D&D 5E Warlock Thoughts (Spell Points, Invocations, Blade Pact)

[Xeviat]

Hi everyone,

I like to mess around with the rules, and the new game I'm DMing has a Warlock character. This has me thinking about a few things.

First of all, for a long time, I've been interested in switching my house games over to spell points. I've also been interested in shifting spellcasting from Long Rest to Short Rest recovery. Having the Warlock in my game would allow me to test both of those.

How much more powerful will spell points make a Warlock? I believe it will make them immensely more flexible. For the bulk of the game, the warlock only has 2 spell slots per short rest. Converted to spell points, a Warlock would be able to spread things around a little more. Mostly, this means they'll have more utility effects. Hex, for instance, doesn't scale until 3rd level, so a Warlock will only cast it for 2 spell points until they have 3rd level spells and they can cast it for 5 spell points for 8 hours. Likely, this isn't going to be a big gain offensively, but it will give them far more options, especially with spells that don't scale well.

Here's what their Spell Points would look like, still refreshed on a short rest:

Level	Spell Points
1	2
2	4
3	6
4	6
5	10
6	10
7	12
8	12
9	14
10	14
11	21
12	21
13	21
14	21
15	21
16	21
17	28
17	28
17	28
20	28

Second, I'm finding myself disliking some of the Warlock Invocations. In the PHB, the following jump out to me:
Agonizing Blast: This feels like a "requirement".
Lifedrinker and Thirsting Blade: Eldritch Blast scales automatically, and up to 4 attacks, and exceeds all 1 handed weapon damage if you take agonizing blast, so why aren't these just built into the Pact of the Blade?
Repelling Blast and Eldritch Spear: Modifiers to Eldritch Blast are cool. I like these in theory. I'd like EB to be a Warlock class ability rather than a cantrip, too. But, these invocations should really come with a price; choose one, modify EB in some way (lower damage die for Eldritch Spear), maybe killed range for Repelling Blast). With the other "offensive" choices removed, these could exist for people who want to run simple blaster warlocks to give them options with their EB. Sort of like the old 3E Warlock.

Well, I thought there were going to be a few more of them. There definitely are in the UA article.

What do I think Invocations should be for? Utility things and options. The at-will utility spells, the extra skills, the extra (but limited) spells known. These are the things I think invocations should be used for. What do you think?

Third, I (and everyone else really) have my own houserules for the Pact of the Blade. Let me know what you think:

Pact of the Blade
You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. It takes on the form of a one-handed melee weapon that deals 1d10 damage of either bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing, your choice based on it's form. You are proficient with it while you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage. You use your Charisma modifier for attack and damage rolls with your Pact Weapon. At 5th level, when you take the attack action and attack with your Pact Weapon, you can attack twice. The number of attacks increases to three when you reach 11th level in this class and to four when you reach 17th level in this class. Your pact weapon counts as an Arcane Focus while you wield it. (The second and third paragraph remain the same).

In effect, the Pact of the Blade gives you a melee Eldritch Blast that doesn't require you to take Agonizing Blast to get your ability modifier added in. I'm still not sure it gives enough benefit over the other pacts: Tome gives you 3 cantrips (2 cantrips is worth half a feat), an Chain gives you a beefy familiar (that doesn't scale, but that's another thread). I'm considering adding "While unarmored and wielding your pact weapon, your AC is 10 plus your Dexterity modifier plus your Charisma modifier". This makes the pact somewhat equivalent to 2ish invocations (agonizing blast and armor of shadows).

I may have overstretched on that first attempt, but what do you think?

 

[cbwjm]

I'm not sure I like allowing the blade pact warlock to attack as often (at for a few levels, more than) the fighter.

One of the benefits of the pact of the blade has is that you can merge a magical weapon with it, turning a flametongue into your pactblade. You could turn a great sword into your pact weapon and be able to use it or even a magical bow (from memory melee weapon isn't a restriction when bonding with a magical weapon).

If you think agonising blast is a requirement, then perhaps removing it would be the best idea. I'm not sure how that will really affect things though, it might make the warlock far less desirable to play if a player is counting on picking it up.

Edit: Forgot to add, rather than giving them unarmoured defence, just have the player pick up the relevant invocation, it's what it is there for.

Edit 2: Man I'm bad at this response. Re: the Spell Points. I would be very interested to hear about any feedback you get if you test this. I think it would make a warlock more interesting to play since they seem to get plenty of spells but not really the ability to cast them consistently since they only have a relatively low number of spell slots/short rest.

 

[Lancelot]

I've never felt that pact blade is suffering in comparison to other classes. Only the fighter gets three (or four) attacks per round with a melee weapon. Pact blade attacks are not directly comparable to eldritch blast. Let me give you an example, using the existing rules:

1) Warlock #1 (Wlk 12) throws three eldritch blasts. He has invested in agonizing blast, and has max Cha. He gets three shots at +9 attack, 1d10+5 damage each. Average damage against an AC 19 opponent is 15.75 points (31.5 x 50% hit chance), not counting crits.

2) Warlock #2 (Ftr 1 / Wlk 11) attacks twice with her bonded +2 greatsword (you run a low-magic campaign? ...no worries, the party wizard simply casts Magic Weapon for 1 hour). She has max Str, and uses non-attack / non-save spells like Armor of Agathys (her Cha is her secondary stat, at only 14). In addition to her plate-armored AC 18 (or higher), she's swinging at +11 attack, 2d6+7 damage (reroll 1's and 2's thanks to weapon style). Average damage against an AC 19 opponent is 18 points (approx. 30 x 60% hit chance). More damage, much higher AC. And, unlike Eldritch Blast, she has access to feats that can massively improve this situation: Great Weapon Master gives additional attack as bonus action on crit or drop, plus the borderline-broken power attack.

Unless you're removing the ability to bond a magic weapon or apply any fighting styles or combat maneuvers or feats or class abilities to the pact blade, opening it up to three attacks per round is likely going to result in massive imbalance. If, by contrast, you ARE preventing any of those things from applying to the pact blade... then you're simply creating a melee version of eldritch blast. And I think the warlock loses something from that. There's a lot of fun to be gained by bonding a magical weapon, or taking some feats (defensive duelist with a bonded finesse blade! polearm master with a bonded halberd!), or multiclassing (the raging barbarian/warlock!).

In summary: pact blade is only underpowered if you're taking in complete isolation to magic weapons (or even just the Magic Weapon spell), feats and multi-classing.

 

[ccs]

Second, I'm finding myself disliking some of the Warlock Invocations. In the PHB, the following jump out to me:
Agonizing Blast: This feels like a "requirement".?

As a warlock player I can tell you this is not a requirement to making a fun, useful, warlock. Nor is EB blast itself.

Lifedrinker and Thirsting Blade: Eldritch Blast scales automatically, and up to 4 attacks, and exceeds all 1 handed weapon damage if you take agonizing blast, so why aren't these just built into the Pact of the Blade?
Repelling Blast and Eldritch Spear: Modifiers to Eldritch Blast are cool. I like these in theory. I'd like EB to be a Warlock class ability rather than a cantrip, too. But, these invocations should really come with a price; choose one, modify EB in some way (lower damage die for Eldritch Spear), maybe killed range for Repelling Blast). With the other "offensive" choices removed, these could exist for people who want to run simple blaster warlocks to give them options with their EB. Sort of like the old 3E Warlock.?

Wow. What order to unscramble this in?
A) Simple blaster Warlocks are already a thing. And it doesn't get any easier. Step 1: Choose Warlock, Step 2: Select EB. Step 3: Select the EB modifying invocations.
Congrats, you've created the most stale, cookie cutter, damage machine you can with the class.

B) Why isn't EB a class ability? It is. It's an option you can take under the cantrip heading. You have to CHOOSE it because there's all types of warlocks out there, not just damage dealing ones.
Why aren't EB modifiers built right in? Again, choice. And clearly the designers intended you to only have access to a handful of spaces in wich to customize your warlocks power set. Wich brings me to....

C) Those invocations you think should come with a price? They DO. A heavy one. Because if you take one of them you're not doing something else cool. So choose carefully.
Of course this does depend upon how you look at a class. If all you see when you read the entries is x damage? Then you'll never understand how cool something like beast speech can be.

 

[Lanliss]

I love the Bladelock, but think that scaling is a bit crazy. I think valor bard is your best example for this. A full casting melee character, gets 1 extra attack at 6th, and medium armor + Shields. I would be fine if those came with the Blade Pact.

I agree that AB looks like a requirement, and just about any time you see a "how to build effective warlock" thread someone responds with "Take EB, take AB". That said, I have specifically not taken Eldritch blast on either of my warlocks. They feel plenty interesting to me.

If you want them to have interesting invocations to choose from make a Fighting Style Invocation that requires the Blade Pact. Pick 1 fighting style. Alternatively, going more magical with it and make riders like the Repelling Blast and Eldritch Spear. A Cleaving Strike that deals necrotic damage to an adjacent enemy to your target, or Piercing Cold that gives you a spear with a reach of 15, adn deals Cold damage. You could steal from critical Role, and have a Dagger Invocation that lets you teleport to where your dagger lands when thrown, 1 per short rest. There are all sorts of fun things you could tie to the chosen Pact weapon.

 

[Xeviat]

I'm not sure I like allowing the blade pact warlock to attack as often (at for a few levels, more than) the fighter.

An Eldritch Blasting Warlock already gets more attacks than an Archer Fighter.

One of the benefits of the pact of the blade has is that you can merge a magical weapon with it, turning a flametongue into your pactblade. You could turn a great sword into your pact weapon and be able to use it or even a magical bow (from memory melee weapon isn't a restriction when bonding with a magical weapon).

And a Rod of the Pact Keeper largely functions as a magic implement for spells (and yes, there's no restriction to ranged weapons for the magic weapon pact). Magic items are a commodity, so if one warlock gets a magic item, the comparison warlock gets a comparable item.

If you think agonising blast is a requirement, then perhaps removing it would be the best idea. I'm not sure how that will really affect things though, it might make the warlock far less desirable to play if a player is counting on picking it up.

I'd rather drop their invocations to 1 at level 2 and bake it into the class then.

Edit: Forgot to add, rather than giving them unarmoured defence, just have the player pick up the relevant invocation, it's what it is there for.

My point is to balance the pacts. I'm arguing that the pact weapon could functionally be seen as a melee eldritch blast with my alterations. That's worth "one" cantrip. Tome gives 3 cantrips, so they need a little more I think.

Edit 2: Man I'm bad at this response. Re: the Spell Points. I would be very interested to hear about any feedback you get if you test this. I think it would make a warlock more interesting to play since they seem to get plenty of spells but not really the ability to cast them consistently since they only have a relatively low number of spell slots/short rest.

Testing it is the plan, I just wanted to see if anything jumped out as terrible about the idea before I implemented it.

I've never felt that pact blade is suffering in comparison to other classes. Only the fighter gets three (or four) attacks per round with a melee weapon. Pact blade attacks are not directly comparable to eldritch blast. Let me give you an example, using the existing rules:

1) Warlock #1 (Wlk 12) throws three eldritch blasts. He has invested in agonizing blast, and has max Cha. He gets three shots at +9 attack, 1d10+5 damage each. Average damage against an AC 19 opponent is 15.75 points (31.5 x 50% hit chance), not counting crits.

2) Warlock #2 (Ftr 1 / Wlk 11) attacks twice with her bonded +2 greatsword (you run a low-magic campaign? ...no worries, the party wizard simply casts Magic Weapon for 1 hour). She has max Str, and uses non-attack / non-save spells like Armor of Agathys (her Cha is her secondary stat, at only 14). In addition to her plate-armored AC 18 (or higher), she's swinging at +11 attack, 2d6+7 damage (reroll 1's and 2's thanks to weapon style). Average damage against an AC 19 opponent is 18 points (approx. 30 x 60% hit chance). More damage, much higher AC. And, unlike Eldritch Blast, she has access to feats that can massively improve this situation: Great Weapon Master gives additional attack as bonus action on crit or drop, plus the borderline-broken power attack.

You've given your blade warlock 1 level of multiclassing, a magic item (or the wizard's concentration slot), and an invocation to get there; your Eldritch Blaster just has an invocation. Take away the multiclassing and the Warlock is back down to AC 16ish. A CR 12 opponent's typical AC is 17, so we have the Eldritch Blaster at +11 (rod of the pactkeeper +2 is rare, just like a +2 weapon; this warlock also gets +2 DCs an an extra spell slot per day, but we won't worry about that) with 3 attacks at 1d10+5 (10.5 @ 75% to hit x3 = 24.45 with crits). The Blade would be +11 (with a +2 greatsword) with 2 attacks at 2d6+7 (14 @ 75% to hit x2 = 21.7 with crits); but they have a bit more MAD to deal with and no range. Life drinker boosts it as follows: Cha 14 is 24.7, Cha 16 is 26.2, Cha 18 is 27.7, Cha 20 is 29.2, but then we need a comparable invocation for EB (and that starts a slippery slope).

Unless you're removing the ability to bond a magic weapon or apply any fighting styles or combat maneuvers or feats or class abilities to the pact blade, opening it up to three attacks per round is likely going to result in massive imbalance. If, by contrast, you ARE preventing any of those things from applying to the pact blade... then you're simply creating a melee version of eldritch blast. And I think the warlock loses something from that. There's a lot of fun to be gained by bonding a magical weapon, or taking some feats (defensive duelist with a bonded finesse blade! polearm master with a bonded halberd!), or multiclassing (the raging barbarian/warlock!).

In summary: pact blade is only underpowered if you're taking in complete isolation to magic weapons (or even just the Magic Weapon spell), feats and multi-classing.

That Blade Warlocks almost require multiclassing and magic items to compete shows me that something is wrong. I don't think I have to get rid of magic item bonding because nearly equivalent caster items exist. The lack of spellcaster feats is also a problem with the feat system, but one easily remedied.

 

[Saeviomagy]

In summary: pact blade is only underpowered if you're taking in complete isolation to magic weapons (or even just the Magic Weapon spell), feats and multi-classing.

...which is reasonable, since none of those things are guaranteed. Feats and multi classing are optional. Magic items (especially specific weapons) are variable. Having the wizard cast magic weapon is far from guaranteed, because not only does it use up a level 4 spell, it also uses his concentration.

Finally, your warlock is losing out on a fair bit to make this work: they're a sub-par caster, took a +2 greatsword as a magic item pick and have to be in melee range (with a not-so-great constitution because they had to prioritize 2 other statistics).

I agree however that giving any class other than fighter 4 attacks is not a good idea. It's been solidly avoided with pure melee classes.

I would like to see the pact weapon warlock improved. The new invocations from the recent unearthed arcana article are quite good for this, giving the ability to smite with spell slots similar to a paladin and the ability to add magic to your pact weapon. There needs to be invocations giving heavy armor equivalents as well though: currently a pact weapon warlock either needs to get armor proficiencies from multi classing or burning feats, or has to prioritize dexterity.

 

[Lancelot]

You've given your blade warlock 1 level of multiclassing, a magic item (or the wizard's concentration slot), and an invocation to get there; your Eldritch Blaster just has an invocation. Take away the multiclassing and the Warlock is back down to AC 16ish. A CR 12 opponent's typical AC is 17, so we have the Eldritch Blaster at +11 (rod of the pactkeeper +2 is rare, just like a +2 weapon; this warlock also gets +2 DCs an an extra spell slot per day, but we won't worry about that) with 3 attacks at 1d10+5 (10.5 @ 75% to hit x3 = 24.45 with crits). The Blade would be +11 (with a +2 greatsword) with 2 attacks at 2d6+7 (14 @ 75% to hit x2 = 21.7 with crits); but they have a bit more MAD to deal with and no range. Life drinker boosts it as follows: Cha 14 is 24.7, Cha 16 is 26.2, Cha 18 is 27.7, Cha 20 is 29.2, but then we need a comparable invocation for EB (and that starts a slippery slope).

True, but the multi-classing is mostly about the huge AC buff. You don't need it for the proficiency, because you're proficient with whatever weapon you bond anyway. In your typical module, magic weapons are far more common that pact keeper rods... and they add to both attack and damage (PC rods and wands of the war mage only add to attack bonus, so DPR favors the blade). There are few if any feats or multiclassing options that can buff eldritch blast, whereas there are multiple fighting styles and multiclasses that can significantly buff weapon options. Further, as you note, Lifedrinker basically equalizes the damage even if the warlock doesn't worry about MAD (they just stick with Cha 14).

The bottom line is that the existing pact blade options can match damage output of eldritch blast as they stand... and can be tooled to exceed it without much difficulty. Yes, they require more feats or multiclassing or MAD to surpass eldritch blast... but the options are there. The options are not there for eldritch blast; you're kind of capped at 1d10+5+push (with attack bonus from your possible rod/wand). There aren't any feats or multiclassing options or even magic items which can help you further. Whereas the blade wielder can always find a sword of sharpness, a +3 weapon (attack AND damage bonuses), take a few levels of fighter or paladin, or whatever. Even the ranged benefit of eldritch blast isn't guaranteed. From experience, most 5e combats end up in melee within the first round anyway... which means a ranged attack is actually a detriment. You need to rely on spells (limited, for a warlock) or other abilities to prevent having disadvantage on every attack. If the combat is at long range, smart foes will just drop prone or seek cover (or fire back with their own weapons).

In any case, it's all just my personal opinion. At my table, I've never seen or heard any issues with the pact blade vs eldritch blast situation as it currently stands. Blade-locks are overwhelmingly preferred by my players (compared to blast-locks). I personally wouldn't attempt to "correct" the issue by upping the number of attacks to 3+ because that encroaches on something very unique to the fighter. The greatest paladins and barbarians in the land... absolute masters of hand-to-hand combat... only get two attacks per round, but blade-locks get up to four because of eldritch blast? I'd be peeved as a player in that kind of campaign. If the perceived problem is eldritch blast, then nerf eldritch blast (or simply remove the Agonizing Blast invocation, or limit it to be applied once per casting rather than once per bolt). That's an incredibly easy solution, rather than fundamentally re-architecting how pact blade works - and then having to change how it interacts with feats/items/classes, and then adding spellcaster feats to counter-balanced the weapon feats, and then whatever else is needed.

 

[Lanliss]

...which is reasonable, since none of those things are guaranteed. Feats and multi classing are optional. Magic items (especially specific weapons) are variable. Having the wizard cast magic weapon is far from guaranteed, because not only does it use up a level 4 spell, it also uses his concentration.

Finally, your warlock is losing out on a fair bit to make this work: they're a sub-par caster, took a +2 greatsword as a magic item pick and have to be in melee range (with a not-so-great constitution).

I agree however that giving any class other than fighter 4 attacks is not a good idea. It's been solidly avoided with pure melee classes.

I would like to see the pact weapon warlock improved. The new invocations from the recent unearthed arcana article are quite good for this, giving the ability to smite with spell slots similar to a paladin and the ability to add magic to your pact weapon. There needs to be invocations giving heavy armor equivalents as well though: currently a pact weapon warlock either needs to get armor proficiencies from multi classing or burning feats, or has to prioritize dexterity.

I like the riders on the "Smite" invocations, but actually dislike the smite itself. I would like them better if they dealt a flat bit of extra damage, maybe something like an extra d8, plus the rider. Possibly make it more like a cantrip, so the bonus die increases at set times, though in a way that takes into account the two attacks. Or, simply don't give the extra attack, leaving them with an attack that literally scales like a cantrip, plus a simple rider. It would certainly make for an interesting warlock to have one or two interchangeable "Melee Cantrips".

 

[Xeviat]

In any case, it's all just my personal opinion. At my table, I've never seen or heard any issues with the pact blade vs eldritch blast situation as it currently stands. Blade-locks are overwhelmingly preferred by my players (compared to blast-locks). I personally wouldn't attempt to "correct" the issue by upping the number of attacks to 3+ because that encroaches on something very unique to the fighter. The greatest paladins and barbarians in the land... absolute masters of hand-to-hand combat... only get two attacks per round, but blade-locks get up to four because of eldritch blast? I'd be peeved as a player in that kind of campaign. If the perceived problem is eldritch blast, then nerf eldritch blast (or simply remove the Agonizing Blast invocation, or limit it to be applied once per casting rather than once per bolt). That's an incredibly easy solution, rather than fundamentally re-architecting how pact blade works - and then having to change how it interacts with feats/items/classes, and then adding spellcaster feats to counter-balanced the weapon feats, and then whatever else is needed.

At my table, every player who has picked warlock started with wanting to do Pact of the Blade and then changing their mind after looking closely at it. That's where I'm coming from there. I'm not concerned about modules, as I never run them unmodified. As I'm houseruling, I'm not worried about Adventure League either.

I've strongly considered severely altering EB. I don't like how it scales with character level, but Extra Attack doesn't scale or stack. But I wouldn't want to take away what I consider to be a core ability. And I recognize that it's an option to not take it, but that simply feels weird to me.