D&D 5E Would you allow switching shield proficiency for Agonizing Blast as a DM?

[doctorbadwolf]

No, I wouldnt allow it.

But it's available for a feat (Eldritch disciple) so he can (and should) just take that if he wants it.

Terrible feat, IMO. An Invocation is only worth half a feat.

And for a melee character, AB isn’t that powerful.

 

[Flamestrike]

Terrible feat, IMO. An Invocation is only worth half a feat.

And for a melee character, AB isn’t that powerful.

You can always switch the invocation out as you advance in levels so that's a bonus.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You can always switch the invocation out as you advance in levels so that's a bonus.

True. I’d still add a cantrip or 1st level spell or soemthing. Hell, I’d allow a feat with a pact boon choice. Let warlocks get 2, and nonlocks really feel like they made a minor pact.

 

[Irlo]

The change is meant for flavor, not for powercreep.

I don't see how an extra bit of damage on the cantrip is flavorful.

I'd say no, for that reason and for those stated by other posters:

• The invocation can be had though other means.
• Giving up a shield proficiency for a character that has no intention of using a shield is hardly a down-side.

 

[Unwise]

I'd vote no on allowing that. Warlocks are already too front loaded for dipping purposes, we want to see less of that, not more.

I allow people with shield proficiency to use another item for parrying for +1AC. So an off-hand dagger not used to attack with can be used to parry instead. Same with a torch (which can of course break). I also allow people to use heavy cloaks draped over the arm for +1AC in a fencing style defense. That allows people to keep a hand free for casting. I really dislike having to worry about what is in your hands for casting, so this means not everybody feels they need warcaster to play how they picture and melee caster working. This also opens up a lot of flavour, for fencing types in particular.

 

[Ayeffkay]

A player wants to play a Hexblade 1 / Swords Bard 19.


Would you as a DM allow the player

<snip>

No.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I’d allow it. Honestly, I think the power level of AB is overrated in CharOp discussions. A bonus to AC is much bigger than a bonus to damage.

EB + AB is like 90% of a warlock's power. Slapping that on the bard, probably the best caster chassis in the game, is absolutely not overrated. You have a character that is good to great at everything. Social, exploration, damage, crowd control...

They never should have made EB a cantrip honestly. It should have remained a class feature.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

EB + AB is like 90% of a warlock's power. Slapping that on the bard, probably the best caster chassis in the game, is absolutely not overrated. You have a character that is good to great at everything. Social, exploration, damage, crowd control...

They never should have made EB a cantrip honestly. It should have remained a class feature.

If you want a warlock that is only "powerful" in terms of at-will damage, and even then only as good as a fighter with a heavy crossbow and no further class features, sure. You still need to add damage to all those attacks by spending a resource in order to surpass other at-will dpr classes. Doing good weapon damage plus ability modifier is...not especially impressive. You are basically 1 feat (crossbow expert) ahead of a ranged fighter. Cool. Compare DPR with a dex battlemaster with a longbow, and I bet the warlock loses, without requiring the fighter take a feat.

Meanwhile, our bard in the OP has fairly low AC as a non-dex primary light armor character with no shield, and idk even know where to begin addressing the idea that the bard is a strong full caster. Magical Secrets is good, sure, but it's still a known spells caster whose list is really only strong in control, which only "wins the game" in white rooms populated by spreadsheets. (don't get me wrong, I love a spreadsheet, but they don't give you all the necessary data to determine game balance)

It's a fun build, but it ain't breaking the game.

 

[Unwise]

They never should have made EB a cantrip honestly. It should have remained a class feature.

I made it a class feature. It means they don't need to spend a cantrip slot on it, and it scales off Warlock level, not total level. I give the 2nd melee attack for free for hexblades too.

I did not like the weak RP I was seeing in my games regarding people swearing themselves to entities, then forgetting about them for the rest of the campaign.

On a side note, we need an Arcane Archer warlock subclass, as effectively that is what they are. They are pretty much a bow fighter with 2 cool tricks per short rest. In a short lived game I played an elven archer who fired bolts of force from a magic bow, like in the old D&D cartoon (Eldtritch Blasts) and had a bunch of magic trick arrows (her spells). People assumed I was a fighter or ranger, until we hit higher level and I unleashed some pretty nasty spells.

 

[Flamestrike]

On a side note, we need an Arcane Archer warlock subclass, as effectively that is what they are. They are pretty much a bow fighter with 2 cool tricks per short rest.

This... already exists.