Unearthed Arcana 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?

 

[Garresh]

Another invocation cost? This is a vad idea, would be easier let them use Cha only when reach level 2. Two level deep to multiclass for that yes a good delay and you miss one ASI too. Only work for one hand and you still need mid levels in str or dex for AC.

Nah. The idea is you're already sinking an invocation for 2 handed style via Curse Bringer. Since this only applies to one handed, its a separate invocation, so you're still only spending 2 by level 5 either way. Plus it allows us to bump up the melee option via riders to exceed Eldritch Blast, which is sorely needed since otherwise even a deep melee one handed build will do better at range than melee, which is just goofy.

 

[Chaosmancer]

You say this, but the Warlock is currently cannibalizing the themes of the Cleric, and has been so for some time now. Why is it ok to take from the Cleric, or the other classes for that matter, but not the Sorcerer?

The warlock/cleric comparison is a bit odd for me.
Both gain power from an outside entity, but Clerics are conduits of their god’s will manifest on earth. The Warlock cut a deal, either for power, desire, or survival.

For me, divine magic is all about community (this is probably stolen from FR and I’ve probably said it before). The god is powered by the worship and devotion of their community, all the people who believe in them. They gather up all those little shards of power, and then redistribute some of them back down to the clerics, whose purpose is to defend that community and bring more people into the fold.

The entities that grant warlocks their power aren’t like this. They are either independently powerful (like fey and GOO) or have the souls and hierarchy of Hell fueling them (fiend). Either way, there is not a large community of people openly worshipping Dis, like there is for Pelor.

This gets weird when you add dark, secretive deities, or decide that the gods of the monstrous races aren’t really gods and can only make warlocks instead of clerics. Personally, I have found in my homebrew that I don’t like “enemy gods” very much, so most of my darker deities have been moderated. IF you want to worship something evil with no regard for life, that’s what the Abyss and Hells are for, you’ve got plenty to choose from, but worshiping the Lord of Iron or the Master of Secrets should be more acceptable than worshipping Asmodeus or Orcus.

Also, beyond theme, there is almost no mechanical overlap between the two, which is my own personal biggest complaint with the Wizard and Sorcerer. This particular line of conversation comes from the response of the mechanical overlap being “just play a wizard and say it is a sorcerer” from some corners, which implies no issue in removing the sorcerer from the game entirely.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I almost hate to bring this up, since it will undoubtedly bring in complaints of "WotC hates 4e fluff" to yet another thread, but they don't actually call the Raven Queen a god in the UA. She is a "a mysterious
being who rules the Shadowfell from a palace of ice deep within that dread realm." So, in the generic sense, it isn't the case of "gods having warlocks" (unless you are playing in the Points of Light).

I have mixed feelings on the whole "are clerics and warlocks really the same thing", mostly because I think it would have worked out better if paladins and bladelocks had been subclasses of some magical champion class (if you patron type is a celestial, you are a paladin; if it is a fiend, you are a hellblade; etc.).

I echo [MENTION=6801228]Chaosmancer[/MENTION], for warlocks and clerics. While a warlock can use his/her abilities for the group's good, the abilities are all pretty much focused on the warlock's utility and damage. You can build a cleric that is self focused easily enough, but the class contains a lot of things that are as likely to help another party member as the cleric (healing, blessing, removing conditions). So, while the cleric may not be locked into the "leader" role like in 4e, it can support that role.

If they had a lot more celestials and fey, I would say you could fuse the cleric and warlock into some kind of channeller (similar to the magical champion I mentioned before, but at X level, you can channel the spells known by and magical powers of your patron type critter at level Y or lower), but I don't see that as viable currently in 5e.

 

[Al2O3]

I almost hate to bring this up, since it will undoubtedly bring in complaints of "WotC hates 4e fluff" to yet another thread, but they don't actually call the Raven Queen a god in the UA. She is a "a mysterious
being who rules the Shadowfell from a palace of ice deep within that dread realm." So, in the generic sense, it isn't the case of "gods having warlocks" (unless you are playing in the Points of Light).

I have mixed feelings on the whole "are clerics and warlocks really the same thing", mostly because I think it would have worked out better if paladins and bladelocks had been subclasses of some magical champion class (if you patron type is a celestial, you are a paladin; if it is a fiend, you are a hellblade; etc.).

I echo [MENTION=6801228]Chaosmancer[/MENTION], for warlocks and clerics. While a warlock can use his/her abilities for the group's good, the abilities are all pretty much focused on the warlock's utility and damage. You can build a cleric that is self focused easily enough, but the class contains a lot of things that are as likely to help another party member as the cleric (healing, blessing, removing conditions). So, while the cleric may not be locked into the "leader" role like in 4e, it can support that role.

If they had a lot more celestials and fey, I would say you could fuse the cleric and warlock into some kind of channeller (similar to the magical champion I mentioned before, but at X level, you can channel the spells known by and magical powers of your patron type critter at level Y or lower), but I don't see that as viable currently in 5e.

I am one of those who really likes 4e and in particular the Raven Queen. Add such I love that they are bringing her back. Since the Forgotten Realms is the setting of many adventures in 5e I like that they do it in a way that fits in that setting and still keeps most aspects of her intact.

Unless she does "F***, marry, kill" with Kelemvor in all three spots she doesn't really have a clear place in the Forgotten Realms. This solution maintains all parts of her that do not include being the God of the dead (and a great epic level story for those who want change it).

The more I think about it, the more excited I become about the solution. Now just give us a lazylord play style class and I for one can't come up with any 4e-related complaints about 5e.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using EN World mobile app

 

[Tyler Havard]

Am I over thinking this? In the artical of the Hexblade, you make a pact with a magic sentient weapon. Pact of the blade allows you to bond with a magic weapon or create one. You can not change a magic weapon into another weapon. At lv.2 you can manifest the curse bringer as your weapon. So my conundrum is, does the sentience transfer to what ever weapon your bound to or is it like a vessel for your hexblade sentients? Being a hexblade allows you to change the weapons form regardless of what the pact of the blade has written?
Um, I believe that's it. Thanks for the help! I look forward to any clarification.

 

[zaratan]

Nah. The idea is you're already sinking an invocation for 2 handed style via Curse Bringer. Since this only applies to one handed, its a separate invocation, so you're still only spending 2 by level 5 either way. Plus it allows us to bump up the melee option via riders to exceed Eldritch Blast, which is sorely needed since otherwise even a deep melee one handed build will do better at range than melee, which is just goofy.

well, charge another invocation for this would only move away more people from bladelock and push them in eldritch blast. Who go deep for the benefit of Cha will do the same way, and will get that invocation too. Eldritch blast isn't the best option compared to GFB or BB until level 5, and start to be amazing at level 11, so just give better Invocations for one handed melee user starting at level 5 (than 11/17), this will keep the "2/3 lvl deepers" way. If this would made, should be a benefit that everyone would want, like:
"when you hit a creature with a melee one handed weapon attack, add 1d6 in the damage, provinient from Hex spell, without use spellslot or concentration.", hexblade can use smite spell without concentration, cast X spell bonus action, extra move or prone, push, grab, frighten... (ok, this start to look like fighter).

 

[Mercule]

Am I over thinking this? In the artical of the Hexblade, you make a pact with a magic sentient weapon. Pact of the blade allows you to bond with a magic weapon or create one. You can not change a magic weapon into another weapon. At lv.2 you can manifest the curse bringer as your weapon. So my conundrum is, does the sentience transfer to what ever weapon your bound to or is it like a vessel for your hexblade sentients? Being a hexblade allows you to change the weapons form regardless of what the pact of the blade has written?
Um, I believe that's it. Thanks for the help! I look forward to any clarification.

Overthinking. I actually read it in such a way that you don't necessarily carry the blade, just a "shadow" of it. The actual blade could be an artifact level item, somewhere remote from you. If you actually take Blade Pact, your eldritch weapon just takes on aspects of your patron.

So, you could play a peasant boy whose parents were slain by some evil overlord. The Sword of Kas visits you in your dreams and offers you the power to defend all that is yours and never again suffer at the hands of another. You say "Sure thing, Dude." Now, you can manifest a pact blade and do other cool stuff. Ultimately, the Sword of Kas wants you to find it and release it into the world, but that doesn't have to happen until the end of the campaign, if ever (not all Warlocks "win").

Now, I might be missing some bit of text that says you have an actual, physical weapon that's really and truly the weapon to which you're pledged. So be it. But... of all the classes, I think the Warlock is the one, thematically, that lends itself best to little tweaks that bring out flavor and make every character unique. In fact, I think it's almost a requirement for Warlock.

Edit: Also, as cool as I think the default "weapon from the Shadowfell" is, I think there's a lot more potential in the kit if you can uncouple it from being that specific.

 

[pdegan2814]

Am I over thinking this? In the artical of the Hexblade, you make a pact with a magic sentient weapon. Pact of the blade allows you to bond with a magic weapon or create one. You can not change a magic weapon into another weapon. At lv.2 you can manifest the curse bringer as your weapon. So my conundrum is, does the sentience transfer to what ever weapon your bound to or is it like a vessel for your hexblade sentients? Being a hexblade allows you to change the weapons form regardless of what the pact of the blade has written?
Um, I believe that's it. Thanks for the help! I look forward to any clarification.

The Blade you wield and the Blade that acts as your Patron are not the same thing. Keep in mind, you don't even have to be a Bladelock as a Hexblade(although I imagine Bladelock will likely be the most popular way to go given how well-matched they are). The example given in the UA is Blackrazor. The sentient force inside Blackrazor is your Patron, but if you become a Bladelock you aren't wielding the actual Blackrazor as your Pact weapon. It's merely a weapon forged with the power given to you by Blackrazor.

 

[Ganymede81]

Edit: Also, as cool as I think the default "weapon from the Shadowfell" is, I think there's a lot more potential in the kit if you can uncouple it from being that specific.

I agree... perhaps the vision is of a woman's hand penetrating from the surface of a glassy lake, clutching a pristine longsword (though Arthurian Legend skews strongly Archfey as well).

 

[jrowland]

Look, it is ok that you don't like the sorcerer. But you are going too far by saying it is unneeded and invalid. Yes, maybe the Lore master could be on line with all other classes, maybe the sorcerer is underpowered the odd one out. But to then go out and say that the solution is to get rid of it, that is too far.

Being an "odd duck" and having the "spontaneous casting" trope being an invalid "reason" for the sorcerer are not saying the sorcerer as a class is unneeded and invalid. You are reading too much into what I said.