit they are prancing around like a fairy.

He must be a level 11+ fighter.

 

[Celtavian]

I'm at work so I can't look up the link, but there's some Lars guy that fires 3 arrows accurately in the time it takes him to jump and land. A round is 6 seconds, so... no problem, as long as they are willing to admit they are prancing around like a fairy.

It was a shortbow, not a longbow. Shortbows can be fired much faster than longbows, but don't have near the penetrating power against armor of longbows. Then D&D archery isn't realistic in any way. Neither is their melee weapon system. I would never worry about that.

 

[Celtavian]

There are a variety of ways that monsters can counter this tactic: ranged attacks, spells, having a high enough movement speed that it can catch up to you regardless, teleportation, and, easiest of all, having allies. A warlock can't keep more than one creature away at a time with this tactic. It doesn't do much good to push one monster away when you're being swarmed by its allies. Repelling blast can only be used to win an encounter by itself if the party is fighting a single, slow enemy that lacks ranged attacks. There are also times when repelling blast simply can't do anything because of the circumstances (fighting in cramped spaces, for example).

That said, I do have one issue with repelling blast as written - there's no size limitation. It seems a bit excessive that warlocks can push around huge and gargantuan monsters with this ability. IMO, if there's any fix needed for this power, it should be limited to Large and smaller creatures. That would prevent warlocks from cheesing encounters with the kinds of huge, hulking brutes that are sometimes used as boss monsters.

That is not countering. You're listing possible monster options that can provide the ability to attack, ones that exist for a very small group of monsters. Repelling Blast is highly effective for any monster that does primary melee damage. It doesn't have to be slow. 40 or 50 feet of movement is not slow, repelling blast in combination with mobile PCs could knock a creature sufficiently far to prevent from attacking nearly every round. If you are allowing feats like Sharpshooter, bow users have an effective range with hit roll degradation for up to 600 feet. A warlock can increase his eldritch blast to 300 feet.

Then there is eldritch blast used in conjunction with a ready action if you want to use eldritch blast solely as crowd control. You can ready the spell to fire as soon as the target enters melee range knocking it back before it attacks. If it has no further available movement, then the creature has lost all of its attacks. Losing even one round of attacks against a party can trivialize an encounter. If a creature only has 30 or 40 feet of movement (pretty standard and not slow), you can pretty much make those creatures pathetic for an entire combat. Or reduce them to less effective ranged attacks if they're primary damage source is melee. Which is trivializing a fight. You can even do this to creatures like dragons, giants, and other single target BBEG to turn a hard fight into a joke. You don't need to knock him back every round, reducing his attack ability every other round or every few rounds will work equally effective because you're reducing the opponents damage while your party unloads on him. You seem to think this is ok for BBEG fights, while I don't like it.

As far as allies in big groups, sure, repelling blast is only moderately effective at protecting the warlock mostly. Should ever BBEG fight be a big group of monsters and their allies? You don't like to see the classic huge dragon versus group being a tough fight? Or a single huge Balor going toe to toe with a party? Or a giant king of great power fighting a party of adventurers solo after they've killed his minions? Repelling Blast can cause a lot of classic BBEG matchups into trivial pursuits. I don't think that is very good game design.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Yes, I've seen the videos you're talking about with Lars Andersen and it is impressive in the video. However there's been reports that debunk his claims of having recovered a sort of "lost art". So take his claims with a grain of salt. However, it is still impressive to be able to fire arrows as he does.

The "debunking" usually consists of pointing out that his arrows aren't being shot with very much force, to which I say, "who cares?" He's a 21st century man in real life. As long as the technique for rapidly nocking and firing multiple arrows (all held in the hand together) can be demonstrated, and it can, and he has done it--what does it matter if you'd need to be using a bow 3x as powerful as his to penetrate European armor? Just assume a medieval cataphract (fighter) who has been training all his life to be 3x stronger than Lars Andersen.

The technique he's using cannot be meaningfully debunked, because it works. After watching that video, anyone can imagine a 20th level fighter Action Surging to shoot eight arrows in six seconds, and it doesn't even seem unrealistic any more. That's what matters.

 

[Celtavian]

The "debunking" usually consists of pointing out that his arrows aren't being shot with very much force, to which I say, "who cares?" He's a 21st century man in real life. As long as the technique for rapidly nocking and firing multiple arrows (all held in the hand together) can be demonstrated, and it can, and he has done it--what does it matter if you'd need to be using a bow 3x as powerful as his to penetrate European armor? Just assume a medieval cataphract (fighter) who has been training all his life to be 3x stronger than Lars Andersen.

The technique he's using cannot be meaningfully debunked, because it works. After watching that video, anyone can imagine a 20th level fighter Action Surging to shoot eight arrows in six seconds, and it doesn't even seem unrealistic any more. That's what matters.

Not with a longbow. I could always imagine it with a shortbow. Though it is clear they could not penetrate European armor very well. That's why the trained most of their lives horse bowmen of the Middle East couldn't take down knights with direct bowfire. They targeted their horses and tried to hit unarmored spots. So yes, it does seem unrealistic because highly trained bowman that trained harder than this guy couldn't pull it off against actual armored European soldiery. It's a lot harder to fire a bow in real combat with people chasing you and trying to kill you than a guy firing a bunch of arrows dancing about for fun. Same reason Mister Combat Trick Shooter who does amazing things with guns isn't great in an actual gun fight.

I don't get why anyone is attempting to interject reality into fantasy. It's kind of pointless. The D&D archer is more like Legolas or Crow on Hawk the Slayer or any of the numerous fantasy archers than real life archers. Just as guys wielding longswords often couldn't hack through full plate armor and the mace was far more effective at damaging opponents wearing plate due to the concussive force. D&D doesn't incorporate real world physics and military technology. It's a fantasy game. You want to walk the line of verisimilitude, not play in a game attempting realism.

In real life, armorers and weapon makers were in a constant state of competition. Each trying to make a better item to defeat the other person. If D&D were trying to mirror reality at all, it would have weapons for all kinds of jobs because most of the weapons in the player's handbook had advantages and disadvantages depending on the opponent. You certainly didn't bring a pike to a sword duel. You don't hack away with your longsword on someone's plate armor, which is why many longswords had points for thrusting and were used in a manner unlike what we see on TV.

 

[Celtavian]

You're forgetting AC, the warlock has to actually hit to push.

Kiting in all it's forms can be a very effective if cheesy tactic if the entire party is doing it so that enemies have nobody to attack. If your entire group has min-maxed around massive Eldritch Blast pushing or other forms of group kiting, you shouldn't feel bad about min-maxing your encounters to deal with it. Enemies with high speeds and ranged attacks can't be kited, you could even kite the players if you feel particularly evil

Hitting isn't that hard in this game in group play. I do tailor encounters. I don't care for imbalanced abilities that often work better than higher level abilities. And an unlimited potential 30 to 40 foot or more knockback is a little much.

 

[Arial Black]

The Ready action allows you to set an observable trigger, and a response to that trigger.

The trigger can be something like, "If the warlock shoots a beam of eldritch blast at my friend...", and the response could be something like, "...I shoot an arrow at him".

If the warlock has multiple beams, and all beams are simultaneous, then all of the beams will resolve before the arrow is shot, because the response cannot stop the trigger from resolving (unless otherwise specified).

If the warlock has multiple beams, and each beam is shot consecutively, then the first beam (an observable, discrete event) will resolve then trigger the arrow response. If the arrow kills the warlock, then the subsequent beams never get used because there is no live warlock to choose targets.

If the response, instead of being "...I shoot an arrow at him", were "...I dispel eldritch blast", what happens?

If the beams are simultaneous, then the magic of eldritch blast has come and gone before the dispel even starts. There is nothing for the dispel to target.

But if the beams are consecutive then the first beam resolves, and this triggers the dispel, which means that the rest of the beams don't get used because the spell itself has gone. If the beams are consecutive then eldritch blast lasts long enough to shoot every beam. We don't need to know how many seconds it lasts, only that it must last until the final beam has been shot.

But isn't eldritch blast an instantaneous spell? Well, it has been argued in this thread that the word 'instantaneous' no longer has any connection to the word in real life! It has been argued that the only meaning of 'instantaneous' in the game is the *ahem* 'definition' of the word in the Spellcasting chapter of the 5E PHB, on p203 under Duration.

But what does it actually say?

Instantaneous: Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant.

Instantaneous spells aren't made of 'magic stuff' that is immune to being dispelled. They cannot be dispelled because the magic has already come and gone before it can be targeted with dispel magic.

If the beams of eldritch blast were consecutive then the spell could be dispelled by a readied dispel magic after the first beam resolves, because the spell must exist until the final beam is resolved. The rules say that an instantaneous spell like eldritch blast cannot be dispelled because its magic exists only for an instant. Therefore, the beams cannot be consecutive, therefore the beams must be simultaneous.

 

[Noctem]

Jeremy Crawford has already directly stated that attacks are not simultaneous. Please read the thread.

@Mouseferatu Multi-beam spell like E-Blast: Choose all targets at once? Or can you hit with one, see result, choose next target, etc?
@JeremyECrawford The intent is that you can choose an attack spell's targets one after another, unless the spell says otherwise. #DnD

Furthermore, instantaneous spells can't be dispelled because the rules specifically say that they can't be. Your silly extrapolations aside, what you're saying is complete nonsense. You're blinding yourself from what the rules say in favor of your invented claim. Anyway, the above quote from JC clearly shows that:

1. You don't pick all targets at the same time
2. Multi attack spells are done in sequence, one attack after the other.
3. Attacks like these are not simultaneous.

This pretty much removes any possible doubt that what you're saying isn't factual no matter how much you want it to be. You might think your personal definition of a word is more important than the definition used in the edition itself but that's also incorrect for everyone else outside your table. Stop trying to spread misinformation and actually look at the evidence presented.

The only spell in the entire game which would fall in the portion of JC's quote above "unless the spell says otherwise" is Magic Missile because it SPECIFICALLY says so in the spell. Not some random definition you're clinging to, not an extrapolation you're inventing to suit your claim: In the spell itself.

1st-level evocation
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 120 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
You create three glowing darts of magical force. Each dart hits a creature of your choice that you can see within range. A dart deals 1d4 + 1 force damage to its target. The darts all strike simultaneously, and you can direct them to hit one creature or several.