D&D 5E Eldritch Blast and Repelling Blast - One time or Each Hit?

[Salthorae]

What I found in play was that I could set up encounters where there wasn't enough room for characters to kite, or where the foes used ranged attacks so kiting them didn't matter. That is what I mean by warping play around the feature. Where I did not do that, the ability for a warlock to push back 20' or so (a couple of bolts hitting) and also move themselves, trivialised the combat in that long-winded way that kiting strategies do.

...

I base my thoughts on live play at my table: 75 sessions (I tracked them) and over a hundred encounters (I have a partial track of those in FG). As you say, the impact of repelling depends on the movement rates of the foes... and again this is the warping problem. I wanted to be able to use foes with all kinds of movement rates, and the amount of movement needed to negate repelling is more than it looks on paper.

Of course, different tables have different ways of playing, which matters. Between the two warlocks at my table, one was super crunch-focused and abused the heck out of his invocations, and the other was more relaxed about them. If I had only had the second player in my game, I doubt I would have noticed a problem.
...
I think if one had a different view of the cost and risk, then one might not want to try it. Otherwise I would recommend changing it to one push per target, for tables who are deeply into encounter tactics and have warlock PCs.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who has experienced this at their table.

I think the type of players at the table matters too as you mentioned. One of my players too is all about maximizing their crunch. So they really double down on their Warlocks with Sorcerer multiclassing. (Multiclassing is accepted at our table for all our DM's so I don't want to hear 'well that's your problem, it's not EB and RP'. Yes, it is RP, it is only compounded by Quicken Spell! And I'm not going to ban a single multiclass combo because it has so many problems in combinations).

I have another player who often plays Warlocks who doesn't really care that much about squeezing every last mechanical drop, but he has seen how effected Repelling Blast can be and takes it on HIS warlocks too. At least until I brought it down to 1 auto and Str save for the following pushes. I might just do what others seem to have done and drop it all the way to 10' once per turn.

 

[MarkB]

What I found in play was that I could set up encounters where there wasn't enough room for characters to kite, or where the foes used ranged attacks so kiting them didn't matter. That is what I mean by warping play around the feature. Where I did not do that, the ability for a warlock to push back 20' or so (a couple of bolts hitting) and also move themselves, trivialised the combat in that long-winded way that kiting strategies do.

Do you run a lot of solo encounters, or were all your players playing warlocks?

Even if he hits with all attacks, a warlock can only do this to one foe per round with any real effectiveness. So yes, if you're sending a single melee-specialised foe into the fight, the warlock can trivialise it.

But, guess what? So can any party. Solo creatures do notoriously badly against parties of multiple characters, simply due to the action economy, and there are all sorts of ways to keep them locked down. It's why they had to introduce special rules for them in both the most recent editions of D&D.

 

[clearstream]

And based on my experience the number of times it has happened at my table is zero. The number of times a tough fight has been trivialised by a Polymorph spell is twice. And two for Animate Objects, about three for Wall of Thorns, once for Wall of Force....

Yup, it's true that it might not happen at every table, and that other spells can also trivialise combat. That said, the other spells you cite here can't be spammed as often. Being levels 4 through 6.

Do you run a lot of solo encounters, or were all your players playing warlocks?

Party of six for most of the campaign. Or do you mean on the creatures side? A real mixture: from dozens of gnolls, to a single demon-lord. And you are right, repelling blast has the most impact on one-foe encounters. That is what I mean by warping, however: I want to be able to run encounters with any number of foes including one.

I think some of the replies to my posts are looking for a binary: must use as RAW versus must change... must be a problem at my table versus has been found to be a problem at some tables. If you don't have trouble with it, don't change it.

5e is full of holes, like all versions of D&D. I don't think they all need fixing, and I regularly cut things from my current list of fixes. For my new campaign - just starting - I am using repelling blast unmodified. None of the PCs are warlocks so why bother with the rule change? Even if it is - in my view - justified. Other fixes (or changes, if you prefer) are like anchors of what I want to do as a DM... like my rest changes. Those are perennial: I'd always prioritise them over worrying about repelling blast.

 

[MarkB]

Party of six for most of the campaign. Or do you mean on the creatures side? A real mixture: from dozens of gnolls, to a single demon-lord. And you are right, repelling blast has the most impact on one-foe encounters. That is what I mean by warping, however: I want to be able to run encounters with any number of foes including one.

Here's the thing, though. You don't have to warp your encounters. If your players have specialised in countering a particular type of foe, you can simply give them the win once in awhile. It rewards them for the investments they've made.

 

[clearstream]

Here's the thing, though. You don't have to warp your encounters. If your players have specialised in countering a particular type of foe, you can simply give them the win once in awhile. It rewards them for the investments they've made.

Repelling blast is also unbalanced and problematic in other kinds of encounters. I was focusing on those you seemed interested in, where it plays out especially egregiously. Also, I think it would be fine if players were challenged, even in one-foe encounters. And that a cantrip didn't undo that.

 

[Salthorae]

Here's the thing, though. You don't have to warp your encounters. If your players have specialised in countering a particular type of foe, you can simply give them the win once in awhile. It rewards them for the investments they've made.

That is neither here nor there. My players get plenty of easy win combats as I'm sure do @clearstream s players.

Repelling Blast makes it more difficult to plan meaningful single foe combats RAW and in my experience. I can give them easy single foe combats. But sometimes I don't want the single foe combat to be easy and so it forces me as the DM to contrive ways to counter the zero cost cantrip whenever I want to do that if I leave it RAW.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If the enemy can be kited with repelling blast, they it must have no ranged weapons, which means it can be kited without repelling blast, e.g. with flying or Expeditious Retreat.

I would be vary weary of designing an encounter with no ranged attackers unless it was a tight space or I intended for it to be a pushover.

 

[clearstream]

If the enemy can be kited with repelling blast, they it must have no ranged weapons, which means it can be kited without repelling blast, e.g. with flying or Expeditious Retreat.

You have given a few examples now of spells that expend slots, and perhaps if EB/RB were a spell and not a cantrip those would feel more directly comparable. Can you think of any unlimited resource examples?

 

[ad_hoc]

I am betting somewhere along the way Eldritch Blast was changed to having multiple attacks while the invocation's wording remained unchanged.

They are strong because of it but an invocation is a huge cost. There are lots of other great things a Warlock can get besides making a cantrip better.

In practical use the chance to apply it to multiple hits isn't as strong as it appears.

Level 1-4 it doesn't apply.
Level 5-10 you only get 2 shots and both aren't going to hit most of the time.

Levels 11+ the tier jump makes cantrips even worse than before. The Warlock gets a lot more spell slots. Most of their effectiveness is going to come from casting many 5th level spells to take on the big threats of the higher tiers.

Cantrips get worse as levels increase. They're at their strongest at levels 1 and 5. Every level above 5 they get worse. For example, at level 10 they're just as good as at level 5 but the threats have increased and the other resources the characters have, have also increased. At level 11 when cantrips get a boost spellcasters start having enough spells where they won't be using cantrips often.

An invocation to buff a cantrip at these levels better do something good.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

You have given a few examples now of spells that expend slots, and perhaps if EB/RB were a spell and not a cantrip those would feel more directly comparable. Can you think of any unlimited resource examples?

Aarakocra.

But it's a pointless distinction. by the time the warlock is blasting 4 EBs at level 17 any other caster has more than enough low level spell slots to last to the next long rest. It's rare for them not to have some left over.

A 17th level druid could summon 120 pixies, each one of who can cast polymorph once.