D&D 5E (2014) Warlocks seem pointless

[Sword of Spirit]

The primary feature of the Blade Pact warlock (their melee attack) requires investment in a second stat, commitment to a pact boon, two invocations and a spell to be almost as good as the attack (eldritch blast) that any warlock can get with only investment in one invocation and a spell. That means it costs you an additional maxed stat+invocation+pact boon choice--and you can still be more effective with eldritch blast than with your own melee attacks at the cost of single additional invocation.

You can put a Blade Pact warlock above your standard eldritch blast warlock if you multiclass, use the right feats with the right weapons, and/or have really good magic weapons. But those rely on optional rules and the whims of the DM or the dice.

As it now stands, according to my calculations, Blade Pact warlock is by default inferior at what it appears designed to do best.

Now, I may be wrong. I might be missing something important. But that's what I'm seeing.

 

[Joe Liker]

You can put a Blade Pact warlock above your standard eldritch blast warlock if you multiclass, use the right feats with the right weapons, and/or have really good magic weapons. But those rely on optional rules and the whims of the DM or the dice.

... and none of that invalidates its inclusion as a development path.

The important thing you are missing is that not all class features are intended to be optimal for single-classed characters. I, for one, am very glad to know this is true.

 

[trentonjoe]

You can put a Blade Pact warlock above your standard eldritch blast warlock if you multiclass, use the right feats with the right weapons, and/or have really good magic weapons. But those rely on optional rules and the whims of the DM or the dice.

As it now stands, according to my calculations, Blade Pact warlock is by default inferior at what it appears designed to do best.

The way I see it, and what I've seen in play, is that the Bladelock is good in combat (but not as good as the pure fighter types), good at range (but not as good as the best archers) AND can cast a couple spells here or there. It also multiclasses nicely.

It may not be the most optimal character but it certainly isn't a bad one. No one at my table is sitting around telling me how bad my guy is. And we do that

 

[Mallus]

Now, I may be wrong. I might be missing something important. But that's what I'm seeing.

I think it boils down to blade warlocks are better at ranged combat than blast-warlocks are in melee. Meaning blade warlocks are more versatile combatants, capable of filling more than one combat role. How much you value that is, of course, up to you (and your group).

All a blade warlock needs is a decent CHA + Agonizing Blast to be effective at range. An EB-focused warlock needs... a lot more to anything other than a desperation front-line fighter. Blade/melee warlocks also benefit more from certain spells --like Armor of Agathys-- and Feats ---because Polearm Master, Sentinel, and Great Weapon Fighter are some of the best Feats in the game.

There are a number of interesting builds for blade/melee warlocks, including unarmored tanks and high-risk & situational DPR builds. None of which require multiclassing (which would admittedly help) but do all but require Feats.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

... and none of that invalidates its inclusion as a development path.

The important thing you are missing is that not all class features are intended to be optimal for single-classed characters. I, for one, am very glad to know this is true.

True, it's still a perfectly valid way to go. I just think it needs to be pointed out that it does require some heavy investment to compete with a simple eldritch blast + agonizing blast combo.

I'm not a fan of class features designed more for multiclassing than playing single-classed (even though I have no problem with multiclassing). I don't know how the designers intended it to function, but I just assumed they intended that extra investment in a path would net extra benefits, without needing a multiclass or feat-dependent build. You may be right that they went a different route, but it stands out compared to all the other classes and subclasses which appear to be designed for 1-20 balance ("casual" balance, of course).

The way I see it, and what I've seen in play, is that the Bladelock is good in combat (but not as good as the pure fighter types), good at range (but not as good as the best archers) AND can cast a couple spells here or there. It also multiclasses nicely.

It may not be the most optimal character but it certainly isn't a bad one. No one at my table is sitting around telling me how bad my guy is. And we do that

That's good know.

I think it boils down to blade warlocks are better at ranged combat than blast-warlocks are in melee. Meaning blade warlocks are more versatile combatants, capable of filling more than one combat role. How much you value that is, of course, up to you (and your group).

Good point. I hadn't considered that blade pact could be looked at more as adding melee capability that otherwise is absent than in making you better at melee than ranged. I guess it just doesn't seem enough reward for investment to put that much into it, and still be better off using eldritch blast and avoiding melee.

Since I really want to feel that Bladelock is always going to do better with their weapon than eldritch blast--and may even feel justified in skipping eldritch blast entirely, I've houseruled a few things.

The simplest component that does the lion's share of the balancing work I want is to simply make two changes to agonizing blast. 1) It has a prerequisite of Pact of the Tome. 2) It applies to only one hit per turn.

That creates a forced choice scenario where you need Pact of the Tome to get the most out of eldritch blast; and it reigns in its power a bit. (It's still the best cantrip in the game, and still excellent with hex). I'm working on one or two tweaks to Pact of the Blade, but most of work is done just with those simple changes to Agonizing Blast.

 

[Joe Liker]

Since I really want to feel that Bladelock is always going to do better with their weapon than eldritch blast--and may even feel justified in skipping eldritch blast entirely, I've houseruled a few things.

I'm assuming you have no problem with a fighter who uses the Archery fighting style, but is still quite good at melee fighting with a finesse weapon. His melee will never be as "optimal" as a great weapon fighter's -- or his own archery -- but it's far from a waste.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I'm assuming you have no problem with a fighter who uses the Archery fighting style, but is still quite good at melee fighting with a finesse weapon. His melee will never be as "optimal" as a great weapon fighter's -- or his own archery -- but it's far from a waste.

Yep, I'm fine with that. If he took Great-Weapon Fighting, or Dueling, or Two-Weapon Fighting rather than Archery, and his own archery is still better...that's where I'm not happy.

 

[green_destiny]

(Pact of the Chain is pretty pointless because you can get a familiar by taking the invocation that grants ritual casting).

Not really, as someone else on this thread has pointed out.

> An invisible familiar that does your bidding (especially to spy or be a look-out for the party)
> You share the senses of the familiar
> Any item a familiar carries becomes invisible ("Hold my spear while I blast this goblin to bits!")
> A familiar that will help you with skill checks and they also has its own skill checks
> When you forego an attack, you can let your familiar attack and their attacks has status effects (poison, frighten, be unconscious etc.)
> Familiars that can shape shift (crawl, walk, fly, swim)
> Also why choose between a Sprite, Quasit, Imp or Pseudo dragon familiars when you can choose which familiar you like each time you summon your familiar?

> AND familiars that shares their MAGIC RESISTANCE with their master! (now I know why only a few of invocations are Pact of chain dependent - to keep the pacts a bit balanced)

Comparing regular familiars with the familiars granted by Pact of chain is like comparing a pet hamster to a K-9 trained police dog.

Only 1 person here liked pact of the tome. I find it weaker than the 2 others, since it gives extra cantrips, but no higher level spells. Fine, it gives a full feat for the price of an invocation later, but it is quite weak.

Pact of the Blade synergy is high for a multiclassed PC

Pact of the Chain: for the price of 1 invocation, you get a bunch of scrying spells (with an invisible familiar), like arcane eye, magic mouth , etc

* Pact of Chain:
No need to spend one invocation to let your familiar talk if your chosen familiar can already talk and rely your message. Unless you want to deliver/talk your message yourself.

* Pact of Tome:
Will give you additional cantrips for extra attack/utility spells. You can also vary your damage types with your wider selection of cantrips. Plus you get to access to all beneficial utility rituals (cant find any attack-based ritual).

* Pact of Blade:
I'm really not a fan of MAD builds (heavily feat and attribute points dependent - but at least you can really stand your ground in melee compared with Chain and Tome). I rather stick with what a warlock does best naturally but each to its own.

 

[Schmoe]

I think you're undervaluing the cantrips. The bonus cantrips can be from any caster's list but they use CHA as the casting stat. So you get the best cantrips in the game, using (presumably) your best stat. Since 5e cantips scale --ie, are meant to be useful throughout an entire campaign-- they're a good deal.

Yup. Cantrips aren't what they used to be; they're much better now. Pact of the Tome is the only one that grabbed my attention, precisely because of the cantrips. The rituals are a very nice bonus.

 

[Ashrym]

I can build blade pact that out damages eldritch blasts throughout the game as a weapon-user, but it is an excessive investment. I definitely prefer tome pact for cantrips and rituals. They can already do damage like the other 2 and draw on more at-will versatility.