Reading all of these opinions and even conflicting interpretations.
If I have this Pact of weapons at 1st level, do I have to own or have access to a magical weapon (call it a sword for ease of language)? Or can I use a non magical sword?
No, you don't.
Pact of the Blade allows you to conjure a weapon out of thin air or bond with an existing magical weapon. The point of the second part is to keep the ability useful at higher levels where you're likely to have access to magical weapons better than the generic ones the ability can conjure up for you.
Given that weapons with a +1 (or better) bonus on attack and damage are listed in the 2024 DMG as being Uncommon or Rare/Very Rare, it is highly unlikely that most PCs will ever have even a +1 (or better) weapon. Thus, the ability to Conjure a Magical Weapon out of thin air will always be a viable option. Now then, back in the days of D&D 4.0 edition, weapons with a bonus of +1 or +2 were relatively common, while weapons with a bonus of +5 or +6 were relatively rare and there was less need for a Magical Weapon Conjuration effect,
Granted, you as a DM can always disagree and you can allow weapons with a bonus of +1 (or better) to be common in your campaign.
The names of magic item rarity levels ("uncommon", "rare", etc.) are meant for comparison with each other; they're not really meant to define how common these items are in an absolute sense, which is really up to the DM.
The idea that "most" PCs who use weapons will never have a +1 or better weapon is very different from what I've personally experienced, which is that almost all long-running 5e campaigns involve the PCs eventually having access to a significant number of magic items, including weapons. This is the sort of baseline experience that D&D rules are designed around, which again is why the "bonding" part of Pact of the Blade exists at all.
The names of magic item rarity levels ("uncommon", "rare", etc.) are meant for comparison with each other; they're not really meant to define how common these items are in an absolute sense, which is really up to the DM.
The idea that "most" PCs who use weapons will never have a +1 or better weapon is very different from what I've personally experienced, which is that almost all long-running 5e campaigns involve the PCs eventually having access to a significant number of magic items, including weapons. This is the sort of baseline experience that D&D rules are designed around, which again is why the "bonding" part of Pact of the Blade exists at all.
Key phrase "long running campaigns"; at which player character level does the DM allow the PCs access to a device (whether weapon, armor or other gear is immaterial) with a +1 (or better) bonus? As for myself, as a player, I prefer to NOT plan on acquiring a magical device of any kind. If a magical device comes my way, and I am able to make use of it, then I will. If nothing comes my way, then I try to survive without it.
Indeed it doesn't break anything and what DMs and players do in their game is up to them, we're discussing it from rules perspective.
Like crzyhawk I would definitely allow a Warlock PC to bond with its beloved grandpa's sword that would have such family heirloom.
Even cooler would be to conjure it's grandpa's sword from hereafter and return to it's resting place when the bond end!
Given that Warlocks under the 2024 PHB rules are ONLY proficient with SIMPLE weapons and that swords are usually considered to be MARTIAL weapons, it is unlikely that a warlock would know how to use the family heirloom and thus, grandfather's sword would remain in its place of honor above the hearth.
The names of magic item rarity levels ("uncommon", "rare", etc.) are meant for comparison with each other; they're not really meant to define how common these items are in an absolute sense, which is really up to the DM.
The idea that "most" PCs who use weapons will never have a +1 or better weapon is very different from what I've personally experienced, which is that almost all long-running 5e campaigns involve the PCs eventually having access to a significant number of magic items, including weapons. This is the sort of baseline experience that D&D rules are designed around, which again is why the "bonding" part of Pact of the Blade exists at all.
Key phrase "long running campaigns"; at which player character level does the DM allow the PCs access to a device (whether weapon, armor or other gear is immaterial) with a +1 (or better) bonus? As for myself, as a player, I prefer to NOT plan on acquiring a magical device of any kind. If a magical device comes my way, and I am able to make use of it, then I will. If nothing comes my way, then I try to survive without it.
Well, whether it's a weapon or armor or other gear isn't immaterial, since a +1 bonus can have a very different impact depending on what it's being applied to. This is why, for instance, +1 weapons are listed as Uncommon while +1 armor is listed as Rare.
But if you want an actual answer to that question, Uncommon magic items, including +1 weapons, are generally intended to be available right from the beginning; the guidance on it in the Dungeon Master's Guide (see here) suggests awarding a party about four Uncommon items per level at levels 1-4. These are meant to be rough guidelines, of course, not a strict mathematical formula, but you can see from this that the idea that a +1 weapon is some incredibly advanced thing that hardly anyone ever acquires is not in keeping with typical 5e adventure design.
Indeed it doesn't break anything and what DMs and players do in their game is up to them, we're discussing it from rules perspective.
Like crzyhawk I would definitely allow a Warlock PC to bond with its beloved grandpa's sword that would have such family heirloom.
Even cooler would be to conjure it's grandpa's sword from hereafter and return to it's resting place when the bond end!
Given that Warlocks under the 2024 PHB rules are ONLY proficient with SIMPLE weapons and that swords are usually considered to be MARTIAL weapons, it is unlikely that a warlock would know how to use the family heirloom and thus, grandfather's sword would remain in its place of honor above the hearth.
Pact of the Blade specifically says that while you're bonded with a weapon, you're proficient with it, regardless of what type it is. That's a key part of the benefit of using Pact of the Blade in the first place.
Indeed it doesn't break anything and what DMs and players do in their game is up to them, we're discussing it from rules perspective.
Like crzyhawk I would definitely allow a Warlock PC to bond with its beloved grandpa's sword that would have such family heirloom.
Even cooler would be to conjure it's grandpa's sword from hereafter and return to it's resting place when the bond end!
Given that Warlocks under the 2024 PHB rules are ONLY proficient with SIMPLE weapons and that swords are usually considered to be MARTIAL weapons, it is unlikely that a warlock would know how to use the family heirloom and thus, grandfather's sword would remain in its place of honor above the hearth.
Pact of the Blade specifically says that while you're bonded with a weapon, you're proficient with it, regardless of what type it is. That's a key part of the benefit of using Pact of the Blade in the first place.
Even if grandfather's sword was a Great Sword requiring a minimum Strength of 13 to wield, while the warlock only has a Strength of 10?
Indeed it doesn't break anything and what DMs and players do in their game is up to them, we're discussing it from rules perspective.
Like crzyhawk I would definitely allow a Warlock PC to bond with its beloved grandpa's sword that would have such family heirloom.
Even cooler would be to conjure it's grandpa's sword from hereafter and return to it's resting place when the bond end!
Given that Warlocks under the 2024 PHB rules are ONLY proficient with SIMPLE weapons and that swords are usually considered to be MARTIAL weapons, it is unlikely that a warlock would know how to use the family heirloom and thus, grandfather's sword would remain in its place of honor above the hearth.
Pact of the Blade specifically says that while you're bonded with a weapon, you're proficient with it, regardless of what type it is. That's a key part of the benefit of using Pact of the Blade in the first place.
Even if grandfather's sword was a Great Sword requiring a minimum Strength of 13 to wield, while the warlock only has a Strength of 10?
Yes. Those two things (weapon proficiency and strength requirements) have nothing to do with each other.
"Conjure" needn't mean it suddenly springs forth into existence. Teleportation spells are of the Conjuration school. The "Simple or Martial Melee weapon of your choice" may from somewhere, and it may return when the bond ends. In effect, it might be a borrowed weapon.
And that could be grandpa's sword as easily as it could be off the rack.
If you really want the Conjured Pact of the Blade weapon to come from somewhere, consider this:
as part of your service agreement with your Patron, you (the warlock) are permitted to borrow for the length of a combat encounter ONE (1) enchanted weapon from your Patron's collection of weapons, with the provision that when the encounter is concluded, the weapon must be released and allowed to return to the Patron. Whereas mundane weapons require a minimum Strength or Dexterity score in order to use effectively, the Patron's weapon collection is enchanted to use other attribute scores such as Charisma or Intelligence.
Reading all of these opinions and even conflicting interpretations.
If I have this Pact of weapons at 1st level, do I have to own or have access to a magical weapon (call it a sword for ease of language)? Or can I use a non magical sword?
No, you don't.
Pact of the Blade allows you to conjure a weapon out of thin air or bond with an existing magical weapon. The point of the second part is to keep the ability useful at higher levels where you're likely to have access to magical weapons better than the generic ones the ability can conjure up for you.
Given that weapons with a +1 (or better) bonus on attack and damage are listed in the 2024 DMG as being Uncommon or Rare/Very Rare, it is highly unlikely that most PCs will ever have even a +1 (or better) weapon. Thus, the ability to Conjure a Magical Weapon out of thin air will always be a viable option. Now then, back in the days of D&D 4.0 edition, weapons with a bonus of +1 or +2 were relatively common, while weapons with a bonus of +5 or +6 were relatively rare and there was less need for a Magical Weapon Conjuration effect,
Granted, you as a DM can always disagree and you can allow weapons with a bonus of +1 (or better) to be common in your campaign.
While I am sure campaigns without magic weapons exist, I think the norm is by level 4-5 everyone who uses weapons regularly(usually just the martials) has one, by level 10 they have a decently powerful one. I don't think the magic item section would be anywhere near that robust if the assumption was that most players never saw one.
Reading all of these opinions and even conflicting interpretations.
If I have this Pact of weapons at 1st level, do I have to own or have access to a magical weapon (call it a sword for ease of language)? Or can I use a non magical sword?
No, you don't.
Pact of the Blade allows you to conjure a weapon out of thin air or bond with an existing magical weapon. The point of the second part is to keep the ability useful at higher levels where you're likely to have access to magical weapons better than the generic ones the ability can conjure up for you.
Given that weapons with a +1 (or better) bonus on attack and damage are listed in the 2024 DMG as being Uncommon or Rare/Very Rare, it is highly unlikely that most PCs will ever have even a +1 (or better) weapon. Thus, the ability to Conjure a Magical Weapon out of thin air will always be a viable option. Now then, back in the days of D&D 4.0 edition, weapons with a bonus of +1 or +2 were relatively common, while weapons with a bonus of +5 or +6 were relatively rare and there was less need for a Magical Weapon Conjuration effect,
Granted, you as a DM can always disagree and you can allow weapons with a bonus of +1 (or better) to be common in your campaign.
While I am sure campaigns without magic weapons exist, I think the norm is by level 4-5 everyone who uses weapons regularly(usually just the martials) has one, by level 10 they have a decently powerful one. I don't think the magic item section would be anywhere near that robust if the assumption was that most players never saw one.
Most enchanted weapons in a dungeon are usually partially hidden under a layer of dirt and other refuse, requiring a decent Perception check to notice it, or requiring having a Detect Magic spell sweeping the area at just the right moment to notice it. If the party's Perception skills are low, if no one has the Detect Magic effect, then the party is very likely to miss acquiring something nice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Given that weapons with a +1 (or better) bonus on attack and damage are listed in the 2024 DMG as being Uncommon or Rare/Very Rare, it is highly unlikely that most PCs will ever have even a +1 (or better) weapon. Thus, the ability to Conjure a Magical Weapon out of thin air will always be a viable option. Now then, back in the days of D&D 4.0 edition, weapons with a bonus of +1 or +2 were relatively common, while weapons with a bonus of +5 or +6 were relatively rare and there was less need for a Magical Weapon Conjuration effect,
Granted, you as a DM can always disagree and you can allow weapons with a bonus of +1 (or better) to be common in your campaign.
The names of magic item rarity levels ("uncommon", "rare", etc.) are meant for comparison with each other; they're not really meant to define how common these items are in an absolute sense, which is really up to the DM.
The idea that "most" PCs who use weapons will never have a +1 or better weapon is very different from what I've personally experienced, which is that almost all long-running 5e campaigns involve the PCs eventually having access to a significant number of magic items, including weapons. This is the sort of baseline experience that D&D rules are designed around, which again is why the "bonding" part of Pact of the Blade exists at all.
pronouns: he/she/they
Key phrase "long running campaigns"; at which player character level does the DM allow the PCs access to a device (whether weapon, armor or other gear is immaterial) with a +1 (or better) bonus? As for myself, as a player, I prefer to NOT plan on acquiring a magical device of any kind. If a magical device comes my way, and I am able to make use of it, then I will. If nothing comes my way, then I try to survive without it.
Given that Warlocks under the 2024 PHB rules are ONLY proficient with SIMPLE weapons and that swords are usually considered to be MARTIAL weapons, it is unlikely that a warlock would know how to use the family heirloom and thus, grandfather's sword would remain in its place of honor above the hearth.
Well, whether it's a weapon or armor or other gear isn't immaterial, since a +1 bonus can have a very different impact depending on what it's being applied to. This is why, for instance, +1 weapons are listed as Uncommon while +1 armor is listed as Rare.
But if you want an actual answer to that question, Uncommon magic items, including +1 weapons, are generally intended to be available right from the beginning; the guidance on it in the Dungeon Master's Guide (see here) suggests awarding a party about four Uncommon items per level at levels 1-4. These are meant to be rough guidelines, of course, not a strict mathematical formula, but you can see from this that the idea that a +1 weapon is some incredibly advanced thing that hardly anyone ever acquires is not in keeping with typical 5e adventure design.
pronouns: he/she/they
Pact of the Blade specifically says that while you're bonded with a weapon, you're proficient with it, regardless of what type it is. That's a key part of the benefit of using Pact of the Blade in the first place.
pronouns: he/she/they
Even if grandfather's sword was a Great Sword requiring a minimum Strength of 13 to wield, while the warlock only has a Strength of 10?
Yes. Those two things (weapon proficiency and strength requirements) have nothing to do with each other.
pronouns: he/she/they
If you really want the Conjured Pact of the Blade weapon to come from somewhere, consider this:
as part of your service agreement with your Patron, you (the warlock) are permitted to borrow for the length of a combat encounter ONE (1) enchanted weapon from your Patron's collection of weapons, with the provision that when the encounter is concluded, the weapon must be released and allowed to return to the Patron. Whereas mundane weapons require a minimum Strength or Dexterity score in order to use effectively, the Patron's weapon collection is enchanted to use other attribute scores such as Charisma or Intelligence.
While I am sure campaigns without magic weapons exist, I think the norm is by level 4-5 everyone who uses weapons regularly(usually just the martials) has one, by level 10 they have a decently powerful one. I don't think the magic item section would be anywhere near that robust if the assumption was that most players never saw one.
Most enchanted weapons in a dungeon are usually partially hidden under a layer of dirt and other refuse, requiring a decent Perception check to notice it, or requiring having a Detect Magic spell sweeping the area at just the right moment to notice it. If the party's Perception skills are low, if no one has the Detect Magic effect, then the party is very likely to miss acquiring something nice.