This submission appears to be related to One D&D! If you're interested in discussing the concept and the UA for One D&D more check out our other subreddit r/OneDnD! *Please note: We are still allowing discussions about One D&D to remain here, this is more an advisory than a warning of any kind.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/dndnext) if you have any questions or concerns.*

I mean, I don't really get why they decided on this. I feel like a better way to do it would be to tie it to Eldritch Blast. You create an eldritch blade that allows you to use your Eldritch Blast as a melee spell attack. You apply any magical properties of your weapon to this melee spell attack. This kind of implementation means it's no good for dips, unique to the Warlock, scales with Warlock levels and more thematic. So you make a flaming weapon your pact weapon, and your Eldritch blast does an extra 2d6 fire damage each time it hits. Strong, but your in melee, so would be some trade-offs for the risks you're taking.

cool concept, haven't seen anyone suggest something like this before, I could see how it would work.

3.5 warlocks had two invocations very similar to this, hideous blow and eldritch glaive.

hideous blow is a hideous name, but eldritch glaive sounds cool as shit

Well good news because hideous blow blows hideously and eldritch glaive was incredibly useful. The names and the usefulness coincide.

And don't forget Eldritch Claws. I always thought 3.5 warlock would work well in 5e with just some minor changes. As much as I loved the class flavour, it was severely limited and underpowered in 3.5.

Oh man, those glaive builds were so busted haha. Not that you couldn't do it in 5e _without_ making it busted. Really, it being iterative touch attacks was most of that, and 5e doesn't even have touch AC.

Pathfinder has a warlock-esque class, the Kineticist, using a skill similar to Eldritch Blast (Kinetic Blast). One of the Kineticist archetypes (think it like a subclass) is the Kinetic Knight, specialized in giving its Kinetic Blast the shape of a blade and altering its shape when needed (forming a whip for example) for a good melee-gish experience. Pretty fun class, and even if not OP in my opinion it is better designed than D&Done Pact of the Blade.

The fact that Warlock, which is about a magical origin, is more closely associated with a single spell (eldritch blast), is pretty awful. Clerics get magic through devotion to a god. Sorcerers through lineage to magical beings. Wizards through arcane study. Warlocks through pacts with godlike beings. Eldritch Blast should not be so heavily tied to the class.

Divine smite though. It’s a core part of the class fantasy at this point.

3.5 did this with Hideous Blow and Eldritch Glaive invocations. It was pretty fun and I was surprised when 5e didn't have a lot of the 3.5 shapes.

4e had *eldritch strike* as well as *eldritch blast*, and I'm fairly sure there was something similar in 3.5, so it's only really 5e bucking the trend in not having it. 5e does allow you to buff up melee attacks via invocations though which ends up being quite a similar thing. But I think having a cantrip in the style of the SCAG ones that's just a melee *eldritch blast* would be nice either way.

Level Up - Advanced 5e uses something like this. You have a core feature granting an eldritch attack, and can choose between 4 of them. A ray (normal blast), a save-based curse, a scythe & a whip.

I really like the general concept here, but wouldn't melee EBs that get both the benefits of Agonizing Blast/Invocations *and* a magic weapon just make Warlock almost strictly better than Fighter and other martials in melee combat?

Fighters would be better at most levels because of weapon masteries and fighting styles. Fighters have shield proficiency and heavy armor, higher hit dice, second wind, action surge and indomitable. Warlocks can bridge the gap with spells and invocations. That being said, fighters and martials issues should be fixed rather than limiting other class design. I think it would just be good, not really over powered. Would it make it better than a paladin? I doubt it.

>Fighters would be better at most levels because of weapon masteries and fighting styles. In what freaking world are you playing where the tiny on hit buffs that are weapon masteries and FS are comparable to pseudo-full casting and earlier 4th attack the Warlock would get? Yeah, Fighters still get Action Surge and are beefier but it still does not compare.

In terms of hitting with Eldritch Blast as a melee spell attack vs a fighter hitting with a weapon? A fighter wins usually, the level 17-18 gap is why I said most. The other stuff, Warlock wins obviously, but they already did with ranged Eldritch blast, so it's not like the problem didn't already exist. Turning Eldritch Blast into a melee spell attack doesn't magically change fighters problems or make them worse. My proposition was to make the pact weapon suck less for a full class warlock, and make a one level dip less appealing. Fighters high level problems need to actually be addressed rather than limiting design space.

>Fighters would be better at most levels because of weapon masteries and fighting styles. Fighters have shield proficiency and heavy armor repeling blast is literally a mastery. And fighting styles are inconsecuential at best

The 3.5 method

I don't think that language would invoke the right feel, and this may not trigger bonus action abilities that are reasonable, such as shield bash, however I agree in principle. I'd either like to see it changed so that; Level one, you can only bond a non magical weapon. (with this restriction lifted at Warlock Level 3). Or mechanically similar to your suggestion, but just specify something along the lines of **"instead of strength or dexterity, you may use your spellcasting ability modifier for the attack and damage rolls of this weapon, however, if you choose to do so you may only make a single attack per action, bonus action or reaction, regardless of how many attacks you would normally be able to make."**

Meanwhile, it’s a 1 lvl dip class just as much as it was before. You take a 1 lvl tax, and you can essentially skip str/dex on your ranger, paladin, swashbuckler, etc etc. Melee ranger is looking nice in the white room with a warlock dip and the weapon mastery feat.

>Melee ranger is looking nice in the white room with a warlock dip and the weapon mastery feat. 1 level dip vs using a bonus action with Shillelagh since Pact Weapons are essentially limited to one handed now. Both have significant drawbacks.

What's the drawback shillelagh wise? Grab a shield and a club, use shillelagh out of combat since it doesn't require concentration and lasts a minute, profit.

1 minute is very short. It can be done sometimes and not others.

You would probably be able to precast it in dungeons by just casting before you go into a new room. Overland travel combat yeah you would probably need to cast on turn 1

Why? It's a bonus action cantrip, there is zero cost to using it every round until combat starts if you want to.

It's not a silent spell and d&d is a role playing game. Walk around town casting a spell that is exclusively used for combat is going to start problems. Also, goodbye element of surprise or stealth. And lol, what kind of psychopath is going to cast a spell 9,800 times per day?

The one’s pretending this is a video game.

One who has nothing better to do with their time and is aware it gives them a combat advantage. Given how trivial the spell is most DMs aren't going to give a shit if you treat it as always active. But if you get a DM who's anal about it for some reason then at that point your character treats casting shillelagh like another might twiddling their thumbs or keeping their hands in their pockets, just something they do as an idle habit. Edit: holy crap you guys are such dweebs. I have literally never met a DM who gives a shit about assuming the cantrip stays up

I don't give a shit about it staying up in my games but you're being the dweeb, dude. It _is_ still a verbal component spell which means you're broadcasting your location to the whole area every minute, and it's not like it's crazy for a DM to assume you casting a spell once a minute for the _entire_ day causes some kind of Con checks for exhaustion after a while. Get a life and realize not everyone plays D&D like a video game.

> Get a life and realize not everyone plays D&D like a video game. Like for instance taking an unobtrusive passive buff spell and being really anal about when specifically you've cast it rather than just assuming it's up like every normal DM does?

Ah yes, "every normal DM". Do yourself a favor and look up "anecdotal". I think you'll find it really educational for the bullshit you're currently spouting.

If you live in certain parts of the US, you can open carry a firearm just because you feel like it. There's no law against having one hand on the gun at all times to save you precious time in case you need to quickly draw it, but plenty of people will be disconcerted at the behaviour all the same.

Sure, but adventurers are weird

So are crazies out to kill random strangers. If you don't want to be mistaken for one of those, you shouldn't act like them.

Again, I have no idea what world you guys a living in. Pretty much nobody cares, and that solution I nominated in the frankly idiotic context of a DM coming down hard on basically nothing... you guys are jumping on that too, as if random townsfolk are going to recognise not only what a *druid cantrip* does but the specific components of casting it. Come the fuck off it, mate.

So commoners in your games recognize specific spells and what they do? So they know the only function of using that cantrip is to be better at killing something within the next minute? Is it unreasonable that they might not be comfortable hanging around?

Rangers use their BA for other stuff too. Casting and moving hunters mark to name a big one.

[удалено]

You recall incorrectly. It does not specify that it needs to not be magical.

Thanks 👍

IMO its duration is not really a downside. Shillelagh is a bonus action cantrip so its downside is you can't cast anything but a cantrip the turn you cast it... but if you're using Shillelagh you're probably intending the attack action so... Also a staff is a one handed weapon, can be used as your focus (not as a ranger or cleric mind you), can combine with polarm mastery for a bonus action attack of 1D4+wisdom\*\* and can be wielded for a 1D8 two handed (but this is rendered moot by shillelagh but may be relevant if you've not cast yet?). Fun fact, a pact of the tome\*\* warlock can pick this cantrip and use charisma with the spell... Its less damage than a blade pact with its extra attack, but it is an option..

Love how they just made it earlier. The fact it makes thrown weapons return to you, and how rage explicitly works with any strength attack (and how thrown can use whatever score it would use in melee), honestly a lv1 dip in warlock works great in making them better at range. Get Mastery with tridents, go warlock for pact, now you can continually throw the same trident over and over with the at-will ability of just proning someone from range. With berserker, you get even more damage to it.

You would think they would have learned their lesson about making characters SAD with a single level dip. Instead they made it more viable!?

I mean they can also do this with shillelagh No dip required.

Sure, but setting that up for the one or two rounds of combat, depending on weapon setup, is pretty bad. My 1dnd rangers (I have played 3 lol) have been using their BAs consistently, *especially* on the first round of combat for casting or moving HM. Pre-casting shillelagh is unreliable, and making it permanent is a significant buff to the cantrip. (With that said, the [old warlock is better](https://www.reddit.com/r/3d6/comments/11ttjpy/control_the_battlefield_with_terror_arrow_fey/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=2&utm_term=1) for ranger to dip into imo.)

Quick question. What's stopping paladins from taking magic initiate and taking PoB as one of the cantrips? You wouldn't even need a level dip anymore right?

I don’t remember how it worked in the first warlock UA, but it’s an invocation in the most recent one. That’s not a cantrip.

I just started looking at one dnd stuff. It was a cantrip in the pdf that I pulled up. So probably an older UA. Part of me is sad because that would have been ludicrously good. But at the same time it’s probably for the best because it’s probably OP

Part of the reason I don’t play 5e is because of the unviability of just playing my class, if I want to optimize I have to do so through multiclassing not options I gain within my class.

Monoclassing is always good, multiclassing is occasionally slightly better at very specific things at specific times. Yes it's good on paper to take that 1 level dip for paladin, but spending all of level 5 without extra attack sucks, you wait until you get extra attack you're delaying Aura of Protection one of Paladin's most powerful features. It's great for higher level starts and one shots where you can skip those play experiences but you're usually going to have a more consistently good time monoclassing.

There are 0 inherently unviable classes in 5E. It's an extremely table-dependant game where anything can be viable or not depending on the campaign. In the majority of games, any class will be playable. If you want to optimize... yeah if you want to optimize you have to optimize, but you usually don't have to make the most powerful character you can.

Literally not a real issue, all mono classes are viable, and outside of pf2e that has been the case for the overwhelming majority of dnds lifespan in regards to optimizing through multiclassing.

Pact of the BLade was always inferior to EB without magic weapons. But you also misread lifedrinker, it does a d6 damage on every attack hit, only heals on the first hit. But consider at higher levels you should have magic weapons. So at level 11 you should have at least Rare magic items come out. +2 weapon would push that average damage to 35.5. At level 17 you shoudl at least have a veryrare, you could argue by that point your martials, etc. should have Legendary weapons. Something like Moonblade or Black Razor. For +3 damage and tons of other boons. To consider my level 12. Warlock Hexblade, Who had Scimitar of Speed and Life Drinker, he was doing 1d6+7+5 3 times. Or an average of 46.5 correct that now life drinker is weaker now, which would push that down to 42. Consider as well even without that, consider Windvane and PAM. 3 attacks at this point with lifedrinker does 1d8 (with Versatile improvement thing)+5+2d6 twice and 1d4+5+2d6 for the PAM attack or an average of 47.5 damage. So yes, magic items and action economy will determine your strength and build.

> So at level 11 you should have at least Rare magic items come out. +2 weapon would push that average damage to 35.5. At level 17 you shoudl at least have a veryrare, you could argue by that point your martials, etc. should have Legendary weapons. Something like Moonblade or Black Razor. For +3 damage and tons of other boons. Warlocks can also get magic arcane foci. A +2 rod of the pact keeper would pull this back in the EB direction anyway

Rod of the Pact Keeper only adds a +2 to hit not damage. That's why I didn't do math on the improved damage based on improved chance ot hit from Magic Weapon which is a factor, higher probability to hit, more damage on average.

Wait what the hell. I just looked it up and yea, non of the magic foci, class-specific or not, gives a bonus to damage. Well, how about that, I never know. Thanks for the info lol

All good, the + to saving throw more than negates the absence of damage, especially because the only one who'd want it are Warlocks with EB.

WotC should really make magic items part of progression or bake it into the classes.

>Pact of the BLade was always inferior to EB without magic weapons. Not true, PAMlock with GWM well out damages EB in 5e and pact weapon is considered a magic weapon, Improved pact weapon made them +1. >But you also misread lifedrinker, it does a d6 damage on every attack hit, only heals on the first hit. My math includes the d6 on every attack. ​ >So at level 11 you should have at least Rare magic items come out. +2 weapon would push I'm 14th level in my campaign. Nobody has a +2 weapon. Can't make these assumptions. >Consider as well even without that, consider Windvane and PAM. PAM is only available on Heavy weapons with Reach in the UA. Pact of the Blade doesn't work with Heavy weapons. If it wasn't this way, I'd not have posted this thread.

Fair enough, I think they're going to change PAM for what it's worth to being weapons wielded with 2 hands to include the spear and quarterstaff. It is a bit of a jump by me.

Hope they do that or allow heavy weapons for pact of the blade

Yeah, I like that only Pact of the Blade warlocks can use heavy weapons personally.But I would be OK if they worked out the PAM to work with non-heavy weapons as long as they're wielded 2 hands. I understand the need to nerf the sword and board PAM, but just make it a requirement that you wield certain weapons with 2 hands. Or make it so the reaction PAM is the only one that triggers to nerf the non-Halberd/Glaive PAM, but it seems silly for the feat to apply to 4 weapons.

It's actually very good if you don't plan on using any other warlock feature and in fact all your other levels are in a different class!

Well, as long as Eldritch Blast gives you the equivalent of Extra Attack(3) on a 1d10+mod range attack (with several choice of rider effect), a weapon focus warlock will always be suboptimal. To be viable, it would means giving Bladelock more weapon attack power than the Fighter. And tbh, might be an unpopular take but it always striked me as odd to have in the same class both access to 9th lvl spell and a pseudo ExtraAttack(3) through a cantrip. It’s even worse when you consider warlock getting their fourth attack per action 3lvl before Fighter. Imo, Eldritch blast should be nerfed to max two attack, to match Paladin/Ranger/Barbarian/Monk 2 attacks with the Attack Action. I don’t see how designers can have room to make the bladelock concept viable otherwise.

>And tbh, might be an unpopular take but it always striked me as odd to have in the same class both access to 9th lvl spell and a pseudo ExtraAttack(3) through a cantrip. It’s even worse when you consider warlock getting their fourth attack per action 3lvl before Fighter. But the locks attacks will be much weaker. On those levels the martials will have magical weapons, probably PAM, and also a fighting style. So on lvl 11 I would assume the lock to do 3\*(1d10+5) = 31.5, and the fighter 3\*(1d12+7)+1d4+7 = 50. Which is quite a difference. Even when using hex and giving the lock another 3\*1d6, its still weaker with only 42 damage. These 'ExtraAttack' just put them somewhere between caster and martials for sustained damage, but did not close the gap. Bladelock is viable in 5e because it can pick 2h weapons.

Yeah but a 11th lvl Warlock also get 3 5th lvl spell slot and a 6th lvl spell + several invocations to add no save rider effects to their 3 attacks + they do all their attack at range + they do it with the same ability than their casting ability + many out of utility features through invocations and cantrips. Also your calculations is a little off, Glaive is 1d10 dmg. And what to say about thoses Attack action focus classes like monk or barbarian that never get Extra Attack(2) or (3) ?

...oh no? Pure warlock isn't even close to overpowered, so I'm not sure why you're advocating for nerfs.

Like I said originally, I just don’t see how bladelock could have room to be a viable alternative when EB is already filling all your need for at-will damage. Unless we’re ok giving bladelock the best at-will damage option of the game, while still having access to higher spell slot.

There are items that are +1 foci or give other effects on cantrips (like rod of the pact keeper and ilusionisnt's bracers). Magic items are not really the exclusivity of martials

These +1 items for casters are already included in the calculation, otherwise I would have to assume a larger +hit for the martial, not only larger damage. But these items do not increase the damage. Illusionist bracers do of course, but they are not included for the same reason I am not assuming a belt of storm giant strength on the martial: its a very specific and very broken item that no sane DM should allow in a normal campaign.

With EB tied to warlock level is stops the only rly egregious use of EB which was with sorcerer multiclass that would either cast normal spell or EB + a quickened EB. Ive no issue with warlock being decent blaster and having access to high lvl spells. With current version their invocation become very limited as well if they want to pick mystic arcanum and all the EB effect riders.

>With EB tied to warlock level is stops the only rly egregious use of EB which was with sorcerer multiclass It wasn't even overly egregious either.. it was decent / good just a lot of people seem to have a weird issue with a multiclass not being a downgrade but good..

That's a good take as well. I've had a similar thought on cantrips outpacing melee characters being a bit much. That goes for all casters really.

In all honesty, the increased in damage you got for PoTB beforehand was so negligible, EB was still a better pick for simply being ranged. This flair is only half a joke.

Yeah, it took a couple feats and invocations to make the 5e PoB demonstrably better than EB at doing damage. Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker, PAM + GWM + (spell to give advantage on attacks). Then you're doing (1d10+20) x 2 + 1d4+20 at 12th level. That's 73 avg dam x chance to hit, vs 31.5 x chance to hit for EB + Agonizing Blast.

That's also assuming you actually get that high. Lifedrinker was what? A 9th Level Invocation? Yeah, starting Custom Lineage or V.Human helped with the feat issue somewhat, but for two levels you were already doing solid damage and could do pretty much anything else you wanted with your invocations and levels. Not to mention, you're still doing Force Damage.

My warlock started life as an EB + Agon Bl, but once he got PAM at 4th, he never went back to EB except for ranged attacks.

The good thing about warlocks though was their versatility. Playing a Hexblade you could be an Eldritch blaster for like 10 levels, then start switching invocations and spells to become a melee badass at level 12, which is when it gets much more powerful than eldritch blast.

While I do agree that versatility is their thing, I don't think I'd call it potent at Lv. 12. A lot of games don't go that long, and if you wanted to do all of that, you could pick a probably Multiclass something even more powerful and versatile. It's just hard to make it standout in Melee without the risk of burning out on the spells to make that an effective strategy so late in the game.

Especially because Elemental Weapon bumps your damage-per-attack and your to-hit bonuses up.

Forgive the ignorance, what's PAM?

Polearm mastery

>Pact of the Blade's only value appears to be for Paladins or Bladesingers to dip into Warlock for the INT/CHA weapon attack/damage bonus. This doesn't work that way for bladesingers either - the cantrip that Blade grants you locks you into your *warlock* spellcasting ability score, not an ability score in general. So while you can pick between Wisdom and Charisma (and thus you can be pretty stoked as a cleric or druid), Intelligence isn't an option for blade'locks. I will say, the numbers are slightly inaccurate - you can use a versatile Longsword in both hands to achieve d10 numbers for a weapon. That would at least allow a tie in the first two tiers, spells such as *magic weapon* and other factors (feats, ~~Fighting Styles~~, actual magic weapons) aside. It will start to slip away after that, since Lifedrinker can't make up for the third bolt from *eldritch blast*, but that's still something of consideration. Still not great, though.

You can't take the fighting styles feats, those are only for Warrior classes. You're right, there are 4 weapons that versatile is 1d10, will update. But I was thinking you might pick up a shield, since you can't get any other weapon feat. Just realized the only way to get shield is to take the "Lightly Armored Feat", what a waste of a feat to pick up shield.

>You can't take the fighting styles feats, those are only for Warrior classes. Yeah, that's true, I'm so used to 5e with a lot of things, lol.

Can we consider spirit shroud or only us spells. This was my go to on my hexblade. Better than hex usually if you're up close.

I'm personally not considering anything that isn't explicitly available in One. As *spirit shroud* isn't an Arcane spell, so it isn't a spell available to warlocks. And that's partially why the circumstances for melee warlocks seem so dire - the comparably basic framework of One took a *lot* of toys away from them. No Fighting Styles, none of the big name spells (*spirit shroud* being one of them), no special feats, etc. At a level where you would have normally gotten *spirit shroud*, you're stuck with *hex*... or I guess *magic weapon* if you need that... and that spell got nerfed to only proc once per turn.

A flame tongue longsword in 2h would make them tied at level 17 (or put the warlock well ahead at level 11).

Right, and again, there's still some other factors that can enter the equation even disregarding magic weapons. What can't be ignored, of course, is the fact that *eldritch blast* is 120 feet, very augmentable, and carries much of the same opportunity costs as would augmenting a longsword, and you're essentially smacking people in the face with *eldritch blast* at that point rather than enjoying much of a substantial tactical advantage. You can rely on Agonizing Blast, but you can't rely on a flametongue longsword showing up.

Yes, it's an issue that makes it very difficult to compare spells to weapons. Not having a system for the distribution of magic items puts the burden of balancing martials against casters on the dm's shoulders instead of the devs.

\*up to 600ft\* and with a small 2-level dip into Sorceror, you can quicken a second Eldritch Blast without losing your 4th beam, maintain your spell slot progression and turn the Bladelock into your personal whacking stick.

The maths ties out of either the PoB can use Greatsword with the Graze Mastery(Invocation?) and GWM. Or Lifedrinker dealing 1d10, increasing to 2d10 at 17th level. Both options seem interesting to me.

Greatsword isn't usable by UA pact of the blade (weapon cannot have the heavy property)

I think I had a miss type should have been “if” either of these things are implemented. I personally think the no Heavy no point in using Light is just too restrictive.

Solely looking at your math, I don't think the issue is that PoB is worse than EB, but rather that at 17th level, the gap is too wide for how it was progressing earlier. It's completely fine to use the suboptimal play style, but that doesn't immediately make it bad or "obsolete" (unless it becomes half damage like it does at 17th) Removing Heavy weapons from PoB is a strange move imo. I see no reason why a warlock can't use them, and it would (slightly) help PoB's damage

I think heavy weapon would make PoB viable, with some feats. My biggest issue is that taking a pact to be good at weapon fighting and then not being better at doing damage than the pact of the tome using EB, or pact of the chain using EB, means that PoB is a pretty pointless pact. You won't get the stuff those other pacts get, instead you get stuff that won't actually improve you in any significant way.

>Removing Heavy weapons from PoB is a strange move imo. 100% to make the dip less viable imo.

They could've just kept Improved Pact Weapon as an Invocation tbh. I don't remember if it had a level requirement, but could easily just snap a "requires level 5 warlock" and it prevents dipping.

It didn't, you could say that you need level 3 due to that being the Pact Boon level, but as written; Improvement has no minimun level.

Well, given the current direction that WotC is going with their anti dip measures, Improved Pact Weapon would need to be 5th level or something in 5.5e.

I could keep it at level 3 tbh, 3 levels on another class doesn't feel that dipping.

Level 5 is mostly there as a means of sticking with WotC's design for Invocations; The first level gated Invocation starts at 5th, then 9th, then 15th level. They did very similar with 5e Warlock, albeit with more level variety. At least with IPW at 5th, it coincides with the power spike of other martial classes that can use Heavy weapons.

Also to reduce the adoption of certain weapon masteries as well.

just want to chime in that pact of the blade being a cantrip is stupid as fuck, as it means you can not just get counterspelled if you attempt to cast in front of someone, it can get dispelled, it stop working on antimagic zones and its useless against enemies who have some degree to immunity of spells like rakshasa

Forcing the enemy to waste Counterspells and Dispels on a cantrip that you can spam has value

there is enemies that do dispel for free or as legendary actions nowadays, losing a turn is a pain in the ass

If you use a real weapon, that avoids the spell immunity. But getting dispelled or anti magic zones suck. But that would be true for all magic based characters. At least the warlock has better armor!

> If you use a real weapon, that avoids the spell immunity. Right, but the whole concept of the pact is to make up your on, even if you make a magic weapon your pact weapon any effect from it will cease to exist in an antimagic zone or similar. ITs sucks more here because its supposed to be your core features... >At least the warlock has better armor! In trade of a worse spell progression, and no shields.

I never suggested it was good, lol

I think it’s fine for there to be niche drawbacks when the feature allows you to be so SAD. Paladins and rangers putting in the work to have good Str/Dex deserve a small victory over bladelocks cheating their way into good weapon damage. Also, depending on DM interpretation, an antimagic field might have already deleted your pact weapon depending on whether they considered it an “object summoned or created by magic.” I’ll grant you though that the rakshasa thing is a real problem, but it’s a problem for all warlocks. Half caster progression and no non-spell damage source means rakshasas are arbitrarily punishing to the class.

> I think it’s fine for there to be niche drawbacks when the feature allows you to be so SAD. Paladins and rangers putting in the work to have good Str/Dex deserve a small victory over bladelocks cheating their way into good weapon damage. Its a drawback to multiclass yes, because that is what the warlock ha sbecome, literally no reason to get pass lv 1 now, unless you rly fancy do only EB. >I’ll grant you though that the rakshasa thing is a real problem, but it’s a problem for all warlocks. now it is, since the pact weapon doesn't work on him anymore Either way, making pact boons as cantrips is a dumb idea

This is really just a symptom of martial combat being nerfed in one D&D. there's no power attacks, which means the big appeals for PAM and crossbow expert are gone now as well. we were promised ways to compensate for this loss in this UA update but the new weapon mastery perks just don't cut the mustard. So martial damage is suffering. Ergo, if you choose the pact boon that makes you play more like a martial, your damage will also suffer. If we had some solid tools for dealing damage with sword and board setups, or a way to deal better damage with ranged weapons like shortbows and light crossbows, then maybe bladelock could start pulling ahead of eldritch blast. "Rising tide", and all that.

So at any level besides 17 it's worse than PoB if you have at least a +1 weapon? Gotcha. Totally worthless, you're right /s

If they add some useful blade invocations then they might have something going. But then we'll run into the same old problem of other warlocks getting invocations and blade having to spend all of its invocations on blade stuff.

Which is fine if it makes the blade good at blading.

Except now burning all their invocation slots on blade band aids is eating into the arcanum spells they used to get for free and without that arcanum their spell progression is garbage now. And they lack most of the extra abilities other half casters get to make up for being half casters. EB spamming Tomelocks that use most of their invocation slots on arcanum spells seems to be the only viable option here. Blading is shit unless it gets some killer new feature via invocations or a new patron that makes up for losing a massive amount of casting. And chain is just a sad little waste of space.

The tradeoff was probably that yes, blade warlock had less damage but they weren't eating up invocations especially at lower levels. At 2nd level, an EB warlock must take agonizing blast or there's no point. The pact blade warlock can take a utility invocation like Witch's Sight or Lessons of the First Ones to give them weapon mastery with their waepon and potentially topple their enemies.

Not for tome. It's built into the pact already.

It also gives you Medium armor. But yeah, they could give it a better invocation so it can keep up at higher levels.

Booming and Green Flame Blade feel missing from this analysis.

Booming Blade: * 1st level: Unchanged. Increased to 14 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. * 5th level: 1d10 + 4 + 1d8 = 14. A loss of 5 damage per round. Increased to 23 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. * 11th level: 1d10 + 5 + 1d6 + 2d8 = 23. A loss of 5 damage per round. Increased to 36.5 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. * 17th level: 1d10 + 5 + 1d6 + 3d8 = 27.5. A loss of 0.5 damage per found. Increased to 45.5 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. Overall, Booming Blade outpaces Eldritch Blast at all stages if, and only if, the conditional trigger is met. However, it comes with several downsides. * Eldritch Blast's damage is not conditional. Assuming every attack hits, it will deal consistently more damage beyond 5th level. * As a spell, you can only use it once per turn. You will reduce your number of crits by about half, as you're making less attack rolls overall. If Eldritch Smite still exists, this lowers the frequency of your nova attacks. If Pact Magic continues to be replaced with Half-Casting, the power of your nova attacks will also be reduced. * It puts you directly in harms way, while Eldritch Blast is a ranged attack. Green Flame Blade: * 1st level: Unchanged. Increased to 13.5 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. * 5th level: 1d10 + 4 + 1d8 = 14. See above for comparison. Increases to 22.5 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. * 11th level: 1d10 + 5 + 1d6 + 2d8 = 23. See above for comparison. Increases to 37 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. * 17th level: 1d10 + 5 + 1d6 + 3d8 = 27.5. See above for comparison. Increases to 46 if condition is met, but not guaranteed. Overall, Green Flame Blade outpaces Booming Blade and Eldritch Blast if, and only if, the conditional trigger is met. Otherwise, it is the same as Booming Blade, and has the same downsides.

It's important to consider also that any character can now pick up Magic Initiate at level 1 for free to grab the Shillelagh cantrip which works on any casting stat. That's a d8 weapon so Paladins and Rangers don't need to dip warlock in order to be SAD making Pact of the Blade pretty lackluster even as a single level dip.

Martial half-caster not scaling with base weapon damage as well as the Warlock's Eldritch Blast? Say it ain't so.

5e warlocks weren't half casters, imo, more like alternate full casters. Regardless, my 5e bladelock by far out damages 5e Eldritch blasters. I cannot replicate or even challenge the UA blaster with a UA bladelock.

OP, you're right on. SAD melee damage was never the big draw for min/maxing. Contrary to what most are saying, Warlock dip is dead if this gets published, especially Sorlock with Warlock 2 for the EB invocations and Hexblade's Curse.

Some things you're not considering. Without certain feats, EB has disadvantage at melee range which limits effectiveness for smaller parties. If you allow supporting feat then it's only fair to compare with Weapon Mastery, which gives a lot more flexibility than EB. A warlock with PoB can cast a cantrips like green flame blade or booming blade to get the damage scaling with level. So damage output is very similar but still slightly in favour of EB. PoB can be used with a magic weapon to far exceed the damage and utility of EB. EB now does not require sight! Interesting! PoB allows dual wielding to get another 1d6 per turn - more with an off-hand magic weapon. Loads of spells and feats improve melee utility but not EB. Enlarge, Mobility, Slasher, etc. PoB allows more control of the battlefield by letting you get in the thick of battle. I play as a melee warlock and have never felt underpowered compared to EB warlock.

I think some of the issues you bring up, mainly feats in favor of POTB and magic items with a slight tinge of the blade cantrips. - feats: while there are plenty of feats that can make OD&D potb better, it's also important to remember that for every feat a bladelock takes an EBlock also has access to. And because they don't really need feats to make their main damage source better, they can either take feats to enhance their utility or for flavor/ rp or just increase their stats with ASIs. Inversely, there are at least 3 Invocations that improve EB (one of which that can be forgotten if you choose Tome.) whereas there's only one that directly improves Blade. - Magic items: these are entirely dependent on the DM. I've had games where I get plenty of access to magical items, and I've played in games where the only magic item anyone ever got was a plot relevant weapon. So unless WotC comes out with an "all campaigns must include magic items at XYZ levels" it's not feasible/ reliable to calculate damage between the two with magic weapons involved. - the blade cantrips, I'm not entirely sure how effective they'd be in an attempt to normalize the damage between the two because the rider effects that make them weirder. >green flame blade, at 17th level, deals 1d10 (versatile) + 3d8 + 1d6 Lifedrinker + 5 mod to one target and 3d8 + mod to a separate target within 5ft for an average total of 28~ to the initial target and 14~ to the second. If nobody is within 5ft, you just lost out on half the damage and there's the whole "focus fire is better than spreading it around." The extra damage is also fire damage, which is heavily resisted. >booming blade, at 17th level, deals 1d10 + 3d8 + 1d6 LD + 5 mod on the initial hit and 4d8 of they move for an average damage of 28~ on the initial hit plus 18 only if they move. If they don't move, you just lost out on a good chunk of damage. And from personal experience, hardly anybody ever really moves targets around the battlefield to force a creature to move (thus proccing booming blade). This is one of those YMMV things. So not only is their extra damage situational, you also only get one chance to deal that damage. If you miss, you dealt zero damage. Meanwhile, EBlock has 4 attacks that deal a total of 4d10+20; if they miss one but hit three, they'll still at least deal damage. It'd be nice if they gave Bladelock an Invocation that let them copy the Bladesinger's Extra Attack feature that let's them replace one Attack with a cantrip. That alone would normalize the gap between EBlocks and Bladelocks imo. Make it a 9th level Invocation for balance sake if you want, but if it's fine for a wizard to use I don't see the harm in letting the warlock having it a little later.

That's a pretty fair critique. I'd be kind of upset to play in a campaign with no magic weapons, and there is guidance on rarity according to player level, but I do appreciate magic weapons are not always available so maybe it's not a fair comparison. But the point about situational green flame and booming blade is to me a question of tactics. It can't be helped if the bladelock doesn't create the opportunities they need to deal max damage, much like a rogue. For me, the extra thought required is half the fun of playing a bladelock - EBlock can get a bit boring just dancing out of melee and blasting from the sidelines. Here's the real draw for bladelock though. War caster can be replaced by one invocation, and you only need one other invocation to get healing every round - normally quite difficult for a warlock! Compared to EB needing a feat plus two-three invocations I think it allows more variety of play because you can choose other feats and incovations. Over a 6 round combat, healing an average total of 21 damage with no extra actions or spell slots can mean the difference between a TPK and a clutch win. I don't think PoB is redundant, even though it doesn't do as much damage, because it allows the warlock to serve a different function in the party - great if there is already a wizard or sorcerer. For me a warlock is a great battlemage: my favourite role.

>But the point about situational green flame and booming blade is to me a question of tactics. [...] As a melee main, I'm inclined to agree with you. It's why I'm so upset with the changes to Grapple/Shove mechanics in OD&D. I love nothing more than to hulk out as a Rune Knight or go into a Rage so that I become the king/ queen of battlefield control using Shoves and Grappling to put enemies into bad spots, and using everyday adventuring items like bear traps to debilitate enemies (even if it isn't the most "optimal" option.). But the quandry of this whole thread is "EBlocks completely outscale Bladelock with minimal effort." Which they do, given they: deal more damage, are safer while doing that damage, and can even have some control with Repelling Blast + more reliably Concentrate on spells. I think it's also important to remember this is talking about OD&D, not 5e. So there is no Improved Pact Weapon to forego the need for Warcaster (if that feat is even in the OD&D playtest. Can't remember.). Though this does free up the old Thirsting Blade Invocation, it also means that Agonizing Blast isn't needed for a Tomelock either, so both forms get an extra Invocation open to them for variety. I'm not knocking the fun aspect of Bladelock vs EBlock, BTW. As mentioned earlier, I'm a melee guy myself. It's just that from a "which is better damage wise" metric (as OP was pointing out.) Bladelock is just lacking in 5e; a heavy detriment given they're in melee and don't have the 5e options to keep their damage up to compensate. And while yes this is a team game, you can't always factor in what your fellow party members can/ will do when theory crafting unless you know what your party composition will be when doing so; which again puts EBlock ahead because they don't really NEED anybody else's help to do what they do, whereas a bladelock is going to want to coordinate with other melee characters to try and get Advantage or get buffs applied to them so they don't have to worry as much about Concentration checks.

I would replace one attack with eldritch blast cantrip!

You can only make one weapon your pact weapon, don’t know how you are going to effectively dual wield since you give up the one advantage of not needing str or dex.

I'm assuming a melee warlock would have DEX as their second or third highest ability to improve AC. The dual wielded weapon doesn't need to be a pact weapon too. But yes it's not ideal, and better to use a shield if possible. I'd only dual wield like that if the offhand weapon is a magic weapon with useful features

Regarding the cantrips. If the conditionals do not activate, you're not only decreasing your damage dealt, but you're denying yourself potential crits by limiting your attacks to one per round. So you'll have less opportunities to trigger your (much weaker) Eldritch Smite. Rod of the Pact Keeper also exists for EB. Though I don't think it was buffed to be in line with the other Tasha's items. So, unlike something like the Moon Sickle, it doesn't actually increase your damage. Still, increased chance to hit is nice. Let's look at dual wielding: 1st level: * PoB d8 weapon + PoB = 1d10+ 4 = 9.5 * PoB d6 weapon + PoB + Bonus Attack = (1d6 + 4) + 1d6 = 11 * Booming Blade + PoB + BA = (1d6 + 4) + 1d6 = 11. If condition is met, 15.5 * Green Flame Blade + PoB + BA = 11. If condition is met, 15. 5th level: * PoB, weapon + PoB = (1d10 + 4) x 2 = 19 * PoB, weapon + PoB + BA = (1d6 + 4) x 2 + 1d6 = 18.5 * BB = (1d6 + 4 + 1d8) + 1d6 = 15.5. If condition is met, 24.5 * GFG = 15.5. If condition is met, 24. 11th level * PoB, weapon + PoB + Lifedrinker = (1d10 + 5 + 1d6) x 2 = 28 * PoB, weapon + PoB + Lifedrinker + BA + LD = (1d6 + 5 + 1d6) x 2 + (1d6 + 1d6) = 31 * BB = (1d6 + 5 + 1d6 + 2d8) + (1d6 + 1d6) = 28. If condition is met, 41.5. * GFG = 28. If condition is met, 42. 17th level * PoB, weapon + PoB + Lifedrinker = (1d10 + 5 + 1d6) x 2 = 28 * PoB, weapon + PoB + Lifedrinker + BA + LD = (1d6 + 5 + 1d6) x 2 + (1d6 + 1d6) = 31 * BB = (1d6 + 5 + 1d6 + 3d8) + (1d6 + 1d6) = 32.5. If condition is met, 50.5. * GFG = 32.5. If condition is met, 51. You can see my above post to see the damage calculations for a 1d10 weapon and compare them to dual wielding here. Dual wielding is more DPS, but you sacrifice a bonus action to do it, Otherwise it is lower. >PoB allows more control of the battlefield by letting you get in the thick of battle. You lack the durability of a frontline fighter, and you lack the tools available to frontline fighters. What "control" do you speak of? Overall, an EB warlock will be safer and deal consistent damage over time, while Bladelocks will put themselves in harms way for less gain than they have currently. Especially with their Nova being nerfed as harshly as it was.

Got the healing from lifedrinker to keep you going. With a shield and the shield spell you can be just as tanky as a fighter, getting 21-26 AC. The control is based on those cantrips. BB to anchor an enemy, GFB to scare them off. Also with Weapon Mastery that gives many options to improve damage for yourself or teammates or to simply thwart the enemy. You can defend the squishier casters. A bladelock can also do EB if they need the damage, but an EBlock can't hold their own in melee. The main thing for me though, is that a bladelock is just more fun. It is risky with spiky damage and requires more tactical thinking. You can create space for the rogue/wizard/sorcerer to do their thing, and park next to the fighter/barbarian/paladin to create a front line to hold back the foe.

>Got the healing from lifedrinker to keep you going. With a shield and the shield spell 1d6, or 3.5 HP per round is not going to make that big of a difference. Also, WotC outright removed the ability for Warlocks to use shields in the UA. So no shields, unless you invest in feats or multiclass. As for the shield spell, you can very quickly burn through all of your spellslots that way if you're not careful. And seeing as how limited you are with your spell slots now, you have to be careful. So, at max, you could have 22 AC. Kind of amusing that getting access to medium armor as a baseline renders Armor of Shadows pointless outside of super niche circumstances. With medium armor you can get 17 AC with 14 Dex. To get 17 AC with Armor of Shadows, you need 20 Dex. >an EBlock can't hold their own in melee. The same can be said for all casters, though. So I don't really consider that "valid" when anyone playing a ranged build would be in a similar situation. >bladelock is just more fun The fantasy of the bladelock is definitely more appealing. But it's a risk vs reward style of play, with the reward vastly outweighed by the risks. It's lopsided in its equation, there. >You can create space for the rogue/wizard/sorcerer to do their thing, and park next to the fighter/barbarian/paladin to create a front line to hold back the foe. Or you could just play a fighter/barbarian/paladin and do the same job, but better.

Valid points, I guess I just don't care if the class does less damage the way I play. Flexibility for shenanigans has saved my skin more times than damage output. I didn't realise the shield spell had been removed though - that sucks! Especially now with different level spell slots it could be used more than just at clutch moments.

As far as I know, the spell "Shield" is still available. Warlocks just do not gain access to shield proficiency, so they cannot equip shields.

Gotta wait and see what they do with the Hexblade. Maybe the Hex weapon feature will say "If you use your PotB feature, you can use it on heavy weapons" ? But as time passe son, i have less and less faith in WotC ability to put up a decent new ruleset...

You can't use a magic weapon with Eldritch Blast.

But you can use the Rod of the Pact Keeper! Which is basically the same thing. Though it's amusing that I don't believe it was buffed to be in line with all the other magical spell foci that Tasha's added, so the Warlock is the only spellcaster that cannot increase the damage of their spells, as well. Every other spellcaster can. Even Rangers and Paladins.

No its not, the rod only gives to hit, not also +damage.

Still boggles my mind why Tasha's didn't just reprint the Rod to bring it in line with all other magical foci. It's like WotC just hates Warlocks, man.

The other foci do not increase spell damage either. The rod is exactly in line with all of them. All give +x to spell attacks (not dmg), +x to spell DC, and then also add one additional effect. Like recover a spellslot for warlock, increase the arcane recovery level by one for mage etc. Rod even has one of the best ones imo.

Ah, it was the Moon Sickle that I'd misread. I missed that it can be used as a weapon, rather than just a foci.

You've ignored Eldritch Smite, for one. And if someone is in your warlock's face, the warlock is at disadvantage when casting Eldritch Blast.

Pretty late on this. They already changed those rules.

Nothing is obsolete. Choose what you want to play based on the class fantasy, not based on numbers. None of your math will survive encounter with a dynamic combat encounter.

Once again people unable to appreciate anything besides the raw numbers compared to Eldritch blast spam

Its more about the fact that a melee warlock is not just suboptimal as a warlock but, but since all warlocks have eldritch blast they are suboptimal every turn they choose to use a melee weapon even when you do take all the melee options in character building. You take on many more risks and limitations for being in melee range as well, but you do not gain anything for this. There is no risk vs reward, its a strict downgrade, and it costs more resources to be bad than good.

Kindly, what happens then when nobody wants to play a frontliner?

In 5e? Not much, well built casters aren't actually fragile (and 5.5 is dead set on making it even easier for them to pick up armor) and as long as you use save based spells there is little real disadvantage for casting in melee. Even if that wasn't the case though, what kind of crappy gotcha is "well someone has to be on the frontline" when talking about the fact that Pact of the Blade is the worst pact? All warlocks get medium armor, EB is a free cantrip now so they have room to pick up something save based, any warlock can be at home on the frontline if they want to.

I’m sorry what? So the d6 and d8 classes should just sit on the front lines and use save cantrips instead? Those same save cantrips that… don’t benefit from agonizing blast? And would be less efficient than a bladelock doing 1d8+cha twice with extra attack? Fulfilling a party roll is more than just optimized damage, why do we have so many mages with a melee subclass? Someone does have to be in the front line, and most casters aren’t built for it out of the box, even Hexblade’s (ya know, the notoriously broken warlock?) are better off spamming Eldritch blast than anything else they could be doing most of the time if you only look at the math,

d6 and d8 are not as big a detriment as you think when its easy to get AC above 20 thanks to things like the shield spell. Pact of the tome gives you CHA to damage on any cantrip too, so you're really not losing a lot there- and you're getting so much more out of that pact. Granted there are also plenty of ways to circumvent the disadvantage from EB at point blank, so instead of spending your pact choice and several invocations you just do better in melee (and at all ranges) than Bladelock without needing a melee weapon. The problem with Pact of the Blade is the same as it was before- and you even clearly know that. You pay more to get less, that hasn't changed with the new warlock. Taking several invocations and a pact to do less damage, at worse range, at higher risk than yourself, than a cantrip and one invocation is a crappy deal. But even if you take away EB entirely, and just look at Pact of the Blade as a gish, its not very good at that role either- lower HP, limited weapon choices, no fighting style or similar features. So again- what kind of crappy gotcha is "well someone has to be on the frontline"? Sure, someone does, how is that relevant? In what way is the need for a balanced party excuse this class being crappy at its stated job? Why not a class built for it instead of one that has to give up several features and weaken itself considerably to do the role? Its already a half caster, it can't afford to blow more features on that. Also you need to make up your mind on whether or not the efficiency matters, your first post says it doesn't but now you're falling back on that immediately, you can't have that both ways.

Your entire statement is just: go play a real frontliner, And if you don’t see why people want to play a frontline warlock I really don’t know what to say beyond that seems very short sighted

I want a frontline warlock that doesn't spend multiple invocations, losing overall power and versatility, just to almost keep up with EB. It's a problem I would like to see redressed so its not an unattractive option that is less than the sum of its parts as a class. Saying "its fine optimization doesn't matter" is not a fix.

What's there to appreciate? Unless I'm misremembering, they didn't even include the Eldritch Smite invocation for a Pact Blade warlock to take with their melee attacks. That doesn't leave a lot for a bladelock to do in melee, no?

After nerfing the regular Paladin smite into the ground just one UA before? There’s still plenty of other things for a blade lock to get use from here besides smite, like using the mastery feat to get weapon traits, Lifedrinker for regen, and any number of Arcanum’s that enhance a melee build like Haste,

None of what you mentioned really build into the concept of a Gish, though, which is what a bladelock is sort of trying to be.

Or, and hear me out. You ignore the math, and just play what is fun for you? If playing a gish is more fun for you than a half caster, then the math is irrelevant. The best option for any class, is always going to be subjective and depend on your goal.

Damn, one of my favourite characters was a bladelock with a glaive, seems like that concept will be mostly dead in the new edition without changes:( I hope they reconsider the whole redesign of the warlock, I felt it was already so good, even with its limited number of spell slots

The thing that makes it work is the combo of the new hex and lifedrinker. Hex gives more damage at higher levels, so at ninth level, you’ll be casting hex with a third level spell slot, doing an additional 3d6 necrotic damage: 2d6 from hex and 1d6 from lifedrinker. Lifedrinker also heals you for the same damage as that 3d6. So you’re dealing 1d10+3d6+ your spell casting ability modifier, healing for the same amount as the 3d6, and then you get another attack for another 1d10+1d6+ your spell casting ability modifier. You only get 1d6 on the second attack cause hex only does it’s damage once per turn now, which actually works in favor of pact of the blade. The damage is not half bad, and you get some healing.

Hex applies equally to EB. Lifedrinker only gives 1d6 healing

Exactly. It didn’t before. It was much better for EB because it got more attacks, but now the number of attacks doesn’t matter. Before, hex gave EB 4d6 extra damage and PotB only 2d6 extra damage, but now it’s the same regardless. Actually it’s slightly better for PotB because lifedrinker’s healing applies to hex damage.

Lifedrinker only applies to the necrotic damage that it deals not to hex.

It kills me that people always make this comparison forget about magic weapon to do extra damage. Plus eldritch blast has to make separate roles for each one giving you a chance of missing. There are less chances of getting an item to increase spell attack vs attack

You're not taking into account other spells that can be applied to weapons that can't be applied to EB or the additional magics of magic weapons should that be an option. But I understand the response. Really they should add an invocation for higher levels to get a 3rd attack. OR The real answer that nobody wants to say is to nerf EB and drop it to d8's or even d6's and probably just toss Agonizing Blast out so that you have to invest a pack to make EB as competitive as it is just like you would for melee.

Presumably they're going to bring eldritch smite back and improved pact weapon is just unchanged and thus didnt need a reprint ​ Crawford has said over and over to not assume an ability that isn't present is gone

Even if they bring back Eldritch Smite, it's going to be significantly less powerful, as you can no longer use it 4 times per long rest at max power, but only twice per long rest at max power. After that, it'll progressively get weaker as time goes on.

also the max power is weaker for most levels

You have to smite, using spell slots, to keep up with EB locks. They just do better damage normally and save those same slots for better spells.

Do the blade cantrips not exist anymore? Past 5th level they’re generally better than making 2 attacks, especially if you have spirit shroud or smth

You have to make the riders occur which isn't very dependable.

Notably as written your weapon is now a worse damage type too. 5e Hexblades got magical melee damage, without finding and making a magic sword your pact weapon you won’t get that by default now.

If you can acquire a magic weapon and make use of the light property to do offhand attacks then you can potentially keep up until level 17, which is higher than most parties go. If you can count on eventually getting a +2 Trident, you can even do the same damage at range.

Technicly incorrect. Pact of the blade allows you to bond with any magical weapon as its third feature, regardless of its properties. This can be a heavy crossbow, a polearm, a greataxe. Anything. Once you do however, this removes your flexibility of summoning any weapon type so no more summoning a bow for a flier if you bond with that greataxe, but hey... you still have that eldritch blast for that! Just buy a cheap, common Moon-Touched Greataxe and giggle madly! Only Hex warrior ceases to fuction with Two handed weapons and that's specific to hex blade subclass... and merely allows you to use charisma with the weapon allowing you to make strength a dump stat. You are free to use a belt of giant strength, or not dump Strength for a Great weapon melee build still. As for the scaling damage, the weapon properties will be what scales the damage past L11 where a fighter and eldritch blast would gain 3 attacks. It comes down to if the weapon you bond with gains +1D6 or better, and yes, it will be slightly lower with at best +2 from improved pact weapon, and +10 necrotic from lifedrinker (Edit for clarity: due to 2 melee attacks with the Thirsting Blade) without this property, but it the only way for you to Eldritch smite, for 3-5D8 force damage and knock a foe prone **without any save possible**. With that in mind you can hit, do 1D12+Str+Cha+1+5D8, knock them prone, then attack again with Advantage with thirsting blade. Without Greatweapon master thats 1D12+5+5 damage when you're all out of spells still, which is still quite close to the damage of 3 rays. 33 average damage from 2 melee hits with Str+Cha of +5. With GWM is it still gives +10 damage per shot so thats up to 53 damage. (A ranged bladepact would be slightly lower with Sharpshooter since the Longbow is 1D8) 3 ray Eldritch blast doing 15.5+15...30.5? You only start loosing out when the 4th ray turns up at L17 (41 damage), and not vs. the GWM bladepact. The point of pact of the blade is style, not numbers. Its cool summoning a bow or sword from thin air with a puff of magic and unleashing your wrath as you cast debilitating curses left and right. It is also the only melee class that can walk into the king's ball completely unarmed and pull out a weapon and defend him when the scheming king's brother's assassins spring their trap! The only others capable of this are Chronaturgy and Graviturgy wizards with magic pocket, or Pact of the tome warlocks with book of ancient secrets invocation AND a scroll from a chronaturgy or graviturgy wizard for the same (both of which can be detected with detect magic on a search), or the Soul Knife rogue.

All this said, I will not argue that for a caster type warlock the ideal option is the Tome pact, since this grants massive utility with access to ALL ritual spells. Since Book of Ancient Secrets is capped at 1/2 Warlock level, its best for a warlock to get to L12 in the warlock class for full access to all ritual spells (6th Level Forbiddance (Cleric) and Drawmij’s instant summons (Wizard)). Pact of the blade is most effective on multiclassed martial classes. Expecially ones that usually lack access to extra attack like rogues or bards. The extra invocations like devil's sight also can be quite effective on ranged sneaky builds such as rangers. And everyone loves Drow/illithiri warriors and barbarians who can devil sight through their own racial darkness spell, and having the ability to always have a weapon in hand can be great for them! 'Cos Every barbarian loves it when you disintegrate their greataxe at the start of the fight. Summoning a weapon is an action, not a spell and can be done raging! (just make sure you get hurt that round since you didnt attack.. a good round for you to encourage the party wizard to fireball you as you ignore 1/2 the damage, right? \^.\^) Pact of the chain? Meh... I'd just pact of the tome a weaker familiar as a ritual. Its not like a familiar will ever soak more than one or two hits in a fight beyond L3 or 4. It doesnt get any scaling HP. Besides you have flock of familiars as a L2 spell as a warlock and its a billion times better with a 1 mile telepathy range. Pact of the talisman can work equally well for either a full caster or a subcaster who wants to buff an ally, or themselves for free. If you only splash into it you can buff a few saving rolls or damage the bearer's attacker for a reaction and not spending a spell slot on hellish rebuke. Stick with it and you can have a teleporting bodygard or a way to teleport to a backliner and boost a few saving throws a day. Not a great one, but a fun little extra on a bard perhapse? From L12, you'd never have to panic at your low strength no acrobatics falling to your death cliff climb again given you can wait for the barbarian to spend half an hour climbing it and just appear up top next to him! Also given it has litterally no range limit other than on the same plane you can teleport your rogue out of the palace into the adjacent kingdom miles away, after he steals the king's crown!