• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D (2024) The new warlock (Packet 7)

One question about Treantmonk's consistency - does his DPR analysis include the effect of Action Surge for the fighter? If it doesn't include that encounter resource (that you can use when you choose to) it shouldn't include crit fishing smites. I also find that so much of that DPR comes from:
  • 2.52 DPA from crit-fishing smites and assuming that an encounter-based resource will always be present
  • 3.375 DPA from using Spirit Shroud rather than hex (including crit effect)
Over three attacks that's 17.685 DPR from these two abilities. Cut the DPR by 17 to take out the uncontrolled burst and the one optional spell from Tasha's and it doesn't look ridiculous.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Amrûnril

Adventurer
The full Treantmonk Bladelock analysis video is out, and I have problems with it.

He assumes that Blade Pact lets you qualify for feats with "Proficiency with a martial weapon" requirements like GWM. I strongly disagree with this interpretation. Temporary spell granted proficiencies do not count for feat requirements.

His math assumes 100% uptime on Spirit Shroud. Between limited spell slots and the need to make Concentration checks from being in melee, that's an over optimistic assumption. Also it's bringing pre-revision material into a post-revision environment, which I strongly suspect a lot of DMs are going to put limits on.

His math assumes you will Eldritch Smith on every crit. This is literally impossible when you have as few spell slots as the Warlock and are already devoting at least one per combat to Spirit Shroud. This is particularly egregious.

With those three components removed the math looks very different from what he proposes. So before anyone cites his conclusion in forum posts or the survey forms, or accuses the devs of having no ability to balance their material, take all that into consideration. These numbers are not reliable.
For discussion purposes here is Treantmonks brief analysis of Pact of the Blade, for discussion purposes. Sorry if I miss something, and I will add Kurotowa's doubts here too:

He did his usual assessment set to 13th level. The level is arbitrary but it's held consistent for his analysis for each class/subclass as a simple test case comparison so he can put them all on one chart. He's not claiming it's completely fair or representative, just a simple test to sort of hold his finger in the air initially. Once they settle on stuff he does a much deeper dive at multiple levels and varies his assumptions.

His quick sample build, not fully optimized.

Species: Any, +2 Chr, +1 Con,
Stats: Str 13, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Chr 17
Notes: Melee Heavy weapons requires a 13 str (Greatsword), Ranged heavy weapon requires 13 dex (Longbow. assumes magic unbonused one at 13th level I think)
First lev feat: Lightly armored (gives medium armor prof for half-plate)
4th lev ASI: Warcaster, chr now 18
8th lev ASI: Charisma +2 for chr 20
12th lev ASI: great weapon master [ Note: Kurotowa disputes they can access GWM due to only temporary Martial Weapon Proficiency ]
Invocations (8 of them): Pact of the Blade (Chr for attack and damage rolls, modify damage types, create weapon as bonus action);
Thirsting Blade (3 attacks with attack action; Lifedrinker (+1d6 damage and healing option); Eldritch smite (used for Crits, 12d8 extra damage on a crit); Otherworldly Leap (20 feet extra movement); three more invocations as you see fit (Agonizing and Repelling blast? Lessons of the First Ones for Tough or Alert? Whatever).

Melee: Greatsword: Graze Mastery, deliver Charisma Mod damage on a miss (5), Base Weapon Damage: 2d6,
Rd 1 Bonus Action, spend 1 of 3 pact slots on Spirit Shroud (5th lev) = +2d8 additional damage to attacks, 1 minute.
Close to Melee. Assuming 60% chance to hit:
Attack #1:
2d6+5 Base Weapon Damage
1d6 Lifedrinker
2d8 Sprit Shroud [Note: Kurotowa disputes Spirit Shroud up 100% of the time and, I assume, thinks this should be reduces by some percentage it's assumed it would be down due to a failed concentration save I assume]
24.5 Average Damage on a Hit
60% chance to hit x 24.5= 14.7 average
40% chance to miss (Graze) x 5 = 2 average
5% chance to Crit x 73.5 Damage for Crits (Eldritch Smite used on Crits) = 3.68 average [Note: Kurotowa disputes the assumption a spell slot will always be available to boost the crit damage here and this estimate should be reduced to reflect a more realistic number of times such a spell slot will be available]
Attack #1 total average damage: 20.38
Attack # 2: 20.38 average damage
Attack #3: 20.38 average damage
Great Weapon Master (Applies proficiency bonus to damage once per round): Chance of hitting at least once with 3 attacks = 94% x 5 (proficiency bonus) = 4.7 damage average per round.
Total Damage Per Round: 65. 84 average (20.38 + 20.38 + 20.38 + 4.7)
Reference: Berserker Barbarian, Beast Master Ranger, Champion Fighter, Assassin Rogue, and Devotion Paladin are all doing around 28 damage per round at this level. 147% over "baseline" which is a Warlock using Eldritch Blast with Agonizing Blast and Hex.

Ranged: Longbow (moontouched or whatever, assumes no magic bonus to hit and damage just base 1d8+5 damage). Includes Slow Mastery, which is nice but not changing DPR calculation.
Rd 1 Bonus Action: Hex (same as baseline attack)
Attack #1 1d8+5
1d6 Lifedrinker
1d6 Hex
Total average damage for a hit = 16.5
60% chance to hit = 9.9 average damage
5% chance to crit (Eldritch Smite used on Crits) 89.5 damage on crit = 4.48 average [BUT SEE BELOW]
Attack #1 total average damage: 14.38
Attack #2 total average damage: 14.38
Attack #3 total average damage: 14.38
Great Weapon Master (Applies proficiency bonus to damage once per round - and yes, it now applies to a longbow too): Chance of hitting at least once with 3 attacks = 94% x 5 (proficiency bonus) = 4.7 damage average per round.
Total Damage Per Round: 47.84 average (14.38 + 14.38 + 14.38 + 4.7), which is 79% more than Eldritch Blast with Agonizing Blast and Hex.

Now Eldritch Smite can use more spell slots. So lets assume for this one you never took Eldritch Smite and that big boost on crits goes away. Crits are now 5% x 12.5 = 0.63. New total is 36.59, which is still 37% more than Eldritch Blast + Agonizing Blast + Hex. And you're Slowing Target (Weapon Mastery) rather than pushing Target (Repelling Blast). And getting more range from longbow than Eldritch Blast. Bottom Line: why use Eldritch Blast anymore when this does a lot more damage for just one more invocation involved really?

He concludes with this about this build"

1. Pact of the Blade Warlocks Outdamage all other tested classes by a lot
2. Has Switchable Damage Types (four, changeable each attack)
3. Has it's bonus action available most rounds beyond first
4. Has faster movement, same speed as same level monk
5. Has three more invocation options left to choose (Lessons of the First Ones to access feats without pre-requisites so can get something like Tough to get HP close to barbarians, Lucky, Alert to win initiative, etc.)
6. Can switch between melee and ranged easily with one bonus action
7. Can access every weapon mastery with bonus action (which is better than fighters get - can just switch to Topple or Push or Graze each round)
8. Has in combat no-action healing (Lifedrinker)
9. Still has spells (will eventually get 9th level spells)

And all this he didn't even add in extra attacks from heavy weapon master, or any subclass boosts like from Genie,.

His quick recommendations:
Lifedrinker should require level 11
Thirsting Blade shouldn't scale at level 11

I think it's implied, but he doesn't state it, that maybe this is too many weapon attacks per round with weapons for a spellcasting class?

I also think we could re-do this assuming 100% of Kurotowa's doubts are applied. So probably assume Spirit Shroud is down 20% of the time, assume 3 battles between short rests instead of 2 so reduce the boosted crit such that 1/3 of it would be only a non-boosted crit (?), and assume no GWM but another feat?

I am still betting the numbers come out so far ahead of any other class it still raises an eyebrow of concern.

I think these damage calculations, with all of their dubious assumptions, distract from what could be a much simpler argument: giving the bladelock a 3rd attack, when Paladins and Rangers (who rely on similar damage boosts) stop at 2 attacks, is probably overkill. Thirsting blade is similarly an extra damage boost above what comparable classes receive at the same level.

Without these abilities, or before they come online, the bladelock seems reasonably balanced with the Paladin or Ranger, or maybe a touch weaker: the bladelock can choose whether to spend spell slots on a smite-like ability, a hunter's mark like ability or burst/aoe damage spells, but doesn't gain the benefit of a combat style and is a bit weaker in terms of HP and armor options.
 


Remathilis

Legend
Might I suggest you make your Patron... yourself?
Nah. I don't trust THAT guy...

eef.png
 


Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
I think these damage calculations, with all of their dubious assumptions, distract from what could be a much simpler argument: giving the bladelock a 3rd attack, when Paladins and Rangers (who rely on similar damage boosts) stop at 2 attacks, is probably overkill. Thirsting blade is similarly an extra damage boost above what comparable classes receive at the same level.

Without these abilities, or before they come online, the bladelock seems reasonably balanced with the Paladin or Ranger, or maybe a touch weaker: the bladelock can choose whether to spend spell slots on a smite-like ability, a hunter's mark like ability or burst/aoe damage spells, but doesn't gain the benefit of a combat style and is a bit weaker in terms of HP and armor options.
Agreed. I think the third attack and scaling of thirsting blade and the switchable weapon mastery are all the areas that deserve a hard look. I'd also change it so it's melee-only and you cannot bond a bow.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I think these damage calculations, with all of their dubious assumptions, distract from what could be a much simpler argument: giving the bladelock a 3rd attack, when Paladins and Rangers (who rely on similar damage boosts) stop at 2 attacks, is probably overkill. Thirsting blade is similarly an extra damage boost above what comparable classes receive at the same level.
But it’s necessary to allow bladelocks to keep up with blastlocks. Basically, the lesson here is not “bladelocks shouldn’t get 3 attacks,” it’s “martial classes should get 3 attacks.”
 

niklinna

satisfied?
Year, even the good fighter subclass eventually gets 'the option you've already passed over twice' as a class feature.
Well, now, this assumes a perspective of "I didn't want that", rather than "I couldn't take both!" Either of which I've felt about different things.
 

Kurotowa

Legend
One question about Treantmonk's consistency - does his DPR analysis include the effect of Action Surge for the fighter? If it doesn't include that encounter resource (that you can use when you choose to) it shouldn't include crit fishing smites.
Averaging out crit Smites also assumes that the crit is always useful. Sometimes you're attacking a minion, not a boss, and a crit Smite is complete overkill. This is the sort of combat sim math that works for a MMO raid boss but doesn't translate well to a D&D environment.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Averaging out crit Smites also assumes that the crit is always useful. Sometimes you're attacking a minion, not a boss, and a crit Smite is complete overkill. This is the sort of combat sim math that works for a MMO raid boss but doesn't translate well to a D&D environment.
Now you're getting a bit in the weeds. Yes, for all class optimization analysis we assume voluntary non-automatic choices like that are helpful to the task because otherwise you wouldn't choose to do it. Much like, to keep everything consistent, we assume all damage is meaningful, for all classes and analysis. And yes, all classes in that analysis assumes crits as well. The trick is to keep everything consistent for all measurements such that, if something is over-damaging or there is some other issue at play where we don't have data to make it more perfect, at least it's doing the same for everything else too in the comparison.

If you're not familiar with how optimization (for 30 years now) works for D&D that's fair. But your reply is basically "I don't find this useful" when thousands do and have been doing so for a very, VERY long time now. Either you accept the basic premise of optimization itself is something you can get use out of or you don't. But at the point where you don't then I guess let the people who do find it useful discuss it rather than crap on what other people appreciate about it? You can be sure, given what Crawford has said even even very recently, that he also finds it helpful in balancing classes and abilities and is not dismissive of it either.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top