It’s interesting how the way one side interprets the rules doesn’t need any special rules and restrictions on how Pact Weapons work, while the other side needs to come up with all of these exceptions to the way they interpret it - ways to stop Oathbows from becoming Oathaxes, Flametounge Swords becoming Flametongue Slings, Maces of Sharpness, how long do the forms change for, limitations…
One thing to consider when trying to understand the written word is to consider how the rest of the paragraph exists in context. If you can read a certain page of text in two different ways, it’s often the method that requires less explanatory power to understand that is often correct.
Regardless, it seems obvious at least that the intention is that you can’t change the form of existing magical items.
Not really. I'm perfectly fine with a flame tongue long bow. I merely stated if you were concerned with that you could add additional limits. Just like if someone was concerned that you removed too much of the pact weapon from the pact weapon feature could have a person make it a either or as suggested above by, bishop99.
Anyways I think it is obvious the intention is you can change the form. That is a very significant change to the power if they wanted to remove that ability it should be explicit.
It’s interesting how the way one side interprets the rules doesn’t need any special rules and restrictions on how Pact Weapons work, while the other side needs to come up with all of these exceptions to the way they interpret it - ways to stop Oathbows from becoming Oathaxes, Flametounge Swords becoming Flametongue Slings, Maces of Sharpness, how long do the forms change for, limitations…
One thing to consider when trying to understand the written word is to consider how the rest of the paragraph exists in context. If you can read a certain page of text in two different ways, it’s often the method that requires less explanatory power to understand that is often correct.
Regardless, it seems obvious at least that the intention is that you can’t change the form of existing magical items.
Not really. I'm perfectly fine with a flame tongue long bow. I merely stated if you were concerned with that you could add additional limits. Just like if someone was concerned that you removed too much of the pact weapon from the pact weapon feature could have a person make it a either or as suggested above by, bishop99.
Anyways I think it is obvious the intention is you can change the form. That is a very significant change to the power if they wanted to remove that ability it should be explicit.
It’s not obvious that you can change them - consider the rules acrobatics you have to do for:
Azuredge as a longbow. You can hurl the bow as a ranged attack? And even though it’s not a battle axe, you have proficiency if you have battle axe proficiency? Similarly, every high level magical item would all use different proficiencies.
What happens when you turn Orcsplitter into a net? Can it still drop enemies to 0 HP on a hit?
My point stands - your interpretation leaves the DM making many more decisions about the interactions of every single possible combination of weapon and how it interferes with existing powers. Of two candidate explanations, yours adds far more complexity and questions than the other - and surprisingly the other has no ambiguity and requires no additional adjustment of any mechanics or rules.
Also, Sage Advice confirms:
“This magic weapon doesn’t have to be a melee weapon, so you could use the feature on a +1 longbow, for instance. Once the bond is formed, the magic weapon appears whenever you call your pact weapon to you, and you can’t change the magic weapon’s form when it appears. For example, if you bond with a flame tongue (longsword) and send the weapon to an extradimensional space, the weapon comes back as a longsword when you summon it. You don’t get to turn it into a club. Similarly, if you bond with a dagger of venom, you can’t summon it as a maul; it’s always a dagger.”
I could have sworn I looked at the Sage Advice Compendium before I blathered on. Oh well. I was wrong. Still wondering if Warlocks can bind weapons with a plus higher than one, but it's clear enough they can't change their form.
Warlocks get a nifty ability. They can create a weapon from nothingness, in whatever shape they like and change it into almost any form they wish. There are exceptions, and those are clearly stated. No ranged weapons initially. When you get the ability later on to make ranged weapons, only certain ones of them. No problem. You also can make it +1. That's cool. +1 Weapon, nearly any kind you want. So you go and you get feats that enhance how you use it.
In order to pull that off, you need to be at least 4th level, because that's when you got Pact Boons and Improved Pact of the Blade. That's Tier 2. That's when your buddies are getting +2 weapons. Now you have a choice to make. Keep using a +1 weapon with all the groovy powers and two feats devoted to using it, or take a +2 weapon that has none of those benefits unless you're lucky enough to get a +2 weapon that your feats work with. Say you took Sentinel and Pole Arm Master. You played as a Variant Human and you passed up your ASI's to get another feat at 4th level. What do you do if the only +2 weapon you get isn't a polearm?
There you are. You've been using your Improved Pact Weapon since 4th level. You're in a party with a Fighter, a Paladin, a Cleric, and a Rogue. The first +2 weapon that dropped was a Glaive. The DM is trying to be fair and impartial, so they are using random rolls to figure out what kind of weapon. You really wanted that Glaive. You've been using your Improved Pact Weapon as a Halberd mostly, and a Glaive would work, but no, the Fighter gets it because they can use it far more effectively than you can and it's only one plus better than what you have. Next time a +2 weapon drops, it isn't a polearm of any sort. It's a Flametongue longsword, and the Paladin grabs that one. Then then next is a +2 Longsword that nobody wants at all, the Rogue ends up with it, but is planning to sell it as soon as possible. They would rather use their non-magical Rapier, since they dumped Strength in favor of Dex like almost every Rogue does. Then comes the +2 Mace that the Cleric grabs. Then what comes up? Greatsword, +2. There you are. By now, you're bordering on Tier 3 and you're still using a +1 Improved Pact Weapon.
They also don't directly say that you can use a weapon of +2 or greater. It's implied that you can, but it was also implied that you could use existing magical ones and change their form, and so many people were confused on that point that the answer ended up in the SAC.
Also, you have proficiency in your pact weapon, regardless of form... that's a big benefit. Find a groovy magic weapon that you couldn't use otherwise? Spend 1 hour of a long rest, and there you go. Another rolls around a few sessions later? There you go... The only class that has access to that many weapons is the fighter, and they aren't bringing any of the magic that the Warlock does.
No, you cannot change the form of a Magic weapon that you bond as your pact weapon.. you cannot do it RAW. You can “create” a pact weapon in any shape, but you cannot change the shape of a Magic weapon that is bonded as your pact weapon.
Warlocks get a nifty ability. They can create a weapon from nothingness, in whatever shape they like and change it into almost any form they wish. There are exceptions, and those are clearly stated. No ranged weapons initially. When you get the ability later on to make ranged weapons, only certain ones of them. No problem. You also can make it +1. That's cool. +1 Weapon, nearly any kind you want. So you go and you get feats that enhance how you use it.
In order to pull that off, you need to be at least 4th level, because that's when you got Pact Boons and Improved Pact of the Blade. That's Tier 2. That's when your buddies are getting +2 weapons. Now you have a choice to make. Keep using a +1 weapon with all the groovy powers and two feats devoted to using it, or take a +2 weapon that has none of those benefits unless you're lucky enough to get a +2 weapon that your feats work with. Say you took Sentinel and Pole Arm Master. You played as a Variant Human and you passed up your ASI's to get another feat at 4th level. What do you do if the only +2 weapon you get isn't a polearm?
There you are. You've been using your Improved Pact Weapon since 4th level. You're in a party with a Fighter, a Paladin, a Cleric, and a Rogue. The first +2 weapon that dropped was a Glaive. The DM is trying to be fair and impartial, so they are using random rolls to figure out what kind of weapon. You really wanted that Glaive. You've been using your Improved Pact Weapon as a Halberd mostly, and a Glaive would work, but no, the Fighter gets it because they can use it far more effectively than you can and it's only one plus better than what you have. Next time a +2 weapon drops, it isn't a polearm of any sort. It's a Flametongue longsword, and the Paladin grabs that one. Then then next is a +2 Longsword that nobody wants at all, the Rogue ends up with it, but is planning to sell it as soon as possible. They would rather use their non-magical Rapier, since they dumped Strength in favor of Dex like almost every Rogue does. Then comes the +2 Mace that the Cleric grabs. Then what comes up? Greatsword, +2. There you are. By now, you're bordering on Tier 3 and you're still using a +1 Improved Pact Weapon.
They also don't directly say that you can use a weapon of +2 or greater. It's implied that you can, but it was also implied that you could use existing magical ones and change their form, and so many people were confused on that point that the answer ended up in the SAC.
So much to debate so little time lol. Not gonna debate what levels are what tiers since its already discussed. that being said if you consider level 4 tier 2 and you have a DM that starts giving out +2 weapons at that level then you are super lucky. Most DMs I've played with don't give that stuff out til around level 8 at the earliest.
Second point why on earth would a Fighter be better off with a Glaive than a Pact of the Blade and lets be honest most likely Hexblade lock at those levels? Lets say at lvl 5 both the Fighter and Warlock both have a +3 modifier and GWM. The Fighter can attack twice but so can the Warlock. Certain Fighter subclasses like Battlemaster can add damage to each swing? So can the Warlock through stuff like Hex and Hexblade's Curse. Some Fighters can potentially attack 3 times like Echo Knight? Well you got me there but the Warlock can generate near guaranteed advantage through Darkness and Devil Sight. And lets not forget the Warlock can also smite. So your argument that a Fighter can use a Glaive better than a Warlock is quite weak at best. Also why on earth would 2 members of the same party setup up pretty much the same build? So they fight each other for gear? That stuff should have been sorted out at session zero.
Worse case scenario everybody got a +2 or equivalent weapon except you, surely you should have a decent amount of gold by now. Politely ask your DM in between sessions if you could have a small shopping session so you can buy a +2 weapon. Its not a big hassle and I'm sure your DM would agree to it if you have been missing out on all the loot.
The most powerful feature of Pact of the Blade isn't changing a weapons form its the fact that you can summon it in pretty much any situation, that I feel is the most powerful aspect of the ability and can lead to a lot of fun and interesting ideas.
Why would a Fighter get priority with a Glaive over a Warlock? Well... I suppose it depends I didn't specify what level any of the items dropped. I was thinking level 5 for the Glaive. I made the assumption that the Fighter was built around Strength. Not all of them are. If so, they'd have a higher strength than a Warlock would unless it was a very odd build. They'd have a better armor class. They'd have better hit points unless the Warlock has a Con that's 4 points higher than the Fighter, and if that's so, the Fighter wasn't built very well. All things being equal, the Fighter is probably the better choice for a melee weapon. Warlocks are great and all, but I don't think of them as being better than Fighters when it comes to the front lines.
At 3rd level the Warlock picks up Improved Pact of the Blade at 5th they get Thirsting Blade and Eldritch Smite. They are full up on Invocations at that point. No Devil's Sight for them, they will have to wait until 7th level.
I have tried to avoid talking about sub-classes. Not all blade-locks are Hexadins. Yes, they are probably the best choice for that, but if I go into sub-classes, I pretty much have to fully create the characters in order to do any real comparison.
Another problem with my example is that magic weapons don't exactly rain out of the skies in most games, and in mine at least, a +2 weapon can't be purchased outside of an invitation only auction so no small shopping session is going to get you one.
In your own games, you get to set the parameters. If you figure that Warlocks are a better choice to get priority on melee weapons, that's fine.
I may get to play my own Warlock this coming Sunday. I'm really looking forward to it. She's not a Hexblade and I've never played a 5th Edition Warlock before.
What does AC or HP have to do with who gets better weapons? I guess it depends on what role they want to play. All things being equal they will have the same bonus to hit and damage. What will be different? The Fighter will probably have the higher base armor class. The Warlock can compensate with their magic, but it takes time. The Fighter will have more hit points, again, the Warlock can compensate for that by being harder to hit, but they can't do both at the same time, and they only have so many spells they can cast. I believe they get 2, and they have been using their Invocations to get their weapon powered up, so they don't have much in the way of innate spells. If the rule the Fighter is filling is tanking, do you want to argue that a Warlock makes a better tank? Maybe they do. I don't have enough experience with them to know that.
I think Warlocks are pretty awesome. I think the Hexblade is awesome too. It's probably the single most powerful sub-class of the class that draws the most attention of all the 13 official classes. Look at the number of threads, posts, and views in this forum, and compare them to any other class you like. When someone is making a multi-class build, if they take any levels in Warlock at all, it's almost invariably the Hexblade they go after. As pointed out, it's pretty much impossible to take away a Hexblade Warlock's weapon, and they can use it as a focus for their spells.
Maybe they should get priority on all weapons after all.
As far as systems for handing out loot go, I'm used to discussing that at the table between the other players and trying to figure out who would use it best. The DM only steps in when there's a prolonged argument. If a Dagger of Venom drops, and the Fighter, the Rogue, and the Warlock all want it, who should get it?
For all those wondering a +1greatsword. Is niether sentient nor am artifact so yes then you can. If how ever it was an artifact or a sentient weapon then nope sorry you cannot
The beauty of a Hexblade is that they're a melee Warlock that can still use the Eldritch Blast spell with Agonizing Blast to be just as good at range as a regular Warlock.
As pointed out they're also a character who's almost completely independent of their equipment. If you start with Dex 16, which you probably should, Armor of Shadows, gives you Mage Armor on demand, for a base AC of 16. That's the same as a Breastplate for zero cost, and if you do boost your dexterity at some point that can go as high as 18AC. That's not the best armour, but it's free, and free is the perfect price.
With the Improved Pact Weapon invocation they can make their weapon a +1 magical version. The contention is only at which point to take IPW. If you're able to grab a Breastplate early you can drop Armor of Shadows for it, or you can wait until level 7. I would prioritize Agonizing Blast and Thirsting Blade over it, but it is, in my opinion, more useful than something like Eldritch Smite or Eldritch Mind.
At 1st level, you acquire the training necessary to effectively arm yourself for battle. You gain proficiency with medium armor, shields, and martial weapons.
The influence of your patron also allows you to mystically channel your will through a particular weapon. Whenever you finish a long rest, you can touch one weapon that you are proficient with and that lacks the two-handed property. When you attack with that weapon, you can use your Charisma modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity, for the attack and damage rolls. This benefit lasts until you finish a long rest. If you later gain the Pact of the Blade feature, this benefit extends to every pact weapon you conjure with that feature, no matter the weapon’s type.
That holds true, even if your Hex Weapon is not your Pact Weapon. So you can effectively use it for Two-Weapon Fighting as well, and picking up the Fighting Style of that same name is now easier than ever.
You linked the wrong part of that. That's not him using the Great sword, that's him CREATING a pact weapon that he can then put in an extradimensional space. When he makes one from scratch, so to speak, he can make it whatever he wants and it becomes +1. He can't take an existing weapon and make it into a new one.
People keep leaving off the part where it says you get to choose the form of the weapon. I think everyone is clear on the idea that you can do that with a weapon created out of nothing. When you have a pre-existing magical weapon you can turn it into your Pact Weapon. So then, can you choose the form of your new magical weapon? Does it say anywhere that you cannot?
The "Plain English" rule is that when you read over what is said, unless you are told otherwise, you only get what it says, no more, and no less. Would someone mind terribly marking out in bold text the line where it says "You can't change the form of a magical pact weapon"? The only line where I see the word "Can't" is the one that says "You can’t affect an artifact or a sentient weapon in this way." I don't see it stated that a +1 Greatsword is an Artifact, nor anything that says it is Sentient. The original poster certainly didn't say it was.
Really, the only question is what happens when your Pact Weapon stops being a Pact Weapon. What form is it in now? Nothing says. My guess is that it turns back into it's original form. If you had a +1 Greatsword, you can change it into a +1 Maul, and so long as the Pact holds, it's a +1 Maul. Once the Pact is broken, I say it's a +1 Greatsword once again, but the case could be made that having turned it into a +1 Maul, it would stay a +1 Maul.
The thing is, it said that when talking about the CREATED FROM NOTHING weapon. If I say "There are many kinds of flowers. We have roses, which are red, and we also have violets." I did not say violets were red, I said roses are flowers and are red, and violets are flowers too. Maybe I'm wrong, but from what I understand the part where it says you can give it shape was about creating it from scratch, not recreating it.
Yeah, it's about the weapon you create from scratch, not a magic weapon you summon.
It's pretty clear with the RAI. Otherwise, you could find a +3 dagger and suddenly magically transform it into a +3 greataxe which is much more of an endgame/higher level weapon. That's an insanely busted ability, especially since you can give the weapon to somebody else for a minute.
Plus, it would also make the new Pact Weapon invocations introduced in Tasha's redundant and unneccesary.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Not really. I'm perfectly fine with a flame tongue long bow. I merely stated if you were concerned with that you could add additional limits. Just like if someone was concerned that you removed too much of the pact weapon from the pact weapon feature could have a person make it a either or as suggested above by, bishop99.
Anyways I think it is obvious the intention is you can change the form. That is a very significant change to the power if they wanted to remove that ability it should be explicit.
It’s not obvious that you can change them - consider the rules acrobatics you have to do for:
Azuredge as a longbow. You can hurl the bow as a ranged attack? And even though it’s not a battle axe, you have proficiency if you have battle axe proficiency? Similarly, every high level magical item would all use different proficiencies.
What happens when you turn Orcsplitter into a net? Can it still drop enemies to 0 HP on a hit?
My point stands - your interpretation leaves the DM making many more decisions about the interactions of every single possible combination of weapon and how it interferes with existing powers. Of two candidate explanations, yours adds far more complexity and questions than the other - and surprisingly the other has no ambiguity and requires no additional adjustment of any mechanics or rules.
Also, Sage Advice confirms:
“This magic weapon doesn’t have to be a melee weapon, so you could use the feature on a +1 longbow, for instance. Once the bond is formed, the magic weapon appears whenever you call your pact weapon to you, and you can’t change the magic weapon’s form when it appears. For example, if you bond with a flame tongue (longsword) and send the weapon to an extradimensional space, the weapon comes back as a longsword when you summon it. You don’t get to turn it into a club. Similarly, if you bond with a dagger of venom, you can’t summon it as a maul; it’s always a dagger.”
...
I could have sworn I looked at the Sage Advice Compendium before I blathered on. Oh well. I was wrong. Still wondering if Warlocks can bind weapons with a plus higher than one, but it's clear enough they can't change their form.
<Insert clever signature here>
Warlocks get a nifty ability. They can create a weapon from nothingness, in whatever shape they like and change it into almost any form they wish. There are exceptions, and those are clearly stated. No ranged weapons initially. When you get the ability later on to make ranged weapons, only certain ones of them. No problem. You also can make it +1. That's cool. +1 Weapon, nearly any kind you want. So you go and you get feats that enhance how you use it.
In order to pull that off, you need to be at least 4th level, because that's when you got Pact Boons and Improved Pact of the Blade. That's Tier 2. That's when your buddies are getting +2 weapons. Now you have a choice to make. Keep using a +1 weapon with all the groovy powers and two feats devoted to using it, or take a +2 weapon that has none of those benefits unless you're lucky enough to get a +2 weapon that your feats work with. Say you took Sentinel and Pole Arm Master. You played as a Variant Human and you passed up your ASI's to get another feat at 4th level. What do you do if the only +2 weapon you get isn't a polearm?
There you are. You've been using your Improved Pact Weapon since 4th level. You're in a party with a Fighter, a Paladin, a Cleric, and a Rogue. The first +2 weapon that dropped was a Glaive. The DM is trying to be fair and impartial, so they are using random rolls to figure out what kind of weapon. You really wanted that Glaive. You've been using your Improved Pact Weapon as a Halberd mostly, and a Glaive would work, but no, the Fighter gets it because they can use it far more effectively than you can and it's only one plus better than what you have. Next time a +2 weapon drops, it isn't a polearm of any sort. It's a Flametongue longsword, and the Paladin grabs that one. Then then next is a +2 Longsword that nobody wants at all, the Rogue ends up with it, but is planning to sell it as soon as possible. They would rather use their non-magical Rapier, since they dumped Strength in favor of Dex like almost every Rogue does. Then comes the +2 Mace that the Cleric grabs. Then what comes up? Greatsword, +2. There you are. By now, you're bordering on Tier 3 and you're still using a +1 Improved Pact Weapon.
They also don't directly say that you can use a weapon of +2 or greater. It's implied that you can, but it was also implied that you could use existing magical ones and change their form, and so many people were confused on that point that the answer ended up in the SAC.
<Insert clever signature here>
Also, you have proficiency in your pact weapon, regardless of form... that's a big benefit. Find a groovy magic weapon that you couldn't use otherwise? Spend 1 hour of a long rest, and there you go. Another rolls around a few sessions later? There you go... The only class that has access to that many weapons is the fighter, and they aren't bringing any of the magic that the Warlock does.
No, you cannot change the form of a Magic weapon that you bond as your pact weapon.. you cannot do it RAW. You can “create” a pact weapon in any shape, but you cannot change the shape of a Magic weapon that is bonded as your pact weapon.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So much to debate so little time lol. Not gonna debate what levels are what tiers since its already discussed. that being said if you consider level 4 tier 2 and you have a DM that starts giving out +2 weapons at that level then you are super lucky. Most DMs I've played with don't give that stuff out til around level 8 at the earliest.
Second point why on earth would a Fighter be better off with a Glaive than a Pact of the Blade and lets be honest most likely Hexblade lock at those levels? Lets say at lvl 5 both the Fighter and Warlock both have a +3 modifier and GWM. The Fighter can attack twice but so can the Warlock. Certain Fighter subclasses like Battlemaster can add damage to each swing? So can the Warlock through stuff like Hex and Hexblade's Curse. Some Fighters can potentially attack 3 times like Echo Knight? Well you got me there but the Warlock can generate near guaranteed advantage through Darkness and Devil Sight. And lets not forget the Warlock can also smite. So your argument that a Fighter can use a Glaive better than a Warlock is quite weak at best. Also why on earth would 2 members of the same party setup up pretty much the same build? So they fight each other for gear? That stuff should have been sorted out at session zero.
Worse case scenario everybody got a +2 or equivalent weapon except you, surely you should have a decent amount of gold by now. Politely ask your DM in between sessions if you could have a small shopping session so you can buy a +2 weapon. Its not a big hassle and I'm sure your DM would agree to it if you have been missing out on all the loot.
The most powerful feature of Pact of the Blade isn't changing a weapons form its the fact that you can summon it in pretty much any situation, that I feel is the most powerful aspect of the ability and can lead to a lot of fun and interesting ideas.
Why would a Fighter get priority with a Glaive over a Warlock? Well... I suppose it depends I didn't specify what level any of the items dropped. I was thinking level 5 for the Glaive. I made the assumption that the Fighter was built around Strength. Not all of them are. If so, they'd have a higher strength than a Warlock would unless it was a very odd build. They'd have a better armor class. They'd have better hit points unless the Warlock has a Con that's 4 points higher than the Fighter, and if that's so, the Fighter wasn't built very well. All things being equal, the Fighter is probably the better choice for a melee weapon. Warlocks are great and all, but I don't think of them as being better than Fighters when it comes to the front lines.
At 3rd level the Warlock picks up Improved Pact of the Blade at 5th they get Thirsting Blade and Eldritch Smite. They are full up on Invocations at that point. No Devil's Sight for them, they will have to wait until 7th level.
I have tried to avoid talking about sub-classes. Not all blade-locks are Hexadins. Yes, they are probably the best choice for that, but if I go into sub-classes, I pretty much have to fully create the characters in order to do any real comparison.
Another problem with my example is that magic weapons don't exactly rain out of the skies in most games, and in mine at least, a +2 weapon can't be purchased outside of an invitation only auction so no small shopping session is going to get you one.
In your own games, you get to set the parameters. If you figure that Warlocks are a better choice to get priority on melee weapons, that's fine.
I may get to play my own Warlock this coming Sunday. I'm really looking forward to it. She's not a Hexblade and I've never played a 5th Edition Warlock before.
<Insert clever signature here>
What does AC or HP have to do with who gets better weapons? I guess it depends on what role they want to play. All things being equal they will have the same bonus to hit and damage. What will be different? The Fighter will probably have the higher base armor class. The Warlock can compensate with their magic, but it takes time. The Fighter will have more hit points, again, the Warlock can compensate for that by being harder to hit, but they can't do both at the same time, and they only have so many spells they can cast. I believe they get 2, and they have been using their Invocations to get their weapon powered up, so they don't have much in the way of innate spells. If the rule the Fighter is filling is tanking, do you want to argue that a Warlock makes a better tank? Maybe they do. I don't have enough experience with them to know that.
I think Warlocks are pretty awesome. I think the Hexblade is awesome too. It's probably the single most powerful sub-class of the class that draws the most attention of all the 13 official classes. Look at the number of threads, posts, and views in this forum, and compare them to any other class you like. When someone is making a multi-class build, if they take any levels in Warlock at all, it's almost invariably the Hexblade they go after. As pointed out, it's pretty much impossible to take away a Hexblade Warlock's weapon, and they can use it as a focus for their spells.
Maybe they should get priority on all weapons after all.
As far as systems for handing out loot go, I'm used to discussing that at the table between the other players and trying to figure out who would use it best. The DM only steps in when there's a prolonged argument. If a Dagger of Venom drops, and the Fighter, the Rogue, and the Warlock all want it, who should get it?
<Insert clever signature here>
For all those wondering a +1greatsword. Is niether sentient nor am artifact so yes then you can. If how ever it was an artifact or a sentient weapon then nope sorry you cannot
The beauty of a Hexblade is that they're a melee Warlock that can still use the Eldritch Blast spell with Agonizing Blast to be just as good at range as a regular Warlock.
As pointed out they're also a character who's almost completely independent of their equipment. If you start with Dex 16, which you probably should, Armor of Shadows, gives you Mage Armor on demand, for a base AC of 16. That's the same as a Breastplate for zero cost, and if you do boost your dexterity at some point that can go as high as 18AC. That's not the best armour, but it's free, and free is the perfect price.
With the Improved Pact Weapon invocation they can make their weapon a +1 magical version. The contention is only at which point to take IPW. If you're able to grab a Breastplate early you can drop Armor of Shadows for it, or you can wait until level 7. I would prioritize Agonizing Blast and Thirsting Blade over it, but it is, in my opinion, more useful than something like Eldritch Smite or Eldritch Mind.
Don’t forget that Hexblade states:
That holds true, even if your Hex Weapon is not your Pact Weapon. So you can effectively use it for Two-Weapon Fighting as well, and picking up the Fighting Style of that same name is now easier than ever.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You linked the wrong part of that. That's not him using the Great sword, that's him CREATING a pact weapon that he can then put in an extradimensional space. When he makes one from scratch, so to speak, he can make it whatever he wants and it becomes +1. He can't take an existing weapon and make it into a new one.
The thing is, it said that when talking about the CREATED FROM NOTHING weapon. If I say "There are many kinds of flowers. We have roses, which are red, and we also have violets." I did not say violets were red, I said roses are flowers and are red, and violets are flowers too. Maybe I'm wrong, but from what I understand the part where it says you can give it shape was about creating it from scratch, not recreating it.
Yeah, it's about the weapon you create from scratch, not a magic weapon you summon.
It's pretty clear with the RAI. Otherwise, you could find a +3 dagger and suddenly magically transform it into a +3 greataxe which is much more of an endgame/higher level weapon. That's an insanely busted ability, especially since you can give the weapon to somebody else for a minute.
Plus, it would also make the new Pact Weapon invocations introduced in Tasha's redundant and unneccesary.