• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

Unearthed Arcana: Wizards & Warlocks -- Hexblades, Raven Queens, and Lore Mastery!

Master of Hexes
Starting at 14th level, you can use your
Hexblade’s Curse again without resting, but
when you apply it to a new target, the curse
immediately ends on the previous target.


Does this mean you can cast it one more time, or over and over again? And does the 1 minute duration reset upon a new target, or does it continue from the previous target?
 

Comments

lowkey13

Exterminate all rational thought
Let's get serious here: who honestly thought that there would be new Pact Boons? Like it or not, Patrons are the defining subclass mechanic for Warlocks and there's really not much, if any, cognitive grounds for new Pact Boons to incorporate. We've got a magical weapon, a spellbook, and a familiar. Like I keep asking, what's left? Much as I adored the Deadlands Hexslinger (don't judge me), really, it's a Pact of the Blade Warlock with a Gun as its Pact Weapon.

As for the gatekeeping on the new Invocations, honestly, I think it looks great; we've plenty of generic invocations in the corebook, but these really go a long way towards helping different warlocks with the same Pact or Patron feel unique. Thumbs up.

Mixed feelings on the new Patrons. The Hexblade is actually pretty awesome, as it expertly compliments the Blade Pact, but the Raven Queen is a little bit too... I don't know, specific.

The Loremaster is actually a lot better than I was anticipating; this actually feels like a pretty solid "generalist" tradition for mages, which we kind of gave up after the corebook release.
The Loremaster is fine- as I wrote, I'm not commenting on the Wizard, because, well, I don't really care about the Wizard.

I do care about the Warlock, and here's the thing-

Adding one or two new pact boons would have greatly increased the options available to the class. It's a great mix-and-match class; and part of the versatility should be that you get to differentiate both your PATRON and your PACT BOON.

Now look where the design space has gone-

A new patron (Hexblade) that is pretty much specifically built for a single pact boon (I'll let you guess ... ;) ). Sure, you can still build a Blade Pact without the Patron, and you can still take Hexblade with something else ... but why?

And now you've got double-locked invocations (Curse Bringer requires Hexblade and Blade pact) ... and other double-locked invocations that you will almost never see (how many fiend/blade and GOO/blade will we be seeing the future).

There are some great ideas in here to use, but in terms of overall design, I don't like it.
 

DEFCON 1

Hero
I would absolutely take the Claw of Acamar on my Warlock, if only it didn't have to manifest as a stupid flail.

Why not simply allow any pact weapon you create to gain the special property of this and similar invocations without locking the warlock into a specific weapon choice?
Because this is a playtest and they want to see how many others agree with you. They have to make these sort of flavor ideas and concepts during testing so that they can get a sense through the surveys how many people actually like the idea of these flavorful aspects and how many don't.

Would you rather they not put it in a playtest document at all and instead just spring these flavor concepts on you when the book was released with no chance to change it?
 

MoonSong

Explorer
I don't like it. (The lore wizard). This is clearly an example of the double standard designers have when it comes to sorcerers and wizards.

- Give an element switch metamagic to sorcerers, "Oh no that would be overpowered and we cannot have that".

- Give an element switch option to wizards, "Of course you can do it, hey let's make it at-will while you are at it"

- To Sorcerer "Metamagic is quite strong, that is why it has to be limited to a few times a day and you need to wait many levels to have more than two"

- To wizard "here have free better empower, free better extend and free better heighten , all at the same time!! No need to wait until 10+ levels to have five unique metamagic-lite"
 

phantomK9

Villager
I'm a bit confused about the Hexblade patron.
Are there literally powerful weapons out there calling to people? Maybe I haven't read enough lore but everything I know about powerful artifact level weapons is that they are waiting for people to find them and then once they attune, they may attempt to take over.
 

UnknownDyson

Explorer
Loremaster is broken. Level 2 ability to consistently target an enemy with their most disadvantageous saving throw using your most powerful spell and avoid resistances by switching damage types is just OP.
 

Ganymede81

Villager
Because this is a playtest and they want to see how many others agree with you. They have to make these sort of flavor ideas and concepts during testing so that they can get a sense through the surveys how many people actually like the idea of these flavorful aspects and how many don't.

Would you rather they not put it in a playtest document at all and instead just spring these flavor concepts on you when the book was released with no chance to change it?
I was not objecting to the playtest revision process.
 

TwoSix

Lover of things you hate
That's true. I completely glossed over the fact that none of the class features require you to hit it with a melee attack. An eldritch blast based Hexblade would be insane.
Yea, the hexblade seems pretty great as a switch hitter, using EB at range and a one-hander and shield when they get close, augmenting with paladin smite spells and shield for defense, and only needing to boost Cha.

Or do a Curse Bringer focused blade build with Strength primary. Getting super-smite with the pact weapon goes a long way towards bringing blade builds up, it's pretty interesting.
 

LuisCarlos17f

Registered User
My own version of 5th ed hexblade was a mixture of binder (from 3.5 "tome of magic:pact, shadow and truename"), and swordsage (from 3.5 "tome of batlle: book of the nine swords"). Is hexblade a mixture of warlock and arcane version of paladin?

Hexblade and duskblade (3.5 player handbook), what is the difference?

* The keys for classes (and subclasses) are:

- Right balance of power, of course.
- Fun and enough different gameplay. Players have to like the class features and to feel their character is "special and unique", not only a list of feats and powers.
- Interesting background or concept.

* What do you think about the variant classes? (Variant classes are classes with some little changes, for example the AD&D gladiator from Dark Sun may to have been the first variant class).
 

pdegan2814

Villager
Not sure I like using Cha as a hit/dmg modifier, seems to lead down the path of subclasses that tailor everything to a specific ability stat, and to me is the worst kind of power creep. That said, I'm willing to have an open mind if someone can show me how being charming leads to hitting harder in combat.
How about this:
Your Charisma stat isn't just about being charming. It's about the strength of your own sense of self. As a Warlock, your Patron chose to make a pact with you because of your strong personality & sense of self. If Wisdom is the Willpower of the mind, Charisma is the Willpower of the gut, intestinal fortitude(or testicular fortitude if you're a sports/WWE fan). Casting spells and wielding your Patron's gifts aren't intellectual exercises for you, you draw from deep down inside you for the power you need. And in the case of a Hexblade, one of those gifts is martial prowess.
 

Gladius Legis

Explorer
The new Blade Pact invocations are all better Smites than the Paladin's Divine Smite. Now without even having to multiclass. Great.

So either these new invocations need to be toned down to 2d8 at 1st level + 1d8 per additional spell level, like the current Divine Smite, or Divine Smite needs to be buffed to 2d8/spell level.

Heck, the Moon Bow is ranged smiting that's now straight-up more damaging than the Paladin's current melee smiting. LOL.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TwoSix

Lover of things you hate
And now you've got double-locked invocations (Curse Bringer requires Hexblade and Blade pact) ... and other double-locked invocations that you will almost never see (how many fiend/blade and GOO/blade will we be seeing the future).
Can't say as I agree with that. Having double-locked invocations with unique features encourages playing non-obvious combinations, so you can get those unique features.
 

Edwin Suijkerbuijk

Registered User
i'm not a fan of extending ranges to one mile.
so now al battles where players have control of where battles take place the wizrds gets good number of rounds before even the range enemies can attack without ranged penalty
 

pdegan2814

Villager
Loremaster is broken. Level 2 ability to consistently target an enemy with their most disadvantageous saving throw using your most powerful spell and avoid resistances by switching damage types is just OP.
Switching the Saving Throw is only once per Rest, so you'll be doing it once every 1/2 battles, most likely. The damage type switching doesn't work on cantrips, so you're limited there too. The damage switching may end up being OP, but that's why they want us to playtest it.
 

flametitan

Villager
As somebody who really likes the Pact of the Undying's flavour, I'm fairly jealous that there's all these cool invocations that I'm barred from and will likely never have any unique invocations of my own, unless they decide to reprint it in a future book.

That's one of the main problems with tying invocations to pacts. Anybody who takes a pact not in the core rules or the supplement that features the invocations is left out. For good reason, mind you. I fully support the idea that expansion books should be self contained. It's just frustrating when your choice in supplement doesn't get to benefit from later expansions.
 

lowkey13

Exterminate all rational thought
Can't say as I agree with that. Having double-locked invocations with unique features encourages playing non-obvious combinations, so you can get those unique features.
Here's the thing, though. They aren't really unique.

Take a look. You have four abilities (Curse Bringer, Claw, Mace, Moon Bow) that are all +2d8 damage per spell slot + (SPECIAL ABILITY).

And based on my review, you'd have to have a really special character design cooked up to make a Bladelock that doesn't have a Hexblade patron. Because it's almost as if they thought, "Hey, let's level up the bladelock by giving them an even better patron."

And that's the killer, for me. The great thing about the Warlock design was supposed to be the independence of the Pact/Patron. While there are aspects of this that I like, I absolutely abhor the design philosophy behind it.

And, as pointed out by [MENTION=6822731]flametitan[/MENTION] above, when you lock in invocations by pact/patron, you close the design space. Are you running an undying warlock? An undying light warlock? Well, so sorry for you!

This isn't just about the specific abilities, but about the class.
 

Fritzo

Villager
The power creep is strong with this UA and with multi classing :):):):) will be ridiculous. But i don't hate whats here, the designers just need to restructure things so it's not so easy to dip for so many fantastic features.

Couple changes i'd make take away the Charisma for damage and attack rolls from Hex Warrior. The second effect of Spell Secrets to change the type of saving throw should be delayed further in the class (sounds like a good 14th level ability to me). Haven't looked at the Invocations yet but i hope they don't give too much power too early.
 

QuietBrowser

Villager
I do care about the Warlock, and here's the thing-

Adding one or two new pact boons would have greatly increased the options available to the class. It's a great mix-and-match class; and part of the versatility should be that you get to differentiate both your PATRON and your PACT BOON.
No, here's the thing: like I keep asking everybody who makes this same complaint, just what is WoTC suppose to add in terms of new Pact Boons?

It's easy to say "warlocks need new pact boons", but the biting problem to that demand is figuring out just what sorts of new boons you could have that wouldn't step on the toes of the existing ones. As I said back on the first page, we've got the Familiar, we've got the Book of Eldritch Lore, we've got the Magical Weapon - just what kind of presents are actually left? What can you honestly say that a Patron could give out as a sign of their contract that'd be any different to what we've already got?

I mean, I can think up new Patrons easily. Angel/Celestial, Dark Mother (a corrupt/evil fertility goddess, ala Shub-Niggurath or Lamashtu), Darkness, Doomspeaker (apocalyptic herald/elder evil), Dragon, Genie, Great Beast (scary/dark animal spirit, ala Jhebbal-Sag or Baphomet), Primordial/Archomental, Sorcerer-King, and that's just off the top of my head.

But new Pact Boons? I have absolutely no idea.

That's my problem. If you could present compelling ideas for new Pact Boons, I'd take this complaint more seriously.
 

Parmandur

Adventurer
The hexblade doesn't seem enough to invalidate other patron bladelocks, or necessitate choosing blade pact even if you have a blade patron. Interestingly, the RW seems to be a familiar patron theme, as much as Hexblade is for blade pact: it's kind if an interesting remix of the design space. A book pact hexblade might be very interesting, actually...

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app
 

Advertisement

Latest threads

Advertisement

Top