D&D 5E Warlocks seem pointless

[Mephista]

Going blade pact with rapiers and dex 18 means you never get disadvantage on attack rolls in melee combat, dealing an average of 17 dmg at level 5 (two attacks), having a solid AC and probably more fun than standing in a corner firing eldritch blasts. Combined with feats like crossbow expert (or polearm master, if going the strg path) you even get one additional attack early. That increases the average dmg to 24,5.

You CANNOT go with crossbow expert. Pact of the blade specifies melee weapons - and crossbows are ranged. So, no Extra Attack, no extra +Cha damage.


As well, if you're using two handed weapons, you must keep in mind that spells, like Hex and Darkness, require you to mess around with material components, requiring a free hand. If you can prebuff before combat, then its not an issue. If you have to do it after or during combat? You're in trouble.

 

[PnPgamer]

You CANNOT go with crossbow expert. Pact of the blade specifies melee weapons - and crossbows are ranged. So, no Extra Attack, no extra +Cha damage.


As well, if you're using two handed weapons, you must keep in mind that spells, like Hex and Darkness, require you to mess around with material components, requiring a free hand. If you can prebuff before combat, then its not an issue. If you have to do it after or during combat? You're in trouble.

Plenty of dms allow holding the weapon in one hand, while casting with the other. Using a two handed weapon is different from just holding it. They weight 6 lbs (little less than 3kg), its not that hard.

The thing is what does it require to return the weapon back to combat wield...

 

[Mephista]

Plenty of dms allow holding the weapon in one hand, while casting with the other. Using a two handed weapon is different from just holding it. They weight 6 lbs (little less than 3kg), its not that hard.

The thing is what does it require to return the weapon back to combat wield...

Its not so much of holding the weapon with one hand and using the other to cast magic so much as letting go of weapon, pulling out the material components, casting the spell, then putting the material components away, then grabbing the weapon again. That's a lot of item interactions, and you're only supposed to get one a turn - that's where the problem comes into play.

I mean, if your GM is going to casually hand wave that away, cool. However, I'm still going to say that it might be problematic if you're trying to juggle all that cqasting a bonus-action spell that requries a material component.

 

[meomwt]

Unless you need specific components, you can use an arcane focus (say a wand) which is easier to grab, use and replace than a handful of oofle dust is.

Of course, if you have a staff as arcane focus and use a quarterstaff in melee, you don't even need to do that!

 

[Quabbe]

You CANNOT go with crossbow expert. Pact of the blade specifies melee weapons - and crossbows are ranged. So, no Extra Attack, no extra +Cha damage.

I didn't mention to make the handcrossbow the pact weapon. In the specific example I meant to go with the rapier as pact weapon, so you would get an additional attack with the handcrossbow on top. On the other hand, the pact allows you to make a magic weapon your pact weapon. It doesn't clearly state, it has to be magic and melee. It only says, you can create any melee weapon at will as your pact weapon. So it should be possible, to get a magic handcrossbow as your pact weapon aswell.

 

[Ahrimon]

Its not so much of holding the weapon with one hand and using the other to cast magic so much as letting go of weapon, pulling out the material components, casting the spell, then putting the material components away, then grabbing the weapon again. That's a lot of item interactions, and you're only supposed to get one a turn - that's where the problem comes into play.

I mean, if your GM is going to casually hand wave that away, cool. However, I'm still going to say that it might be problematic if you're trying to juggle all that cqasting a bonus-action spell that requries a material component.

You don't have to let go of the weapon though. They've said that you can pull out and use your material components with the same hand that you cast the spell. So whether you are holding a lantern in one hand or your greatsword you can cast the spell one handed. At most you have a second item interaction putting your hand back on your greatsword, but that's a little much for me personally.

 

[Nebulous]

warlocks are great for those people who want a caster but don' t want to have to manage all those spells. There is a very real niche for them

I don't think there's anything wrong with the class at all. What you said, it fills a niche. I'm glad they ported it from 4th edition.

 

[jimmyjimjam]

This is something that might depend on dm. In our games we are assumed to wear armor when out in the adventures.

Does your DM assume that your PCs wear armor to bed every night?

 

[charliebananas]

As for the material component question, it's a free action to draw and stow a weapon or vice versa.

 

[Joe Liker]

As for the material component question, it's a free action to draw and stow a weapon or vice versa.

It's free to do it once during your turn. You don't get to stow a weapon and draw a wand, for example, but you could drop the weapon (or take one hand off a two-handed weapon) and draw a wand.

And you certainly can't draw a wand, cast a spell, and stow the wand, so if you're using a two-handed weapon, you won't be able to make an opportunity attack (or commander's strike) in the same round that you cast a spell, unless you're willing to drop the wand.

In my game, life gets interesting for people who make a habit of dropping their stuff during combat.