Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 6621130" data-attributes="member: 6750235">The warlock would lose an action to disengage/dash on a melee opponent by disengaging or dashing without expeditious retreat on an opponent that is within 5 ft or else be forced to attack with disadvantage for a penalty.Longstrider and expeditious retreat isn't sustainable because longstrider is burning through 6 spell slots already at 2 per hour with 2 short rests and expeditious retreat is generally once per encounter while using concentration.  Either ground or damage is also lost the first round in casting expeditious retreat because the bonus action is already gone for expeditious retreat so the action is used for dashing or attacking but not both.  The initial range of 100 ft is also questionable because it depends on visibility that's impacted by nightfall, weather, terrain, and not typical in dungeons at almost any time.  One of the issue with kiting we run into is there needs to be a place to run to and that's often problematic, hence my comment about dungeons versus open wilderness.You've turned your wizard into a rather poor kiter at that level and that's all the warlock would be doing at that level.Similar topics seem to be cropping up so I'll repost from another forum that includes and example and some additional commentary."The blade warlock letting hex drop for another spell isn't any different than an agonizing blaster letting hex drop for another spell. Another spell doesn't have to be a concentration spell. He also has the option of "encounter ending" spells and using sleep from your example, would cast a more powerful version of sleep more often than the wizard because it's in a higher level slot and can be done once or twice per short rest. Sleep is available to fey patron. Command is pretty good for fiend but fireball is also there and that's more likely to be taken for the defensive components, hurl through hell, and more temp hp opportunities early. Or any warlock can cast hypnotic pattern for their encounter ending ability.The warlock doesn't need to be low on CON. For example, standard array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 and mountain dwarf is an option. +2 STR and +2 CON works for the subclass and we can go with STR 16, DEX 10, CON 15, INT 8, WIS 12, CHA 15 at 1st level. 5 ASI's / feats gives us heavy armor (already proficient in medium) and polearm mastery. 1 ASI gos to CON and CHA for three 16's and CON can remain there. This gives us the option for 18 STR and 18 CHA or 20 STR and 16 CHA (what I would do with a dwarf). 16 CHA was a sacrifice for AC on the build but the choice to cast spells is a difference of DC 17 vs DC 19. If, for example, I choose to cast hypnotic pattern on 20 targets without save proficiencies (which is normal) and WIS 10 (for simplicity in the average) then the average is 16 targets who fail instead of 18 targets who fail. That's a minor concession for the melee ability and why the dwarf would still be as much a caster as an agonizing blaster, and the dwarf could cast that same spell 16 times in a day with short rests plus 4 arcana. A wizard could cast it 14 times in a day after having used arcane recovery if he still wants to keep 4 top level spell slots to match the arcana.If the warlock uses hex twice in the day, they are reasonably similar with such an encounter ending spell. Hex is just casting a spell using a spell slot which is what spellcasters do. They are also similar in that the wizard has 2 at will spells from spell mastery (my favorite wizard feature, by far) while the blade warlock has a choice of several at will spells of higher levels than the wizard can select with spell mastery. Alter self, silent image, levitate, and arcane eye are nice options in that list. What has been termed a non-spell caster still has the option for true polymorph so from what I can see the similarities are pretty darn close enough to go with a full spell caster. Moreso than a war cleric, for example, who is in much of a similar situation but was also listed as a full caster simply based on a spell progression chart instead of what the mechanics between the 2 separate systems provide. Spellcasters have their own differences in their classes and warlocks fit the mold.Regarding the lost attacks for moving hex -- they only matter if hex is moved and can be made up by opportunity attacks. That would cost the agonizing blaster another feat and require close proximity.For convenience, damage on the dwarf example. Sans hex or foresight and at 75% accuracy +2 polearm (d10):5% crit*2 -- 2d10+5+3+2 = 2.15% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+3+2 = 0.7570% norm*2 -- 1d10+5+3+2 = 21.770% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+3+2 = 8.75damage = 33.3Versus agonizing blast *4 with 75% accuracy using +2 rod of the pact keeper (adds accuracy and DC's, not damage)5% crit*4 -- 2d10+5 = 3.270% norm*4 -- 1d10+5 = 29.4damage = 32.6And keeping on track, an eldritch knight with 75% accuracy using pole arm mastery and a +2 pole arm5% crit*4 -- 2d10+5+2 = 3.65% crit*1 -- 2d4+5+2 = 0.670% norm*4 -- 1d10+5+2 = 3570% norm*1 -- 1d4+5+2 = 6.65damage = 45.85 (-1 attack below 20th level is 36.2)So the warlock is still casting spells on par with other full casters (melee full casters like bards and cleric), still doing better damage than eldritch blasts, and the fighter isn't struggling but the earlier suggestion (don't recall by whom) to give blade pact warlocks a 3rd attack would shoot up to 45.2 and step on the fighter's toes significantly. This is just on a standard, non-optimized build trying to mix melee with a lot of offensive magical options."</blockquote>

Verification