I mean, that goes for Shield as well? You cast shield to protect yourself from an attack. Cool! But then, your DM utters those dreaded words: "make a dex save." Now you wasted a spell slot and still got hit anyway. And not just that, you took more damage than when you would've cast AoA or SoM since you had no tempHP. By casting those you at least have a chance of making the concentration safe to keep them active and there are more than enough ways to boost those even without invocations.
That's not quite how Shield works. You only cast it when you get hit by a attack so it will never be a wasted spell slot.
It depends on what you're trying to do. Generally speaking though, yes, Hexblade is mechanically better than everything else outside niche applications. I personally LIKE those niche applications and that's where I tend to go with my warlocks, but hexblade is almost never the wrong pick for any kind of warlock you put together whether it's an EB spammer or some flavor of weaponlock.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I mean, that goes for Shield as well? You cast shield to protect yourself from an attack. Cool! But then, your DM utters those dreaded words: "make a dex save." Now you wasted a spell slot and still got hit anyway. And not just that, you took more damage than when you would've cast AoA or SoM since you had no tempHP. By casting those you at least have a chance of making the concentration safe to keep them active and there are more than enough ways to boost those even without invocations.
That's not quite how Shield works. You only cast it when you get hit by a attack so it will never be a wasted spell slot.
Okay it's not completely wasted, but still doesn't do anything if you don't get targeted by actual attacks afterwards. It's the same argument.
Not the same. Shield will negate loads of damage and probably discourage incoming attack rolls for that turn. The other combo is using two spell slots, two separate actions, and can be readily undone with a very common scenario.
Suppose you cast AoA and SoM. Great, you got some temps and you're likely hard to hit. Cool! But then, your DM utters those dreaded words: "make a dex save." Mind you, those words aren't exactly rare. Quite the opposite in fact. And you're not exactly great at those.
Now you roll for concentration, and likely you're not Great at those either unless you built for it with eldritch mind... if only you didn't use those invocations for thirsting blade and improved pact weapon, and agonizing blast. Great, you lose concentration and your temps are gone. Now what? Now you're out of slots, just like that. And more than that, you're defenseless. Not the situation I'd like to be in.
Armor of Agathys is not concentration, and I think the argument is that the temp hps are not wasted because they would be used up on either the dex save or the attack that hits you and they do it without using a reaction or typically even usin an action at all in combat. It also upcasts vey well making it useful on a 5th level slot even..
Shadow of the moil makes you heavily obscured which means enemies can't see you and that will mean they can't target you with anything that requires them to see you, so that works against a good number of dex save effects and an even larger number of intelligence, wisdom and charisma save effects. Cenrtainly not everything, but a lot.
After 3rd level Shield is just not effective on a Warlock because you do not have enough slots. If you are comparing it to SOM alone, if you use both your slots on shield it is going to give you a +5 AC for less than two rounds worth of attacks (from the triggering attack to the start of your turn). SOM will give enemies disadvantage on all attacks until you lose concentration and that is before you consider any of the other SOM effects (damage and preventing targeting by anything that can see you). Even just looking just at preventing hits; I think it generally beats shield. There may be a few corner cases where 2 castings of shield will disrupt more attacks and save more damage (for example blindsight), but that will be rare I think.
The effectiveness of shield is also mitigated by the Warlock's low AC. Once SOM is available a lot of enemies will beat shield+AC. Depending on your table and how the DM plays this, it could mean completely wasting your spell.
Another option for comparison on a Hexblade is blink, which is not concentration. Blink will flat prevent 50% of all attacks and damaging effects for an entire battle using the same the same slot cost.
The math here changes dramatically if you have lots of low level slots, but single-class Warlocks don't.
I mean, that goes for Shield as well? You cast shield to protect yourself from an attack. Cool! But then, your DM utters those dreaded words: "make a dex save." Now you wasted a spell slot and still got hit anyway. And not just that, you took more damage than when you would've cast AoA or SoM since you had no tempHP. By casting those you at least have a chance of making the concentration safe to keep them active and there are more than enough ways to boost those even without invocations.
But shield saved you from the attack. It did what it was meant to do. Its not wasted.
And at higher levels, that might be saving you from way more damage than AoA or SoM could block for you, with the added bonus that you get to use your actual actions for attacks or more actively useful spells like control or aoe damage.
About your argument over Shield, I would say that it does drop out at higher levels. Instantaneous spells are rarely a good pick for warlocks, unless they are up-to-level, super powerful spells like Fireball and, of course, Shield. With so few spell slots to spend, as well as the fact that any warlock worth its salt has Eldritch Blast with some improvement invocations for damage, they need to choose spells that last, affecting you or your opponents over several rounds. Shadow of Moil and Armor of Agathys are both examples of spells that last, and are therefore a good use of your warlock spell slots.
On the other hand, Shield is a great spell to pick up if you're multiclassing the Hexblade with the Bard, Paladin, or Sorcerer, who have more low-level spell slots to burn through. This is also the case with Hex, a spell that I would take as a low-level warlock but ditch at level 5. In fact, multiclassing a Hexblade warlock into a few levels of Bard or Sorcerer might be a good idea just to get those low-level slots to shield and hex with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
I mean, that goes for Shield as well? You cast shield to protect yourself from an attack. Cool! But then, your DM utters those dreaded words: "make a dex save." Now you wasted a spell slot and still got hit anyway. And not just that, you took more damage than when you would've cast AoA or SoM since you had no tempHP. By casting those you at least have a chance of making the concentration safe to keep them active and there are more than enough ways to boost those even without invocations.
But shield saved you from the attack. It did what it was meant to do. Its not wasted.
And at higher levels, that might be saving you from way more damage than AoA or SoM could block for you, with the added bonus that you get to use your actual actions for attacks or more actively useful spells like control or aoe damage.
It is unlikely it will shield you from more than SOM since SOM will cause disadvantage on most attacks and operate over multiple rounds.
AOA is not typically cast in combat, it is cast before combat so there is no action cost for it. Also cast at 5th level it saves a minimum of 25 damage. It is not a safe bet that shield will save you that much damage. Further if you are using shield spell then you are not using your pact slots as an action, which means losing your action to cast a defensive buff is not as big a deal.
In general shield will not save as much as AOA against a hard hitting, high level opponent. The opposite is actually true. For example a Young Red Dragon bite does an average of 20.5. AOA, cast at 5th level will stop all of that and have another 4.5 temp hps left to go. Shield MIGHT stop that and it might not. Shield might not save you from that damage at all.
That Young Red Dragon bites your Warlock in half plate (AC 17) and you cast shield. There are 14 possible rolls that will hit AC17, shield makes 5 of them miss, so the chance Shield actually stops the first attack from hitting is only 5 in 14. The dragon also gets 2 claw attacks that cause 13 damage each, so if you cast it on the bite there is a 5 in 20 chance it stops each of those attacks too.
When you put this all together against said young Red Dragons shield spell will stop 13.8 hit points of damage if you cast it on the first bite attack (including chance of saving you from later claws), 7.9 if you cast it on the first claw attack and 4.6 if you cast it on the second claw attack. The straight up probabilities assuming a bite-claw-claw sequence:
1. 70% chance you cast shield on the first attack and it saves 13.8 on average over all 3 attacks
2. 21% chance you cast it on the second attack and it saves 7.9 damage over all 3 attacks
3. 6% chance you cast it on the 3rd attack and it saves 4.6 damage over all 3 attacks
4. 3% chance you do not cast it at all
Average damage done by that attack sequence is 32.6 with no spell. Against shield-Warlock the overall probability is 97% chance that you use the spell slot and on average it will save 11.6 points of damage. Against a full attack action with shield in your back pocket your warlock will take on average 21 points of damage from the dragon on the first turn.
Going into the same attack sequence with AOA cast at 5th level will take on average 7.6 real hp damage level your AND the Dragon will take on average 52 cold damage (although it could potentially be 25, 50 or 75 depending on how the dragon rolls damage).
This is with no breath, if the dragon breathes on one of those turns it is worse for the shield user.
It is unlikely it will shield you from more than SOM since SOM will cause disadvantage on most attacks and operate over multiple rounds.
SOM also uses concentration though, meaning that at higher levels its practically going down the first time you get hit by an aoe attack or an attack that beats disadvantage (which isn't that hard if you aren't a hexblade warlock with medium armor and shield).
In general shield will not save as much as AOA against a hard hitting, high level opponent. The opposite is actually true. For example a Young Red Dragon bite does an average of 20.5. AOA, cast at 5th level will stop all of that and have another 4.5 temp hps left to go. Shield MIGHT stop that and it might not. Shield might not save you from that damage at all.
A young red dragon has 3 attacks. That AOA will go down and then you have 2 more attacks coming at you.
With medium armor for 19 AC and a shield, the shield spell gives drops the chance of those 3 attacks hitting you to much less than 50%. And if the attacks roll so well that it wouldn't help anyways, you don't have to use the spell.
Not to mention you and your party will take fewer attacks if you throw out an eldritch blast and help kill the dragon faster, instead of using an ability that plans for the dragon to hit you.
Shield is a fantastic spell for any class... Except for the warlock. With the few spell slots the warlock has, it's underutilizing one of them. I'm not saying it's wasteful, but really what you want as a Warlock is to make the most of your limited magical resources. The cost of the spell vs the benefit just isn't worth it. The warlock has much more interesting things to spend his limited resources on. He is like a person who can only pay with $100, and does not receive change. The best thing is that he tries to spend that $100 on things that cost that, or as close as possible, and not on things that cost $10.
It is unlikely it will shield you from more than SOM since SOM will cause disadvantage on most attacks and operate over multiple rounds.
SOM also uses concentration though, meaning that at higher levels its practically going down the first time you get hit by an aoe attack or an attack that beats disadvantage (which isn't that hard if you aren't a hexblade warlock with medium armor and shield).
Sure but an attack that beats disadvantage is likely to beat shield too, and most attacks are going to be a relatively low con save. An AOE can take it down pretty easy of course, but the flip side to that is spells that require the enemy to see the target can't target you at all. It might fail early or it might last 3 or 4 rounds, long after you will have used up your two slots for shield.
You are most likely to use SOM if you are going to be in melee fighting goons or enemies with gaze/spell abilities that target you specifically. You are probably not going to use it against someone throwing AOEs, and you are not going to use shield against that enemy either.
In general shield will not save as much as AOA against a hard hitting, high level opponent. The opposite is actually true. For example a Young Red Dragon bite does an average of 20.5. AOA, cast at 5th level will stop all of that and have another 4.5 temp hps left to go. Shield MIGHT stop that and it might not. Shield might not save you from that damage at all.
A young red dragon has 3 attacks. That AOA will go down and then you have 2 more attacks coming at you.
A Young Red Dragon bite will rarely take down a 5th level AOA in one shot. The bite does 20.5 damage on average, a 5th level AOA is 25 temp hps. If you are rolling damage a hit with a bite will take down AOA in one shot 19% of the time (if it hits). A claw attack will never take down AOA at 5th level unless you crit and roll near max crit damage. So usually AOA will last for 2 hits against a Young Red Dragon.
I considered all 3 attacks in the math above. 5th-level AOA in an attack sequence against a Young Red Dragon and the Warlock will take on average 8 damage and the dragon will take on average 52. Using Shield in the same situation a Warlock will take on average 24.
That assumes Half Plate and 14 Dex (AC 17)
With medium armor for 19 AC and a shield, the shield spell gives drops the chance of those 3 attacks hitting you to much less than 50%. And if the attacks roll so well that it wouldn't help anyways, you don't have to use the spell.
The shield spell has a somatic component. You need to carry a shield for 19AC which means you can't use a weapon or a spell with a material component and cast the shield spell unless you have a feat. So 19AC does not generally work with the shield spell. That is why I used a 17 AC above.
Even if you have a 19AC though and go weaponless and only use spells with no M, you will still average taking 16 damage with the shield spell vs 7 with AOA against the Red Dragon. The dragon is CR10 and has a +10 attack bonus, shield will fail A LOT. This will get worse as you get better enemies and shield will rarely work to stop anything.
For example against a Purple Worm who attacks you twice with shield spell and AC 19 you will take on average 56 combined damage from both his attacks if you use shield spell. With a 5th level AOA you will take on average 40 and at the same time deal either 25 or 50 damage to the Worm (depending on whether he attacks with his stinger or bite first).
Not to mention you and your party will take fewer attacks if you throw out an eldritch blast and help kill the dragon faster
AOA is usually cast out of combat since it lasts an hour, so it usually does not use an action in combat. However even if you cast it in combat, using a 5th level AOA will cause 52 damage on average against the Dragon example above if he attacks you 3 times (with AC 17). That is more than a 20th level Warlock will do with EB/AB even if all 4 beams hit and you can do this at level 9.
So comparing AOA to shield/EB using the same 5th level pact slot:
You will take LESS damage with AOA than with shield
You will deal MORE damage to the enemy with AOA than with EB/AB
Sure but an attack that beats disadvantage is likely to beat shield too,
Not really? If your warlock's AC is only 13 or so, then its really not all that hard to beat disadvantage. Not to mention that in this scenario of fighting a young dragon, there would be no disadvantage: they have blind sight. A lot of more powerful monsters have true sight, blind sight, or devil's sight.
Its much harder to beat an AC of 24, and the first time its activated should be an automatic block.
A Young Red Dragon bite will rarely take down a 5th level AOA in one shot.
Ok, you get to block a little of the damage from the second attack too. Its basically the same outcome.
The shield spell has a somatic component. You need to carry a shield for 19AC which means you can't use a weapon or a spell with a material component and cast the shield spell unless you have a feat. So 19AC does not generally work with the shield spell. That is why I used a 17 AC above.
If you are a hexblade warlock with a shield, you probably are not holding a weapon in your other hand. That is part of the versatility of the class: being a well defended spell oriented warlock is also a possibility.
Otherwise, improved pact weapon to use your weapon hand for somatic components or the war caster feat is hardly uncommon if you are level 10.
ven if you have a 19AC though and go weaponless and only use spells with no M, you will still average taking 16 damage with the shield spell vs 7 with AOA against the Red Dragon. The dragon is CR10 and has a +10 attack bonus, shield will fail A LOT.
I don't agree with your math on this. With a +10 to hit against an effective AC of 24, there is little more than a 1/4th chance of the attack beating the AC.
Meanwhile, the Warlock with 13 AC and 25 temp hit points is basically guaranteed to take every attack head on.
For example against a Purple Worm who attacks you twice with shield spell and AC 19 you will take on average 56 combined damage from both his attacks if you use shield spell.
What even is this? You have a 50% chance of his attack missing, so how are you deciding this damage? If the first attack can't be blocked, you're probably swallowed anyway, so the second attack won't come.
Also I'll point out: a warlock with 13 AC and AoA and SoM is just useless here. The Purple worm hits them even when it rolls a 1 on its attack roll, which is redundant because it sees past SoM with tremorsense and blindsight.
Then that warlock is either swallowed and removed from the fight, or miraculously beats a dc19 dex save and takes a second attack that can't miss for another round of damage, and gets poisoned on top unless it makes a dc19 con save.
level AOA will cause 52 damage on average against the Dragon example above if he attacks you 3 times
That is an impressive amount of damage, but at 10th level that is going to leave most warlocks pretty close to going down, taking around 30 damage in addition to any damage received from an initial breath attack or subsequent one. I can't imagine it taking more than one round before the warlock who isn't making death saving throws has surpassed them in damage.
I think the real lesson here is that defensive spells are just not amazing on warlocks except very situationally. A strategy that depends on being in the way of direct harm is not optimal. The spell slot is always better spent on powerful damage or control spells unless the warlock is just desperate. My point is that with shield, there is at least a chance to avoid harm altogether and you get to save that investment until you know it will pay some dividend.
The amount of damage being blocked by a shield spell also increases though, even if the shield spell's benefit doesn't. Blocking 50 damage from the first 2 attacks of an adult dragon is a lot of benefit.
The amount of damage being blocked by a shield spell also increases though, even if the shield spell's benefit doesn't. Blocking 50 damage from the first 2 attacks of an adult dragon is a lot of benefit.
But you are missing the math. This will not happen. I was talking about a Yung Dragon. An adult is even worse. To start with 2 attack from an adult Red do not do 50, they do 41 (26 bite, 15 claw). All 3 attacks combined do 56
An adult Red Dragon has a +14 to hit. If you have AC 17 that means he needs a 3 to hit you before shield (90%). His DPR against you without using shield at all is 50 DPR with all 3 attacks.
With shield you have an AC of 22 and he needs a 8 to hit you (65%). If you cast shield the Dragon will on average do 36 damage to you.
So shield does not save you 50 hps. It takes the average damage the Dragon will do from 56 to 26 if you have a 17 AC. So it saves you 20 points of damage on average. AOA is 25 and damages the dragon.
Sure if it caused 3 attacks which would otherwise hit to miss shield will "save" 56hps. The chance it will do that though is extremely small - 1.6%. On the flip side there is also a chance you cast it and it does not stop a single attack at all and you get hit by all 3 and waste the slot. The chance that happens is 27%. It is 18 times more likely to stop no damage at all then it is to stop 56hps of damage.
I'd like to, once again, lean on the side of Shield being only useful for multiclassed characters and low-level warlocks. Given the choice between casting a 1st-level defensive spell with one of my two or three spell slots and casting a 4th- or 5th-level one, I know what I'd pick.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
Guys, this discussion about the dragon is pointless. It is a very specific case that may or may not happen in a game. And, in addition, there can be many other variables that favor or disfavor the use of shield.
I believe that it is better to focus on general arguments, applicable in most cases, than to go to the specific case.
The hexblade is the most versatile, when it comes to combining armed combat and spellcasting and especially by multiclassing any charisma-based class into a powerful melee class. If you just want to dip into warlock, hexblade is almost always the best option.
However, if you want to go full warlock, hexblade is still good, but not necessarily better than all other classes. Personally I think the genie's ability to take their housing with them and short-rest anywhere makes them at least as good as hexblades.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
+ Instaboot to murderhobos + I don't watch Critical Role, and no, I really shouldn't either +
Shield is one reason I tend to prefer to MC my warlocks to get some 1st and 2nd level slots for utility. There's generally not a lot at very high levels that I feel is worth agonizing over, and I don't mind delaying my spells and mystic arcanum a bit in favor of utility I use nearly every session.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Sure but an attack that beats disadvantage is likely to beat shield too,
Not really? If your warlock's AC is only 13 or so, then its really not all that hard to beat disadvantage. Not to mention that in this scenario of fighting a young dragon, there would be no disadvantage: they have blind sight. A lot of more powerful monsters have true sight, blind sight, or devil's sight.
It is not that hard to beat the shield spell either. If your AC is 13 the Young Red Dragon needs a 3 to hit you. He needs an 8 to hit you if you use shield.
I agree on a Dragon, or anything with truesight SOM is not the best spell to use. But against that kind of enemy shield is still weak. If he hits you and you cast shield you have a 73% chance of still taking all the damage from that attack, with the shield in place you have a 65% percent chance of taking damage from the next two attacks as well.
On a Hexblade against a Young Red Dragon Blink is the right call for in-combat defense. It will stop a flat 50% of attacks for 10 rounds without using concentration. This is comparedto shield which will stop 25% of attacks for 1 turn.
Its much harder to beat an AC of 24, and the first time its activated should be an automatic block.
It is never an automatic block, that is not how the spell works and if your DM hand waves this tells you if it will work so you can save the slot it hardly makes it better for you. For example the dragon rolls a 14 the DM tells you "shield won't stop it" so you save the spell and take 21 damage. Next attack he rolls an 8 and misses. Third attack he rolls a 12 and DM annouuces "shield will work" - you cast it and it saves 13 damage you would have taken.
The DM telling you that did not not change the outcome or damage, the result is the same- 1 slot used, saved 13 damage and that kind of thing will be the most common attack sequence.
If the DM announces whether shield will work to stop the attack it makes the slot use more efficient but the Dragon, but does not change the average damage to you becuase using shield does not change the target it needs to beat shield.
Shield works best with a very high AC against a low attack bonus. A Warlock has trouble with both of those in tier 2-3.
A Young Red Dragon bite will rarely take down a 5th level AOA in one shot.
Ok, you get to block a little of the damage from the second attack too. Its basically the same outcome.
The amount of damage matters. Statistically you are taking less damage than if you cast shield and the Dragon is also taking damage.
If you are a hexblade warlock with a shield, you probably are not holding a weapon in your other hand. That is part of the versatility of the class: being a well defended spell oriented warlock is also a possibility.
Otherwise, improved pact weapon to use your weapon hand for somatic components or the war caster feat is hardly uncommon if you are level 10.
I would disagree. Most of the Hexblade abilities are centered around using weapons. Also to be clear it is not only a weapon you need to go without, you are also carrying no wand or spell pouch, and you don't get attacks of opportunity.
I would also argue that with a 19AC a Warlock has mediocre defense, not really a good defense once you get to the top of tier 2. He is better than a lot of characters, but lacks either the hit points or the AC of the really good defensive options. Something like a Bladesinger, or defense-oriented Eldritch Knight or Sword and board Paladin or Cleric is going to have a significantly higher AC in combat, and a high constitution Barbarian is going to have comparable AC with the ability to take far more damage.
You can't use your pact weapon with shield because the shield spell does not have a material component. Sure if you get warcaster then you can use the shield spell .... twice between short rests and cast no other spells from level 1-5.
ven if you have a 19AC though and go weaponless and only use spells with no M, you will still average taking 16 damage with the shield spell vs 7 with AOA against the Red Dragon. The dragon is CR10 and has a +10 attack bonus, shield will fail A LOT.
I don't agree with your math on this. With a +10 to hit against an effective AC of 24, there is little more than a 1/4th chance of the attack beating the AC.
The chance of hitting a 24 AC is 7/20 or 35% that is not 1/4th it is over 1/3rd. The Dragon attack sequence is bite for 20.5, claw for 13, claw for 13. That is 46 damage. 35% of 46.5 is 16.275.
Meanwhile, the Warlock with 13 AC and 25 temp hit points is basically guaranteed to take every attack head on.
Why are we changing the comparson here? Why is one Hexblade in Medium Armor and shield while the other is naked?
Even if this is true you are still wrong. Going Naked the Dragon hits 90% of the time. He does 41.85 damage on average against the naked warlock. AOA abosorbs 25 of that, meaning the Warlock took 16.85 damage on average less than 1 point difference from the armored warlock. The Dragon also takes over 50 damage on average assuming he uses his bite first (or more if he starts with a claw)
So a naked Hexblade facing a dragon with a 5th level AOA has the same defense as one in half plate and shield with sheild spell on tap while also damaging the Dragon by more than a Warlock can do with an attack action or cantrip.
Put the two Warlocks in the same 19AC armor and the guy who cast AOA takes only 3 damage on average while dealing over 50 on average to the Dragon
For example against a Purple Worm who attacks you twice with shield spell and AC 19 you will take on average 56 combined damage from both his attacks if you use shield spell.
What even is this? You have a 50% chance of his attack missing, so how are you deciding this damage? If the first attack can't be blocked, you're probably swallowed anyway, so the second attack won't come.
No there is a 40% chance to miss. A purple worm has a 14 attack bonus. That means he has a 60% chance to hit a 24 AC (40% chance to miss). His attacks do 84 damage total. That is an average of 50 damage. It is not 56 like I said earlier but it is still substantially more than if he had AOA at 5th level.
Note I assume he failed the Con save for the poision damage.
Also I'll point out: a warlock with 13 AC and AoA and SoM is just useless here.
Why is every Warlock who does not have shield spell naked?
Then that warlock is either swallowed and removed from the fight, or miraculously beats a dc19 dex save and takes a second attack that can't miss for another round of damage, and gets poisoned on top unless it makes a dc19 con save.
This brings up another interesting point. If you damage a purple worm for 30in a turn he spits you back out. Running AOA you have 25 of that met. Meaning if you have AOA at 5th level running and he swallows you, then you have damaged him 25 already and still have a reaction which you can use for hellish rebuke (average 26.5 damage) to easily break the 30 threshold and force him to spit you back out that very turn.
As noted above Blink is the defensive play here it would have stopped him from attacking you at all half the time and would have a 50% of getting you out of his stomach every turn if you are swallowed and can't beat the 30 that turn.
Going against the guy with a shield he is probably going to swallow him too.
level AOA will cause 52 damage on average against the Dragon example above if he attacks you 3 times
That is an impressive amount of damage, but at 10th level that is going to leave most warlocks pretty close to going down, taking around 30 damage in addition to any damage received from an initial breath attack or subsequent one. I can't imagine it taking more than one round before the warlock who isn't making death saving throws has surpassed them in damage.
Ok. but then this is true for the guy using shield too. First off if he already breathed on you then shield-man took full damage from that while AOA man mitigated 25 of it (without damaging the Dragon). If he again casts AOA (because he is near death like you said) he will outlast shield-man.
There may be (probably is) a better spell than AOA to cast, but AOA is better than depending on shield which is what we are comparing.
I think the real lesson here is that defensive spells are just not amazing on warlocks except very situationally. A strategy that depends on being in the way of direct harm is not optimal. The spell slot is always better spent on powerful damage or control spells unless the warlock is just desperate. My point is that with shield, there is at least a chance to avoid harm altogether and you get to save that investment until you know it will pay some dividend.
I agree with most of this. The problem with your logic is the last sentence. With Shield and only 2 spell slots per short rest there will rarely be a chance to avoid harm all together.
It is literally part (not even all) of 2 rounds you can possibly mitigate some damage. Unless your battles are only 1-round long it won't be able to do that. You don't have enough slots to use it reliably, and that is aside from the fact you are not very effective in combat if you don't cast spells that will affect the enemy.
If you are multiclassed with a lot of low-level slots it is a completely different story.
That's not quite how Shield works. You only cast it when you get hit by a attack so it will never be a wasted spell slot.
It depends on what you're trying to do. Generally speaking though, yes, Hexblade is mechanically better than everything else outside niche applications. I personally LIKE those niche applications and that's where I tend to go with my warlocks, but hexblade is almost never the wrong pick for any kind of warlock you put together whether it's an EB spammer or some flavor of weaponlock.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Not the same. Shield will negate loads of damage and probably discourage incoming attack rolls for that turn. The other combo is using two spell slots, two separate actions, and can be readily undone with a very common scenario.
Armor of Agathys is not concentration, and I think the argument is that the temp hps are not wasted because they would be used up on either the dex save or the attack that hits you and they do it without using a reaction or typically even usin an action at all in combat. It also upcasts vey well making it useful on a 5th level slot even..
Shadow of the moil makes you heavily obscured which means enemies can't see you and that will mean they can't target you with anything that requires them to see you, so that works against a good number of dex save effects and an even larger number of intelligence, wisdom and charisma save effects. Cenrtainly not everything, but a lot.
After 3rd level Shield is just not effective on a Warlock because you do not have enough slots. If you are comparing it to SOM alone, if you use both your slots on shield it is going to give you a +5 AC for less than two rounds worth of attacks (from the triggering attack to the start of your turn). SOM will give enemies disadvantage on all attacks until you lose concentration and that is before you consider any of the other SOM effects (damage and preventing targeting by anything that can see you). Even just looking just at preventing hits; I think it generally beats shield. There may be a few corner cases where 2 castings of shield will disrupt more attacks and save more damage (for example blindsight), but that will be rare I think.
The effectiveness of shield is also mitigated by the Warlock's low AC. Once SOM is available a lot of enemies will beat shield+AC. Depending on your table and how the DM plays this, it could mean completely wasting your spell.
Another option for comparison on a Hexblade is blink, which is not concentration. Blink will flat prevent 50% of all attacks and damaging effects for an entire battle using the same the same slot cost.
The math here changes dramatically if you have lots of low level slots, but single-class Warlocks don't.
But shield saved you from the attack. It did what it was meant to do. Its not wasted.
And at higher levels, that might be saving you from way more damage than AoA or SoM could block for you, with the added bonus that you get to use your actual actions for attacks or more actively useful spells like control or aoe damage.
About your argument over Shield, I would say that it does drop out at higher levels. Instantaneous spells are rarely a good pick for warlocks, unless they are up-to-level, super powerful spells like Fireball and, of course, Shield. With so few spell slots to spend, as well as the fact that any warlock worth its salt has Eldritch Blast with some improvement invocations for damage, they need to choose spells that last, affecting you or your opponents over several rounds. Shadow of Moil and Armor of Agathys are both examples of spells that last, and are therefore a good use of your warlock spell slots.
On the other hand, Shield is a great spell to pick up if you're multiclassing the Hexblade with the Bard, Paladin, or Sorcerer, who have more low-level spell slots to burn through. This is also the case with Hex, a spell that I would take as a low-level warlock but ditch at level 5. In fact, multiclassing a Hexblade warlock into a few levels of Bard or Sorcerer might be a good idea just to get those low-level slots to shield and hex with.
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
It is unlikely it will shield you from more than SOM since SOM will cause disadvantage on most attacks and operate over multiple rounds.
AOA is not typically cast in combat, it is cast before combat so there is no action cost for it. Also cast at 5th level it saves a minimum of 25 damage. It is not a safe bet that shield will save you that much damage. Further if you are using shield spell then you are not using your pact slots as an action, which means losing your action to cast a defensive buff is not as big a deal.
In general shield will not save as much as AOA against a hard hitting, high level opponent. The opposite is actually true. For example a Young Red Dragon bite does an average of 20.5. AOA, cast at 5th level will stop all of that and have another 4.5 temp hps left to go. Shield MIGHT stop that and it might not. Shield might not save you from that damage at all.
That Young Red Dragon bites your Warlock in half plate (AC 17) and you cast shield. There are 14 possible rolls that will hit AC17, shield makes 5 of them miss, so the chance Shield actually stops the first attack from hitting is only 5 in 14. The dragon also gets 2 claw attacks that cause 13 damage each, so if you cast it on the bite there is a 5 in 20 chance it stops each of those attacks too.
When you put this all together against said young Red Dragons shield spell will stop 13.8 hit points of damage if you cast it on the first bite attack (including chance of saving you from later claws), 7.9 if you cast it on the first claw attack and 4.6 if you cast it on the second claw attack. The straight up probabilities assuming a bite-claw-claw sequence:
1. 70% chance you cast shield on the first attack and it saves 13.8 on average over all 3 attacks
2. 21% chance you cast it on the second attack and it saves 7.9 damage over all 3 attacks
3. 6% chance you cast it on the 3rd attack and it saves 4.6 damage over all 3 attacks
4. 3% chance you do not cast it at all
Average damage done by that attack sequence is 32.6 with no spell. Against shield-Warlock the overall probability is 97% chance that you use the spell slot and on average it will save 11.6 points of damage. Against a full attack action with shield in your back pocket your warlock will take on average 21 points of damage from the dragon on the first turn.
Going into the same attack sequence with AOA cast at 5th level will take on average 7.6 real hp damage level your AND the Dragon will take on average 52 cold damage (although it could potentially be 25, 50 or 75 depending on how the dragon rolls damage).
This is with no breath, if the dragon breathes on one of those turns it is worse for the shield user.
SOM also uses concentration though, meaning that at higher levels its practically going down the first time you get hit by an aoe attack or an attack that beats disadvantage (which isn't that hard if you aren't a hexblade warlock with medium armor and shield).
A young red dragon has 3 attacks. That AOA will go down and then you have 2 more attacks coming at you.
With medium armor for 19 AC and a shield, the shield spell gives drops the chance of those 3 attacks hitting you to much less than 50%. And if the attacks roll so well that it wouldn't help anyways, you don't have to use the spell.
Not to mention you and your party will take fewer attacks if you throw out an eldritch blast and help kill the dragon faster, instead of using an ability that plans for the dragon to hit you.
Shield is a fantastic spell for any class... Except for the warlock. With the few spell slots the warlock has, it's underutilizing one of them. I'm not saying it's wasteful, but really what you want as a Warlock is to make the most of your limited magical resources. The cost of the spell vs the benefit just isn't worth it. The warlock has much more interesting things to spend his limited resources on. He is like a person who can only pay with $100, and does not receive change. The best thing is that he tries to spend that $100 on things that cost that, or as close as possible, and not on things that cost $10.
Sure but an attack that beats disadvantage is likely to beat shield too, and most attacks are going to be a relatively low con save. An AOE can take it down pretty easy of course, but the flip side to that is spells that require the enemy to see the target can't target you at all. It might fail early or it might last 3 or 4 rounds, long after you will have used up your two slots for shield.
You are most likely to use SOM if you are going to be in melee fighting goons or enemies with gaze/spell abilities that target you specifically. You are probably not going to use it against someone throwing AOEs, and you are not going to use shield against that enemy either.
A Young Red Dragon bite will rarely take down a 5th level AOA in one shot. The bite does 20.5 damage on average, a 5th level AOA is 25 temp hps. If you are rolling damage a hit with a bite will take down AOA in one shot 19% of the time (if it hits). A claw attack will never take down AOA at 5th level unless you crit and roll near max crit damage. So usually AOA will last for 2 hits against a Young Red Dragon.
I considered all 3 attacks in the math above. 5th-level AOA in an attack sequence against a Young Red Dragon and the Warlock will take on average 8 damage and the dragon will take on average 52. Using Shield in the same situation a Warlock will take on average 24.
That assumes Half Plate and 14 Dex (AC 17)
The shield spell has a somatic component. You need to carry a shield for 19AC which means you can't use a weapon or a spell with a material component and cast the shield spell unless you have a feat. So 19AC does not generally work with the shield spell. That is why I used a 17 AC above.
Even if you have a 19AC though and go weaponless and only use spells with no M, you will still average taking 16 damage with the shield spell vs 7 with AOA against the Red Dragon. The dragon is CR10 and has a +10 attack bonus, shield will fail A LOT. This will get worse as you get better enemies and shield will rarely work to stop anything.
For example against a Purple Worm who attacks you twice with shield spell and AC 19 you will take on average 56 combined damage from both his attacks if you use shield spell. With a 5th level AOA you will take on average 40 and at the same time deal either 25 or 50 damage to the Worm (depending on whether he attacks with his stinger or bite first).
AOA is usually cast out of combat since it lasts an hour, so it usually does not use an action in combat. However even if you cast it in combat, using a 5th level AOA will cause 52 damage on average against the Dragon example above if he attacks you 3 times (with AC 17). That is more than a 20th level Warlock will do with EB/AB even if all 4 beams hit and you can do this at level 9.
So comparing AOA to shield/EB using the same 5th level pact slot:
You will take LESS damage with AOA than with shield
You will deal MORE damage to the enemy with AOA than with EB/AB
Not really? If your warlock's AC is only 13 or so, then its really not all that hard to beat disadvantage. Not to mention that in this scenario of fighting a young dragon, there would be no disadvantage: they have blind sight. A lot of more powerful monsters have true sight, blind sight, or devil's sight.
Its much harder to beat an AC of 24, and the first time its activated should be an automatic block.
Ok, you get to block a little of the damage from the second attack too. Its basically the same outcome.
If you are a hexblade warlock with a shield, you probably are not holding a weapon in your other hand. That is part of the versatility of the class: being a well defended spell oriented warlock is also a possibility.
Otherwise, improved pact weapon to use your weapon hand for somatic components or the war caster feat is hardly uncommon if you are level 10.
I don't agree with your math on this. With a +10 to hit against an effective AC of 24, there is little more than a 1/4th chance of the attack beating the AC.
Meanwhile, the Warlock with 13 AC and 25 temp hit points is basically guaranteed to take every attack head on.
What even is this? You have a 50% chance of his attack missing, so how are you deciding this damage? If the first attack can't be blocked, you're probably swallowed anyway, so the second attack won't come.
Also I'll point out: a warlock with 13 AC and AoA and SoM is just useless here. The Purple worm hits them even when it rolls a 1 on its attack roll, which is redundant because it sees past SoM with tremorsense and blindsight.
Then that warlock is either swallowed and removed from the fight, or miraculously beats a dc19 dex save and takes a second attack that can't miss for another round of damage, and gets poisoned on top unless it makes a dc19 con save.
That is an impressive amount of damage, but at 10th level that is going to leave most warlocks pretty close to going down, taking around 30 damage in addition to any damage received from an initial breath attack or subsequent one. I can't imagine it taking more than one round before the warlock who isn't making death saving throws has surpassed them in damage.
I think the real lesson here is that defensive spells are just not amazing on warlocks except very situationally. A strategy that depends on being in the way of direct harm is not optimal. The spell slot is always better spent on powerful damage or control spells unless the warlock is just desperate. My point is that with shield, there is at least a chance to avoid harm altogether and you get to save that investment until you know it will pay some dividend.
The amount of damage being blocked by a shield spell also increases though, even if the shield spell's benefit doesn't. Blocking 50 damage from the first 2 attacks of an adult dragon is a lot of benefit.
But you are missing the math. This will not happen. I was talking about a Yung Dragon. An adult is even worse. To start with 2 attack from an adult Red do not do 50, they do 41 (26 bite, 15 claw). All 3 attacks combined do 56
An adult Red Dragon has a +14 to hit. If you have AC 17 that means he needs a 3 to hit you before shield (90%). His DPR against you without using shield at all is 50 DPR with all 3 attacks.
With shield you have an AC of 22 and he needs a 8 to hit you (65%). If you cast shield the Dragon will on average do 36 damage to you.
So shield does not save you 50 hps. It takes the average damage the Dragon will do from 56 to 26 if you have a 17 AC. So it saves you 20 points of damage on average. AOA is 25 and damages the dragon.
Sure if it caused 3 attacks which would otherwise hit to miss shield will "save" 56hps. The chance it will do that though is extremely small - 1.6%. On the flip side there is also a chance you cast it and it does not stop a single attack at all and you get hit by all 3 and waste the slot. The chance that happens is 27%. It is 18 times more likely to stop no damage at all then it is to stop 56hps of damage.
I'd like to, once again, lean on the side of Shield being only useful for multiclassed characters and low-level warlocks. Given the choice between casting a 1st-level defensive spell with one of my two or three spell slots and casting a 4th- or 5th-level one, I know what I'd pick.
Panda-wat (I hate my username) is somehow convinced that he is objectively right about everything D&D related even though he obviously is not. Considering that, he'd probably make a great D&D youtuber.
"If I die, I can live with that." ~Luke Hart, the DM lair
Guys, this discussion about the dragon is pointless. It is a very specific case that may or may not happen in a game. And, in addition, there can be many other variables that favor or disfavor the use of shield.
I believe that it is better to focus on general arguments, applicable in most cases, than to go to the specific case.
The hexblade is the most versatile, when it comes to combining armed combat and spellcasting and especially by multiclassing any charisma-based class into a powerful melee class. If you just want to dip into warlock, hexblade is almost always the best option.
However, if you want to go full warlock, hexblade is still good, but not necessarily better than all other classes. Personally I think the genie's ability to take their housing with them and short-rest anywhere makes them at least as good as hexblades.
+ Instaboot to murderhobos + I don't watch Critical Role, and no, I really shouldn't either +
Shield is one reason I tend to prefer to MC my warlocks to get some 1st and 2nd level slots for utility. There's generally not a lot at very high levels that I feel is worth agonizing over, and I don't mind delaying my spells and mystic arcanum a bit in favor of utility I use nearly every session.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
It is not that hard to beat the shield spell either. If your AC is 13 the Young Red Dragon needs a 3 to hit you. He needs an 8 to hit you if you use shield.
I agree on a Dragon, or anything with truesight SOM is not the best spell to use. But against that kind of enemy shield is still weak. If he hits you and you cast shield you have a 73% chance of still taking all the damage from that attack, with the shield in place you have a 65% percent chance of taking damage from the next two attacks as well.
On a Hexblade against a Young Red Dragon Blink is the right call for in-combat defense. It will stop a flat 50% of attacks for 10 rounds without using concentration. This is comparedto shield which will stop 25% of attacks for 1 turn.
It is never an automatic block, that is not how the spell works and if your DM hand waves this tells you if it will work so you can save the slot it hardly makes it better for you. For example the dragon rolls a 14 the DM tells you "shield won't stop it" so you save the spell and take 21 damage. Next attack he rolls an 8 and misses. Third attack he rolls a 12 and DM annouuces "shield will work" - you cast it and it saves 13 damage you would have taken.
The DM telling you that did not not change the outcome or damage, the result is the same- 1 slot used, saved 13 damage and that kind of thing will be the most common attack sequence.
If the DM announces whether shield will work to stop the attack it makes the slot use more efficient but the Dragon, but does not change the average damage to you becuase using shield does not change the target it needs to beat shield.
Shield works best with a very high AC against a low attack bonus. A Warlock has trouble with both of those in tier 2-3.
The amount of damage matters. Statistically you are taking less damage than if you cast shield and the Dragon is also taking damage.
I would disagree. Most of the Hexblade abilities are centered around using weapons. Also to be clear it is not only a weapon you need to go without, you are also carrying no wand or spell pouch, and you don't get attacks of opportunity.
I would also argue that with a 19AC a Warlock has mediocre defense, not really a good defense once you get to the top of tier 2. He is better than a lot of characters, but lacks either the hit points or the AC of the really good defensive options. Something like a Bladesinger, or defense-oriented Eldritch Knight or Sword and board Paladin or Cleric is going to have a significantly higher AC in combat, and a high constitution Barbarian is going to have comparable AC with the ability to take far more damage.
You can't use your pact weapon with shield because the shield spell does not have a material component. Sure if you get warcaster then you can use the shield spell .... twice between short rests and cast no other spells from level 1-5.
The chance of hitting a 24 AC is 7/20 or 35% that is not 1/4th it is over 1/3rd. The Dragon attack sequence is bite for 20.5, claw for 13, claw for 13. That is 46 damage. 35% of 46.5 is 16.275.
Why are we changing the comparson here? Why is one Hexblade in Medium Armor and shield while the other is naked?
Even if this is true you are still wrong. Going Naked the Dragon hits 90% of the time. He does 41.85 damage on average against the naked warlock. AOA abosorbs 25 of that, meaning the Warlock took 16.85 damage on average less than 1 point difference from the armored warlock. The Dragon also takes over 50 damage on average assuming he uses his bite first (or more if he starts with a claw)
So a naked Hexblade facing a dragon with a 5th level AOA has the same defense as one in half plate and shield with sheild spell on tap while also damaging the Dragon by more than a Warlock can do with an attack action or cantrip.
Put the two Warlocks in the same 19AC armor and the guy who cast AOA takes only 3 damage on average while dealing over 50 on average to the Dragon
No there is a 40% chance to miss. A purple worm has a 14 attack bonus. That means he has a 60% chance to hit a 24 AC (40% chance to miss). His attacks do 84 damage total. That is an average of 50 damage. It is not 56 like I said earlier but it is still substantially more than if he had AOA at 5th level.
Note I assume he failed the Con save for the poision damage.
Why is every Warlock who does not have shield spell naked?
This brings up another interesting point. If you damage a purple worm for 30in a turn he spits you back out. Running AOA you have 25 of that met. Meaning if you have AOA at 5th level running and he swallows you, then you have damaged him 25 already and still have a reaction which you can use for hellish rebuke (average 26.5 damage) to easily break the 30 threshold and force him to spit you back out that very turn.
As noted above Blink is the defensive play here it would have stopped him from attacking you at all half the time and would have a 50% of getting you out of his stomach every turn if you are swallowed and can't beat the 30 that turn.
Going against the guy with a shield he is probably going to swallow him too.
Ok. but then this is true for the guy using shield too. First off if he already breathed on you then shield-man took full damage from that while AOA man mitigated 25 of it (without damaging the Dragon). If he again casts AOA (because he is near death like you said) he will outlast shield-man.
There may be (probably is) a better spell than AOA to cast, but AOA is better than depending on shield which is what we are comparing.
I agree with most of this. The problem with your logic is the last sentence. With Shield and only 2 spell slots per short rest there will rarely be a chance to avoid harm all together.
It is literally part (not even all) of 2 rounds you can possibly mitigate some damage. Unless your battles are only 1-round long it won't be able to do that. You don't have enough slots to use it reliably, and that is aside from the fact you are not very effective in combat if you don't cast spells that will affect the enemy.
If you are multiclassed with a lot of low-level slots it is a completely different story.