D&D 5E At my table: Hexblade removed, Pact of the Blade enhanced

[tezrul]

The change I would suggest would be to remove shield proficiency and tie the rest of the bonuses into the attack action. I would leave medium armor for EB builds if they want that over the other patron choices.

-So you can activate the curse only when you use an attack action. Could keep it as a bonus action. (timing wise you could still use it before the attack)
-You could even add another ability saying when you use your hex weapon and perform an attack action you gain +2 AC for 1 round. (makes up for lost shield proficiency for melee builds)

So a melee focused build loses nothing at all and both builds now have a free hand to cast spells (which I think is more streamlined for a caster). Although they would not have their +2 AC at range.

An EB focused build can now hold a sword and leave the off-hand empty. In the early levels they are still given a reason to use their sword over EB when stuck in melee over dealing with disadvantage or moving away.

An EBer just getting Medium armor is still a nice bonus and worthwhile. shield and curse on top is a bit strong.

 

[Malisteen]

Remove Hex Warrior from hexblade. Maybe make the hexblade's curse bonus damage scale w/ warlock level. Boom, done, fine, it's fixed, you can leave the rest in, it isn't more dippable than other patrons, it's got a cool Elric/Malus Darkblade thing going, has that Raven Queen associations for the 4e fans, it works fine. Sure it's a bit abstract, but no more so than star or undying. Sure, it's a bit less menacing than fiend, but still more so than celestial, about on the level of fey. It works fine. If you absolutely need a more personified patron, re-fluff it as a Sorrowsworn pact.

After that? If you don't think bladelock had issues as originally printed, then boom, you're done, you're fine. If you did think there was a problem with how bladelock worked before, then let pact blade's attack with cha, and either give pact of the blade medium armor & shield proficiency, or, if you think that's too much without extra cost, then add a 'pact warrior' blade invocation granting medium armor and shield proficiency. You can't make it more expensive then that, or you go back to every single bladelock dipping fighter at level one, with the pact basically being dead weight in games that bar multiclassing.

But don't remove hexblade outright when the only real problem with it is that the designers shoe-horned a pact blade fix into it, not when that fix is so easily isolated, removed from the rest of the package without damaging anything at all, and slotted back into the pact blade where it belongs. Again, if you even think it was necessary in the first place.

 

[Irda Ranger]

This thread got me to revise and finalize a house rules version of the Warlock I'd been working on for a while. Rather than derail this thread with my ideas though, I made my own thread.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?606518-Revised-Warlock

Brief summary-
1. Give Pact of the Blade medium armor and +Charisma to-hit and damage
2. Choose your Pact (now called Fraternity) at 1st level and your Patron at 3rd level
3. Move the "obvious" Invocations into Fraternity features you get at higher levels.
4. Remove the Eldritch Blast dependencies and make generic class features to compensate. So now you can choose between many cantrips.
5. A few tweaks to the spellcasting system.
6. More Patrons and super-Familiars to choose from.

 

[Ganymede81]

the Hexblade offers simultaneously far broader and stronger options than the other patrons.

I believe Mearls stated that the design of the Hexblade put it at a power level where warlocks should be, not necessarily in line with the power level of warlocks as they are.

Maybe the better approach is to boost up the other patrons instead.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

I believe Mearls stated that the design of the Hexblade put it at a power level where warlocks should be, not necessarily in line with the power level of warlocks as they are.

Maybe the better approach is to boost up the other patrons instead.

Based on how WotC has been approaching class design, I doubt this is going to happen. At least not officially or with official support. A great example is the Storm Sorcerer. I think a great many people would agree that its original incarnation with domain type spells was a good step for the Sorcerer class. It gives them something close to the number of spells known compared to a Bard and the number of spells a Wizard can memorize per day, as well as assures that the player will have some thematic spells and design room for a bit of versatility. But rather than revamp the previously published Dragon and Wild Magic Sorcerer, they removed the domain spells from the final design released in SCAG.

Additionally, having played a Warlock (non-Hexblade) to high level, I don't think it needs a power boost. Invocation support for each of the Patrons and Pacts perhaps, and making Hex a class feature rather than a spell, sure. I don't expect the latter to happen officially, but I also don't expect that Wizards will re-release the previous Patrons.

Also this argument is a bit harder to accept if you look at the Raven Queen patron (originally released alongside the Hexblade in the same Unearthed Arcana). That patron option was certainly in line with what we have come to expect from Patron abilities at 1st level.

Another example is the Celestial patron released in XGtE, which is also underwhelming in comparison to the Hexblade. The light cantrip is a thematic ribbon at best, and sacred flame is to give them access to a signature ability different from eldritch blast (which would be necessary given the super low number of cantrips warlocks get to begin with). So the Celestial gets a ribbon ability, near 1-for-1 eldritch blast replacement, and an ability to provide some healing. Meanwhile, the Hexblade gets medium armor, shield, and martial weapon proficiencies, can use their primary stat in place of attack and damage with melee weapons, a super roided out version of Hex that requires no concentration, and steals the Fiend Patron's ability to boot.

So yea, while Mearls may have said something along those lines, both history and contemporary design examples contradict that argument. As long as the Hexblade exists as a Patron, there is literally no reason to ever NOT pick that patron or you would be crippling your character. Why would I choose Fiend Pact when Hexblade can do what I do, but better because of the increased combat capabilities ensuring that he kills more enemies and thus gets more temp HP? Why Would I choose Great Old Old when compared to all that the Hexblade gets, I get a really short range telepathy (let's be honest, the range of the GOO Patron's telepathy should be minimum 60')? The only patron the sort of stands up is the Archfey, but only because fear/charm is a pretty nice ability at 1st level. But even then, most of the Hexblade's abilities are always on, while the Archey is only once per short rest.

Choosing anything but the Hexblade cripples the Warlock. That to me is the very definition of broken and unbalanced.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

You can't compare warlock patrons without looking at the spell lists. Infernal warlocks get access to fireball, which is not just one of the most powerful spells in 5e, but also fills a huge hole in the anemic warlock spell list. Archfey and GOO are underpowered compared to the hexblade, sure, but they've always been underpowered relative to fiend so that's hardly a new situation.

 

[CubicsRube]

I proposed medium armor proficiency (but not shields) for pact of the blade in another thread and it was considered too much by someone here as well.

I disagree. As was said, pact of the tome is essentially similar to a feat (magic initiate plus parts of ritual caster).

Medium armor could be a fair equivalent for that. You can be a dwarf anyway for medium/heavy armor proficiency, and medium armor effectely allows a max ac of 17 with a dex bonus. Not that high.

I love the suggestion above that eldritch blast counts as a melee attack for a potb warlock. I like the simplicity and feel it preserves the warlock flavor.

 

[ZickZak]

I imagine Hexblade as a Witcher. Ultimately, it's a great class, as long as one does not go Hexblade 1 / CharismaClass X for the sole purpose of CHA to hit & dmg.

The fixes I would propose:
Raven Queen patron
- Hexblade Expanded Spell List
- Hexblade's Curse
- Accursed Specter
- Armor of Hexes
- Master of Hexes

Pact of the Hexblade
- Pact of the Blade feature
- Hex Warrior
- Remove shields proficiency
- Can't take / has to replace Eldritch Blast

 

[Hawk Diesel]

You can't compare warlock patrons without looking at the spell lists. Infernal warlocks get access to fireball, which is not just one of the most powerful spells in 5e, but also fills a huge hole in the anemic warlock spell list. Archfey and GOO are underpowered compared to the hexblade, sure, but they've always been underpowered relative to fiend so that's hardly a new situation.

I'm sorry, but from my perspective this is just false. The warlock spell lists are a relatively minor consideration when it comes to balance between the Warlock patrons. Many forget that the spell lists allow the Warlock to choose those spells, but do not in fact automatically add them to spells known. Fiend Warlocks do not automatically get fireball. Additionally, you state that Fiend Patron is more powerful than the other two as if it is a fact. But I do not see it that way. Fiend Pact is better in direct combat to some extent, sure. But Archfey is more focused on battlefield control and escaping sticky situations, and the GOO Patron is a master of the mind and eventually gets you a humanoid meatshield.

 

[LapBandit]

OP here, some great ideas being worked on! I might have to adopt a few changes once I talk to my players =).