By the way, I saw in the thread that someone was worried because the bladelock doesn't have healing spells. I understand that your concern is because you can't heal yourself. Well, my partner chose lifedrinker, and it really is a bit of a weak invocation. The extra d6 damage is fine, since it applies to every hit from your Pact Weapon. But the healing is marginal. At level 9+ 1d6 healing per turn has hardly any impact. That is something that I have seen that has to be adjusted, and I will say so in the survey.
I have also seen that someone was worried about the shield. My partner uses a shield, what I don't know is if he got it with one of his free feats (human or background) or with lessons of the first one. The problem with the shield is that it takes up one hand, which is a problem you have to solve with warcaster. And it is logical that you have to invest resources in that. You are good in melee, with the arcane list to protect you. You are SAD. You have big pockets full of tricks. Do you also want to use a shield? Well, invest your resources in that. In my opinion you don't need it. But if you want it, you can have it.
I just hope that bladelock won't be obligated to use invocations just to catch up with real gishes out there. Again. Having played both Vengeance paladin and Hexblade warlock, boy did I feel the envy.
I don't follow you kamchatmonk. I've played both subclasses, and honestly I didn't find the hexblade inferior. In fact with armor of agathys + Shadow of moil the hexblade was much more powerful. I also tell you that the hexblade began to tire me a bit in combat, since its spell slots only went to Armor of Agathys and Shadow of moil. And, occasionally, on some Sickening Radiance-type area spell. But generally the AoA + SoM combo was more effective, which makes you both difficult to hit and risky to hit (since whoever hits you is going to take a lot of "free" damage). Plus he had the Eldritch Blast for when he couldn't go melee.
Maybe I'm not understanding you. But if you say Vengeance paladin is more powerful than hexblade, I don't agree.
And going back to the bladelock from the playtest, in game it seemed much more gish than the hexblade. And the person who played the bladelock agrees with me. In addition to the fact that he found it much more fun to play than the hexblade, in the same way that I found my playtest tomelock more fun than any other warlock I played since 2014.
I don't follow you kamchatmonk. I've played both subclasses, and honestly I didn't find the hexblade inferior. In fact with armor of agathys + Shadow of moil the hexblade was much more powerful. I also tell you that the hexblade began to tire me a bit in combat, since its spell slots only went to Armor of Agathys and Shadow of moil. And, occasionally, on some Sickening Radiance-type area spell. But generally the AoA + SoM combo was more effective, which makes you both difficult to hit and risky to hit (since whoever hits you is going to take a lot of "free" damage). Plus he had the Eldritch Blast for when he couldn't go melee.
Maybe I'm not understanding you. But if you say Vengeance paladin is more powerful than hexblade, I don't agree.
And going back to the bladelock from the playtest, in game it seemed much more gish than the hexblade. And the person who played the bladelock agrees with me. In addition to the fact that he found it much more fun to play than the hexblade, in the same way that I found my playtest tomelock more fun than any other warlock I played since 2014.
Those are great combos indeed, but with the new UA Bladelock those combos are pushed all the way to late-mid game at level 13.
Bladesinger is easily the best gish and it’s not even close really.
Except paladin and ranger have spells, too. Access to arcane spell list is not some kind of OP feature that puts the class above others and makes it necessary to nerf it. Not to mention that warlock is a half caster and therefore can't blast for any competitive damage.
In theory, correct. In practice, wrong. First off, Eldritch Blast. Hardly any other arguments are needed, but let's see. Paladins must use their spells for Smites to keep up with other martials' damage. They can use the smite spells to apply some conditions or other spells. But mostly, these slots would go for smites. For Rangers, expect some control and healing spells. Warlock gets to blast. I don't think these different uses for spells should be measured one against the other, because that's not really possible. Neither is this what I meant.
Instead, Warlocks get their invocations. These include some spells one can cast at will, and yes, Mystic Arcanum. Even if you only dedicate one invocation for that, that's still a 3rd-level spell slot at the 5th level when the other half-casters only get 2nd, and by level 17, a 9th-level spell slot when everyone else only gets their 5th-level spells. This is just one invocation dedicated, and you still have the same number of normal slots as they do, keeping you ahead. And again, Eldritch Blast.
So even if you believe the spell lists are perfectly balanced, you're still coming out on top in this regard. Sure, you need to choose your invocations, but that's not a tax, it's the intention of the feature. And as someone else mentioned, you do get competitive blasting, with Eldritch Blast.
Lastly, and most importantly, your spells are actually better, because your spellcasting modifier is better. Except for Rangers using Shillelegh specifically, all other Rangers and Paladins need a different ability score for attacks, and usually, that means worse spellcasting modifiers. Especially Paladins, who also need high Con due to incompatibility with ranged weapons. If you roll for stats and get great rolls, this might not be felt as much, but either when you roll average/low, or use point buy/standard array for stats, you'll feel the difference.
How in the hell are they supposed to be better than paladins when they have weaker HP, no shield or heavy armor proficiency, and no ability to use a two-handed weapon? No crazy saving throw aura, no healing spells and dedicated healing feature on top of it, no immunities. Oh, right, they have this elite VIP access to the mighty Arcane spell list which by itself it much more powerful than anything of the same level, especiallly given the fact that it wasn't designed for healing or support.
First off, Eldritch Blast. Second, the ability to attack with the same modifier for both spells and weapon attacks. Third, Mystic Arcanum for higher-level spells. 4th, a single invocation to grab a feat and get that shield proficiency, if they want. They can swap that later if they ever want anything else. 5th, "weaker HP" is literally -1 average per level. If you're using fixed HP, as most people do, it is exactly -1 HP per level. Invest into Con, since you can because you don't need to also support your Str, and now you're equal. Also, free casting of Flase Life can make a big difference at lower levels. 6th, you don't need a two-handed weapon when you can EB to deal 1d10+AS from range. And if you use a weapon? 1d8 is still good. Plus, you have Hex. Also, you can't take 2-handed weapons, but you can take versatile ones and hold them 2-handed, and now you have 1d10. 9th, the crazy saving throw aura is cool but usually amounts to a mere +1 or +2. Again, because Paladins just can't invest so much in Cha, along with Str and Con that are more important. 10th, I know I already mentioned EB, but the ability to just disengage and remain effective from range is really underrated. A Paladin who runs out of resources just remains stuck there in the front, watching their HP deplete, or chooses to flee entirely. They can't disengage and remain effective from a distance.
Turn on your imagination. If the patron is chosen at 1st level and the terms of the pact at 3rd, it alleviates the problem of "but what am I before level 3 if I don't have a pact?" that some people whined about. You pick a patron at level 1 and choose the flavor, then you can choose how you serve, what role your patron wants you to fulfil. There's much more than those original three pact boons. You could be an artifact collector, a possessed host, an eldritch assassin of patron's rivals, a planar messenger/courier with supreme mobility and communication...
It does solve that problem, but as far as I'm concerned, I'd rather subclasses would just remain at 1st level. Obviously, WotC wants to go a different route. But other than that, there's absolutely no reason why you can't decide on a patron before even starting to play. You're supposed to do that. Then, at level 3, you gain the benefits for the first time. The only strange part is that you now can technically just swap a patron between the 1st and 3rd levels. But why not? Perhaps your first pact is with a lesser entity, and then you make another one with a greater one? Perhaps the master of the first one?
As for your suggestions, notice how differently each pact boon changes your playstyle. What is a blade lock supposed to do from 1st to 3rd level, spam EB? Or are we going to lock that option into only one single subclass that makes it useful, like the Hexblade and Pact Weapon are for the 5th edition? I also find it hard to believe that my choice of how I use the patron's powers has more effect than which patrol I choose. You tell me that choosing whether I serve a celestial or fiend is less impactful than choosing if I have a servant or a book with a handful of spells?
Let's compare a level 9 Paladin with a level 9, bladepact, Warlock.
Warlock will take improved pact weapon, lifedrinker, eldritch smite, and agonizing blast. The fifth can be anything, maybe a 3rd level mystic arcanum for Hunger of Hadar. They'll wield a longsword two-handed for a d10 damage dice. With 14 dex and half plate they'll have 17AC. With two ASIs down they'll have 20 charisma.
At level 9 both Paladin and Warlock have level 3 spell slots to spend on smites, both can smite once per turn. The Warlock gets 2d8 to 4d8 force damage from an eldritch smite, Paladin gets 2d8 to 4d8 radiant damage from a divine smite.
Paladin will take polearm master and use a glaive, so they're capable of getting three attacks a turn. With another ASI they'll get their strength to 20. They will take full plate for 18AC although they'll probably take the defensive fighting style to get to 19AC.
If the Warlock expends a third level spell slot for Hex that's an additional 2d6 necrotic damage, once per turn.
Warlock gets (1d10 (weapon dice) +1 (improved pact weapon) +5 (charisma) + d6 (lifedrinker)) x 2 + 2d6 (hex) = 2d10 + 12 + 4d6, they can expend a spell slot for eldritch smite, as mentioned previously.
Paladin gets (1d10 (weapon dice) + 5 (strength)) x 2 + (1d4 (polearm master dice) + 5 (strength)) = 2d10 +15 +d4, again they can expend a spell slot for divine smite.
At level 9 damage for the Warlock (assuming all hits) ranges from 18 to 56, and damage for the Paladin ranges from 18 to 39. The Paladin does add another 3 to 24 damage at level 11 when it gets Radiant Strikes, so 21 to 63 damage.
So the bladepact Warlock is actually comparable to a polearm master Paladin, despite not having access to heavy weapons, thanks to the extra magical damage they add. The Paladin does have the option of taking great weapon master, for proficiency extra damage each turn, and sentinel, but at level 9 they'd only have one of those, and therefore still be at strength 19 for +4 instead of +5. Even if the Warlock drops improved pact weapon they only lose 2 damage top and bottom, 16 to 54.
Because they're limited to just one smite per turn, either divine smite or a smite spell, the Paladin's power spike has been pulled way down. If the Paladin gets spirit shroud, a bonus d8 radiant damage per hit at level 3, so does the Warlock.
With eldritch smite, and with smite spells and smite abilities excluding each other, the Warlock doesn't need anything from the Hexblade to still be pretty good at hitting things.
If you want healing you can just play a Celestial Warlock.
I don't follow you kamchatmonk. I've played both subclasses, and honestly I didn't find the hexblade inferior. In fact with armor of agathys + Shadow of moil the hexblade was much more powerful. I also tell you that the hexblade began to tire me a bit in combat, since its spell slots only went to Armor of Agathys and Shadow of moil. And, occasionally, on some Sickening Radiance-type area spell. But generally the AoA + SoM combo was more effective, which makes you both difficult to hit and risky to hit (since whoever hits you is going to take a lot of "free" damage). Plus he had the Eldritch Blast for when he couldn't go melee.
Maybe I'm not understanding you. But if you say Vengeance paladin is more powerful than hexblade, I don't agree.
And going back to the bladelock from the playtest, in game it seemed much more gish than the hexblade. And the person who played the bladelock agrees with me. In addition to the fact that he found it much more fun to play than the hexblade, in the same way that I found my playtest tomelock more fun than any other warlock I played since 2014.
AoA and SoM are indeed the essence of a hexblade. So much so that every other choice of spells is practically irrelevant. AoA, SoM, and then you just bonk things mindlessly. It is powerful, yes, but the problem is that once you try to stray from that path, you start sucking. 5e hexblade has a very narrow path they must take to be effective. Improved Pact Weapon, Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker invocations, AoA and SoM for spells you will always use in combat, and that's not up to discussion. Most of your customization and adaptability flies out of the window because there's only one way for you to be really effective. Meanwhile Vengeance paladin didn't have to bother. There was stuff to address a much broader range of situations, freedom of choice, a paladin doesn't have to stick to the one and only cookie-cutter build to stay effective.
I'm all for the new half-caster warlock exactly because there's now spell slots to use and you can finally not only precast AoA and SoM all the goddamn time forever until you die of boredom. I just want the other half of warlock to be strong enough so that there isn't that one mandatory build that allows you to stay competitive. I just want legitimate choices, not illusions of choice.
It's because the Arcane spell list is vastly superior to the Divine one. Paladins get SMITE because their spells aren't that great so they can afford tons of slots for SMITE. A Bladelock is a true gish where their spells are better than any SMITE would be - Shield, Find Familiar, Magic Missile, Hideous Laughter, Sleep, Misty Step, Mirror Image, Blur, Web, Levitate, Haste, Fireball, Counterspell, Thunderstep, Polymorph, Dimension Door, Bigby's Hand, Wall of Force.
The main problem with the UA warlock is that the Invocations other than Mystic Arcanum really aren't good enough to compete with high level Arcane spells. So even though you don't HAVE to take Mystic Arcanums with Invocations, it's hard to see why you wouldn't - I mean what would you take instead?
Problem number 1 - not enough invocations supporting Pact of the Blade, or going into melee range in general. We need invocations for durability. Not Fiendish Resilience - 5-8 temp HP for the price of an action is kind of a joke, it needs a rework.
No, no, no. You really do not need them. On average the bladelock has 15% less HP than a ranger or paladin, but using their spellslots / invocations for Shield gives then a 22 AC. They also get all the Arcane list defensive spells including Blur, and Mirror Image making them MUCH more tanky than other martials in terms of AC. Add in 8 tmp HP at the start of every combat (Fiendish Resilience is for casting before combat not during combat obviously) and the blade lock has MORE hp and MORE AC than the Ranger easy.
Drow, blade pact, Celestial Warlock. Drow High Magic for on demand detect magic, levitate, and dispel magic. First level Rogue for expertise in persuasion and deception, along with stealth, sleight of hand, and thieves' tools. Level 1 feat, skilled, athletics, acrobatics, performance.
Starting stats, Str 8, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 16.
Blasting is when you drop 8d6 damage upon everything in a 20 ft radius at character level 5. That's blasting. It's what only fullcasters are capable of.
The new Warlock can still drop 8d6 damage on everything in a 20ft radius at level 5. That's blasting.
Having to waste a feat on something that other comparable class just has for free is not good. Besides, to gain proficiency with shield, you'd have to take Lightly Armored feat, in which case two out of three parts of the feat would be wasted, since warlock already has light and medium armor training. Yes, I agree that warlock has the advantage of being SAD, but the thing with Divine spell list is that there's a plenty of spells that don't factor spellcasting ability modifier at all (Bless, Divine Favor, Shield of Faith, all smite spells, etc.), that's how paladin spellcasting mostly works. A paladin can have lousy Cha score and still cast a decent part of their repertoire at full potential. Warlock being able to rely on spell save DC is more or less a compensation for not having healing or many support spells.
I don't follow you kamchatmonk. I've played both subclasses, and honestly I didn't find the hexblade inferior. In fact with armor of agathys + Shadow of moil the hexblade was much more powerful. I also tell you that the hexblade began to tire me a bit in combat, since its spell slots only went to Armor of Agathys and Shadow of moil. And, occasionally, on some Sickening Radiance-type area spell. But generally the AoA + SoM combo was more effective, which makes you both difficult to hit and risky to hit (since whoever hits you is going to take a lot of "free" damage). Plus he had the Eldritch Blast for when he couldn't go melee.
Maybe I'm not understanding you. But if you say Vengeance paladin is more powerful than hexblade, I don't agree.
And going back to the bladelock from the playtest, in game it seemed much more gish than the hexblade. And the person who played the bladelock agrees with me. In addition to the fact that he found it much more fun to play than the hexblade, in the same way that I found my playtest tomelock more fun than any other warlock I played since 2014.
Those are great combos indeed, but with the new UA Bladelock those combos are pushed all the way to late-mid game at level 13.
Bladesinger is easily the best gish and it’s not even close really.
With an Eldritch Invocation, you can snag a Fire Shield, which functions similiarly to Shadow of Moil, but lasts 10 minutes and requires no Concentration. That can get you through several battles in a dungeon, assuming they're close to back-to-back. Same damage, but SoM dims ligth around you instead of offering light. You can't cast Fire Shield back to back, but you do have multiple uses of Armor of Agathys and you can lean into Hellish Rebuke as well now.
Bladesinger might be a "better" gish but the warlock was built more to be a thorn tank, whereas bladesinger is a dodge tank. Different playstyles. Well, used to be, but its all on the same list now, so... ymmv.
We're getting off topic, but I can't help but ask. Why do you say that Fire Shield has similar functionality to Shadow of Moil? Really what makes Shadow of Moil so powerful, is that it makes you heavily obscured to others. Fire Shield gives you resistance to fire damage or cold damage, which is nice but not remotely close. And rather more situational, I must say.
Edit: In fact, a comparable spell to Shadow of moil is Greater Invisibility, just without the extra damage.
No, no, no. You really do not need them. On average the bladelock has 15% less HP than a ranger or paladin, but using their spellslots / invocations for Shield gives then a 22 AC. They also get all the Arcane list defensive spells including Blur, and Mirror Image making them MUCH more tanky than other martials in terms of AC. Add in 8 tmp HP at the start of every combat (Fiendish Resilience is for casting before combat not during combat obviously) and the blade lock has MORE hp and MORE AC than the Ranger easy.
I don't see how you could use invocations for Shield. And Shield spell works for one attack. So, by burning all your 1st level slots, you can protect yourself, like, three or four times. In a day. Yay? Makes sense for full casters who have nothing better to do with 1st level slots and generally avoid getting targeted and hit altogether, but warlocks better still be a bit more conservative with their half-caster spell slots, avoid damaging spells and prefer lasting debuffs and control to get the most bang for their buck. Fog Cloud, Grease, and Tasha's Hideous Laughter will be way better for warlocks thanks to their SADness.
The new Warlock can still drop 8d6 damage on everything in a 20ft radius at level 5. That's blasting.
Fullcaster power once per day, optionally. It's not weak, sure, and it's kind of the other half of the class, but I still kinda think Mystic Arcanum shouldn't have been moved into invocations.
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
In theory, correct. In practice, wrong. First off, Eldritch Blast. Hardly any other arguments are needed, but let's see. Paladins must use their spells for Smites to keep up with other martials' damage. They can use the smite spells to apply some conditions or other spells. But mostly, these slots would go for smites. For Rangers, expect some control and healing spells. Warlock gets to blast. I don't think these different uses for spells should be measured one against the other, because that's not really possible. Neither is this what I meant.
Eldritch Blast is not a blast, ironically. Fireball is a blast. Big AoE damage that can potentially end the encounter or seriously change the balance in one casting. Eldritch Blast is basically a heavy crossbow in the hands of a fighter with a Crossbow Expert feat. 1d10+5 single-target damage is good enough to be a primary source of steady, consistent damage output that measures up to martials, but it's not anything BIG.
Instead, Warlocks get their invocations. These include some spells one can cast at will, and yes, Mystic Arcanum. Even if you only dedicate one invocation for that, that's still a 3rd-level spell slot at the 5th level when the other half-casters only get 2nd, and by level 17, a 9th-level spell slot when everyone else only gets their 5th-level spells. This is just one invocation dedicated, and you still have the same number of normal slots as they do, keeping you ahead. And again, Eldritch Blast.
So even if you believe the spell lists are perfectly balanced, you're still coming out on top in this regard. Sure, you need to choose your invocations, but that's not a tax, it's the intention of the feature. And as someone else mentioned, you do get competitive blasting, with Eldritch Blast.
Lastly, and most importantly, your spells are actually better, because your spellcasting modifier is better. Except for Rangers using Shillelegh specifically, all other Rangers and Paladins need a different ability score for attacks, and usually, that means worse spellcasting modifiers. Especially Paladins, who also need high Con due to incompatibility with ranged weapons. If you roll for stats and get great rolls, this might not be felt as much, but either when you roll average/low, or use point buy/standard array for stats, you'll feel the difference.
Like I said before, the thing with paladins' and rangers' spellcasting is that they have spells that don't care about spellcasting ability modifier at all, they can easily use those at full potential even with negative Wis/Cha. Warlocks being SAD unlocks control spells for them, which is good, it makes warlocks stand apart from how ranger and paladin use spells. I like the Mystic Arcanum design overall, but I wish they didn't just take four features away form a class to give warlocks an option to buy back what was theirs for free.
First off, Eldritch Blast. Second, the ability to attack with the same modifier for both spells and weapon attacks. Third, Mystic Arcanum for higher-level spells. 4th, a single invocation to grab a feat and get that shield proficiency, if they want. They can swap that later if they ever want anything else. 5th, "weaker HP" is literally -1 average per level. If you're using fixed HP, as most people do, it is exactly -1 HP per level. Invest into Con, since you can because you don't need to also support your Str, and now you're equal. Also, free casting of Flase Life can make a big difference at lower levels. 6th, you don't need a two-handed weapon when you can EB to deal 1d10+AS from range. And if you use a weapon? 1d8 is still good. Plus, you have Hex. Also, you can't take 2-handed weapons, but you can take versatile ones and hold them 2-handed, and now you have 1d10. 9th, the crazy saving throw aura is cool but usually amounts to a mere +1 or +2. Again, because Paladins just can't invest so much in Cha, along with Str and Con that are more important. 10th, I know I already mentioned EB, but the ability to just disengage and remain effective from range is really underrated. A Paladin who runs out of resources just remains stuck there in the front, watching their HP deplete, or chooses to flee entirely. They can't disengage and remain effective from a distance.
Using an invocation to get a Lightly Armored feat, in which you already have two benefits out of three, is a waste. -1HP/level go a long way. It's often a difference between being KO'd in three hits or four hits, give or take. "You don't need a two-handed weapon when you can EB to deal 1d10+AS from range" - that's not what I play bladelock for. "Just stop being yourself and do the default thing" is not a fun advice. As for paladins, they have the most staying power in the frontlines with all their buffs and healing. It's gonna take a while for a paladin to deplete all their resources, and even then they're still ironclad warriors armed with martial weapons and fighting styles, probably even masteries if we're to believe JC. And in OneDnD so far, paladins can easily be dexadins with archery fighting style and ranged smites.
As for your suggestions, notice how differently each pact boon changes your playstyle. What is a blade lock supposed to do from 1st to 3rd level, spam EB? Or are we going to lock that option into only one single subclass that makes it useful, like the Hexblade and Pact Weapon are for the 5th edition? I also find it hard to believe that my choice of how I use the patron's powers has more effect than which patrol I choose. You tell me that choosing whether I serve a celestial or fiend is less impactful than choosing if I have a servant or a book with a handful of spells?
It's like employment - because it basically is, in a magical fantasy way. What company (patron) you work for doesn't matter as much as your specialization/qualification (pact boon). If you're an HR manager, your job is similar, be it Amazon or Walmart or Netflix. If you're a trained soldier, your job will be more or less the same, whether you serve US, North Korea, or as a mercenary in a PMC.
No shield, no shield, no shield. Blah. A shield is a 1st level feat which you can immediately refund with your first invocation. And unlike the Paladin, the Bladelock isn't choosing between their casting stat and their melee stat (or their ranged stat)! And unlike both the Paladin AND the old Warlock, this one has a bunch of 1st-level slots they can use on arcane things like the Shield spell too. Or Armor of Agathys. Or False Life. They're fine.
As far as blasting - Warlock has the best damage cantrip in the game, and competitive blasting from the Arcane List all the way up with the right Arcana selection. Or they could just throw their spear or trident etc. They're fine.
I prefer the Patron as the subclass rather than the Pact Boon. I like being a bladelock at 1st level, as well as not being locked into one specific flavor of patron to do that. The same goes for tomelock and chainlock.
Having to waste a feat on something that other comparable class just has for free is not good. Besides, to gain proficiency with shield, you'd have to take Lightly Armored feat, in which case two out of three parts of the feat would be wasted, since warlock already has light and medium armor training. Yes, I agree that warlock has the advantage of being SAD, but the thing with Divine spell list is that there's a plenty of spells that don't factor spellcasting ability modifier at all (Bless, Divine Favor, Shield of Faith, all smite spells, etc.), that's how paladin spellcasting mostly works. A paladin can have lousy Cha score and still cast a decent part of their repertoire at full potential. Warlock being able to rely on spell save DC is more or less a compensation for not having healing or many support spells.
Blasting is when you drop 8d6 damage upon everything in a 20 ft radius at character level 5. That's blasting. It's what only fullcasters are capable of. Half-casters don't catch up, they use their other half to do damage and their caster half to buff and support it.
Swapping patron and pact boon keeps you the freedom of matching the bladelock with any patron. Thing is, right now, WotC have to cram a lot into the basic pact boon "cantrip" (with its level 5 upgrade being basically a whole other feature) and still leave some out in mandatory invocations like Lifedrinker. That stuff could be organized in a more true to purpose way as a subclass. Just put the mechanics and functionality into subclass, and leave the flavor and customization to choosing patron spell list at level 1 and invocations along the way.
What? Are you seriously trying to compare half caster warlock to a Paladin to justify gaining shields. Rangers have a better argument for gaining heavy armor in that case. Warlocks come with the best single target ranged cantrip and require a free hand to cast many spells. Bladelock would be forced to take a feat to cast spells in melee while eldritch blasters would automatically have a free hand with a shield.
Blasting is technically dropping heavy damage at range. If full casters are Bard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Wizard only two of them can drop 8d6 damage at 5th level, so I wouldn’t use that as the standard for blasting. Also guess what the the one dnd Warlock can do at 5th once a day? Drop a fireball via Mystic Arcanum.
Just as the Ranger and Paladin are martial and half-caster classes (Primordial magic and Divine magic, respectively), my idea was for the Warlock to be a martial and half-caster class of Arcane magic, but with the versatility to "abandon" their martial characteristics and go the full casting route.
Nothing you said really resonates with me, but especially not this part.
The bladelock IS a martial half-caster of Arcane magic. Of the same format as a Paladin? No, but that's neither here nor there. After all, the Ranger is not merely a Primal Paladin. They are quite different from that. So, why turn the Warlock into just merely being an Arcane Paladin? Seems like a waste.
The 1DD Warlock is really a sort of swiss-army-knife, able to half-way fill several different roles, without being the same jack-of-all-trades that the 5e Bard was (but the 1DD Bard doesn't appear to be). If I wanted to see something different for the 1DD Warlock, it would be something like half-way filling the Expert role (skill and tool benefits, for example, like a Pact of the Forge or something), and a reworked Fey patron that makes them a half-decent Primal caster (so Half-Arcane, Half-Primal -- maybe letting them pick spells from both the Arcane and Primal spell lists), and a reworked Celestial patron that does the same for a half-decent Divine caster. That's how I see the Warlock: not a Martial who gave up some Warrior capabilities to be a half-caster, but a character who mixes a lesser amount of Arcane casting and special abilities to also half-way fill other niches. In that way, I see their role (swiss-army-knife) as being a replacement for the 5e Bard ... because the 1DD Bard seems to be something else now.
IF you're looking for an Arcane Paladin or Arcane Ranger, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. And I don't think that's where the Warlock should be directed. If I was going to redirect some existing class into an Arcane Martial, it would be the Artificer.
Just as the Ranger and Paladin are martial and half-caster classes (Primordial magic and Divine magic, respectively), my idea was for the Warlock to be a martial and half-caster class of Arcane magic, but with the versatility to "abandon" their martial characteristics and go the full casting route.
Nothing you said really resonates with me, but especially not this part.
The bladelock IS a martial half-caster of Arcane magic. Of the same format as a Paladin? No, but that's neither here nor there. After all, the Ranger is not merely a Primal Paladin. They are quite different from that. So, why turn the Warlock into just merely being an Arcane Paladin? Seems like a waste.
The 1DD Warlock is really a sort of swiss-army-knife, able to half-way fill several different roles, without being the same jack-of-all-trades that the 5e Bard was (but the 1DD Bard doesn't appear to be). If I wanted to see something different for the 1DD Warlock, it would be something like half-way filling the Expert role (skill and tool benefits, for example, like a Pact of the Forge or something), and a reworked Fey patron that makes them a half-decent Primal caster (so Half-Arcane, Half-Primal -- maybe letting them pick spells from both the Arcane and Primal spell lists), and a reworked Celestial patron that does the same for a half-decent Divine caster. That's how I see the Warlock: not a Martial who gave up some Warrior capabilities to be a half-caster, but a character who mixes a lesser amount of Arcane casting and special abilities to also half-way fill other niches. In that way, I see their role (swiss-army-knife) as being a replacement for the 5e Bard ... because the 1DD Bard seems to be something else now.
IF you're looking for an Arcane Paladin or Arcane Ranger, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. And I don't think that's where the Warlock should be directed. If I was going to redirect some existing class into an Arcane Martial, it would be the Artificer.
From my understanding they tried something like that with sorcerer in the first 5e playtest and people hated it. People typically prefer classes to stay some what like they remember them. So it makes sense for that to not resonant with you. At this point Warlock almost has to have Pact magic in some form. It’s been a core of the class for 10 years now.
My only real complaints about the 1DD warlock are:
1- I wish the Pact Boons allowed any of the 3 spell casting stats, instead of this one being forced to take these 2, and the other pact boon forcing you to pick these other 2, etc. Just let all Pacts pick their spell stat as Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma. I don't see why Pact of the Tome can't be Charisma based, or why Pact of the Blade can't be Intelligence based.
2- I wish you weren't _forced_ to take Eldritch Blast ... and possibly weren't forced to take Hex. Just let me take 2 other Warlock and/or Arcane cantrips. Maybe I want EB and/or Hex, maybe I don't.
3- This is probably already true, but the wording implies via omission it's not true: it should be explicit that when a Warlock gets new Cantrips, they can pick Arcane cantrips ... OR Warlock cantrips. In a weird sort of way, this would actually make me a little less concerned about #1 (because my Pact of the Tome Warlock/Bladesinger Wizard could be Intelligence based, and use one of their extra cantrip picks to take Pact Weapon). (the wording for Sorcerer and Wizard cantrip/spell preparation has similarly missing language -- they can pick/prepare Arcane spells, but a Wizard can't prepare a Wizard spell that they created via Modify Spell + Create Spell, because that spell is of type Wizard, not Arcane).
The Warlock can take "arcane" cantrips. It cannot take "warlock" cantrips. You only get the "warlock" cantrips you start the game with.
The rules say what you can do.
My suggestion for blending Pact Magic with a long rest based mechanic, a message I posted on Jeremy Crawford's Twitter.
After further consideration I'm going to have to come down on the, "the Warlock changes are bad" side. The 2014 Warlock basically gave full caster power, but limited by limited spell slots and a lack of utility. They compensated with invocations that provided some low level spells, and the high level Mystic Arcanum. The 2023 version guts this completely. A half caster sees level 5 slots at level 17. Giving them invocations for on demand spells is pointless, because they already have that utility from the low level spell slots they get. They're a utility caster with more utility. Big deal.
Getting one spell per level a day does not replace that power.
Eldritch Blast with Agonizing Blast is baseline damage, not something that can carry a class.
If you want an armored caster with some martial ability, play a cleric. If you want an arcane caster that can actually do something, take Lightly Armored and play a Wizard. I would suggest a revision for Pact Magic.
Instead of two slots at the highest level (up to level 5) it provides two slots at the highest level (up to level 5) and two slots of a level lower (up to level 4).
To provide a constant power level, instead of short rest recharges, move "Eldritch Master" renamed "Eldritch Recovery" to level 1, and scale it. At level 1 you can use it once. At level 5 twice. At level 11, three times, and level 17, four times. This would probably require dropping the level 11 and 17 spell slot increases. They'd not have more than four slots, but at level 17 they could use them five times per long rest. This makes the power level of Warlock consistent over an adventuring day.
[...]or why Pact of the Blade can't be Intelligence based.[...]
My suspicion is that they don't want the bladesingers to dip into bladelock to be SAD, and break the subclass. He doesn't want a new hexadin, to understand us.
Which makes me wonder why they designed the bladelock so that you can hit with your spellcasting ability from level 1. I guess they didn't want to make it too weak just to avoid dips. It's the problem of multiclasses, which are a nightmare for class design.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I just hope that bladelock won't be obligated to use invocations just to catch up with real gishes out there. Again. Having played both Vengeance paladin and Hexblade warlock, boy did I feel the envy.
I don't follow you kamchatmonk. I've played both subclasses, and honestly I didn't find the hexblade inferior. In fact with armor of agathys + Shadow of moil the hexblade was much more powerful. I also tell you that the hexblade began to tire me a bit in combat, since its spell slots only went to Armor of Agathys and Shadow of moil. And, occasionally, on some Sickening Radiance-type area spell. But generally the AoA + SoM combo was more effective, which makes you both difficult to hit and risky to hit (since whoever hits you is going to take a lot of "free" damage). Plus he had the Eldritch Blast for when he couldn't go melee.
Maybe I'm not understanding you. But if you say Vengeance paladin is more powerful than hexblade, I don't agree.
And going back to the bladelock from the playtest, in game it seemed much more gish than the hexblade. And the person who played the bladelock agrees with me. In addition to the fact that he found it much more fun to play than the hexblade, in the same way that I found my playtest tomelock more fun than any other warlock I played since 2014.
Those are great combos indeed, but with the new UA Bladelock those combos are pushed all the way to late-mid game at level 13.
Bladesinger is easily the best gish and it’s not even close really.
In theory, correct. In practice, wrong. First off, Eldritch Blast. Hardly any other arguments are needed, but let's see. Paladins must use their spells for Smites to keep up with other martials' damage. They can use the smite spells to apply some conditions or other spells. But mostly, these slots would go for smites. For Rangers, expect some control and healing spells. Warlock gets to blast. I don't think these different uses for spells should be measured one against the other, because that's not really possible. Neither is this what I meant.
Instead, Warlocks get their invocations. These include some spells one can cast at will, and yes, Mystic Arcanum. Even if you only dedicate one invocation for that, that's still a 3rd-level spell slot at the 5th level when the other half-casters only get 2nd, and by level 17, a 9th-level spell slot when everyone else only gets their 5th-level spells. This is just one invocation dedicated, and you still have the same number of normal slots as they do, keeping you ahead. And again, Eldritch Blast.
So even if you believe the spell lists are perfectly balanced, you're still coming out on top in this regard. Sure, you need to choose your invocations, but that's not a tax, it's the intention of the feature. And as someone else mentioned, you do get competitive blasting, with Eldritch Blast.
Lastly, and most importantly, your spells are actually better, because your spellcasting modifier is better. Except for Rangers using Shillelegh specifically, all other Rangers and Paladins need a different ability score for attacks, and usually, that means worse spellcasting modifiers. Especially Paladins, who also need high Con due to incompatibility with ranged weapons. If you roll for stats and get great rolls, this might not be felt as much, but either when you roll average/low, or use point buy/standard array for stats, you'll feel the difference.
First off, Eldritch Blast. Second, the ability to attack with the same modifier for both spells and weapon attacks. Third, Mystic Arcanum for higher-level spells. 4th, a single invocation to grab a feat and get that shield proficiency, if they want. They can swap that later if they ever want anything else. 5th, "weaker HP" is literally -1 average per level. If you're using fixed HP, as most people do, it is exactly -1 HP per level. Invest into Con, since you can because you don't need to also support your Str, and now you're equal. Also, free casting of Flase Life can make a big difference at lower levels. 6th, you don't need a two-handed weapon when you can EB to deal 1d10+AS from range. And if you use a weapon? 1d8 is still good. Plus, you have Hex. Also, you can't take 2-handed weapons, but you can take versatile ones and hold them 2-handed, and now you have 1d10. 9th, the crazy saving throw aura is cool but usually amounts to a mere +1 or +2. Again, because Paladins just can't invest so much in Cha, along with Str and Con that are more important. 10th, I know I already mentioned EB, but the ability to just disengage and remain effective from range is really underrated. A Paladin who runs out of resources just remains stuck there in the front, watching their HP deplete, or chooses to flee entirely. They can't disengage and remain effective from a distance.
It does solve that problem, but as far as I'm concerned, I'd rather subclasses would just remain at 1st level. Obviously, WotC wants to go a different route. But other than that, there's absolutely no reason why you can't decide on a patron before even starting to play. You're supposed to do that. Then, at level 3, you gain the benefits for the first time. The only strange part is that you now can technically just swap a patron between the 1st and 3rd levels. But why not? Perhaps your first pact is with a lesser entity, and then you make another one with a greater one? Perhaps the master of the first one?
As for your suggestions, notice how differently each pact boon changes your playstyle. What is a blade lock supposed to do from 1st to 3rd level, spam EB? Or are we going to lock that option into only one single subclass that makes it useful, like the Hexblade and Pact Weapon are for the 5th edition? I also find it hard to believe that my choice of how I use the patron's powers has more effect than which patrol I choose. You tell me that choosing whether I serve a celestial or fiend is less impactful than choosing if I have a servant or a book with a handful of spells?
Varielky | Emma
I suppose we could try some theorycrafting.
Let's compare a level 9 Paladin with a level 9, bladepact, Warlock.
Warlock will take improved pact weapon, lifedrinker, eldritch smite, and agonizing blast. The fifth can be anything, maybe a 3rd level mystic arcanum for Hunger of Hadar. They'll wield a longsword two-handed for a d10 damage dice. With 14 dex and half plate they'll have 17AC. With two ASIs down they'll have 20 charisma.
At level 9 both Paladin and Warlock have level 3 spell slots to spend on smites, both can smite once per turn. The Warlock gets 2d8 to 4d8 force damage from an eldritch smite, Paladin gets 2d8 to 4d8 radiant damage from a divine smite.
Paladin will take polearm master and use a glaive, so they're capable of getting three attacks a turn. With another ASI they'll get their strength to 20. They will take full plate for 18AC although they'll probably take the defensive fighting style to get to 19AC.
If the Warlock expends a third level spell slot for Hex that's an additional 2d6 necrotic damage, once per turn.
Warlock gets (1d10 (weapon dice) +1 (improved pact weapon) +5 (charisma) + d6 (lifedrinker)) x 2 + 2d6 (hex) = 2d10 + 12 + 4d6, they can expend a spell slot for eldritch smite, as mentioned previously.
Paladin gets (1d10 (weapon dice) + 5 (strength)) x 2 + (1d4 (polearm master dice) + 5 (strength)) = 2d10 +15 +d4, again they can expend a spell slot for divine smite.
At level 9 damage for the Warlock (assuming all hits) ranges from 18 to 56, and damage for the Paladin ranges from 18 to 39. The Paladin does add another 3 to 24 damage at level 11 when it gets Radiant Strikes, so 21 to 63 damage.
So the bladepact Warlock is actually comparable to a polearm master Paladin, despite not having access to heavy weapons, thanks to the extra magical damage they add. The Paladin does have the option of taking great weapon master, for proficiency extra damage each turn, and sentinel, but at level 9 they'd only have one of those, and therefore still be at strength 19 for +4 instead of +5. Even if the Warlock drops improved pact weapon they only lose 2 damage top and bottom, 16 to 54.
Because they're limited to just one smite per turn, either divine smite or a smite spell, the Paladin's power spike has been pulled way down. If the Paladin gets spirit shroud, a bonus d8 radiant damage per hit at level 3, so does the Warlock.
With eldritch smite, and with smite spells and smite abilities excluding each other, the Warlock doesn't need anything from the Hexblade to still be pretty good at hitting things.
If you want healing you can just play a Celestial Warlock.
AoA and SoM are indeed the essence of a hexblade. So much so that every other choice of spells is practically irrelevant. AoA, SoM, and then you just bonk things mindlessly. It is powerful, yes, but the problem is that once you try to stray from that path, you start sucking. 5e hexblade has a very narrow path they must take to be effective. Improved Pact Weapon, Thirsting Blade, Lifedrinker invocations, AoA and SoM for spells you will always use in combat, and that's not up to discussion. Most of your customization and adaptability flies out of the window because there's only one way for you to be really effective. Meanwhile Vengeance paladin didn't have to bother. There was stuff to address a much broader range of situations, freedom of choice, a paladin doesn't have to stick to the one and only cookie-cutter build to stay effective.
I'm all for the new half-caster warlock exactly because there's now spell slots to use and you can finally not only precast AoA and SoM all the goddamn time forever until you die of boredom. I just want the other half of warlock to be strong enough so that there isn't that one mandatory build that allows you to stay competitive. I just want legitimate choices, not illusions of choice.
No, no, no. You really do not need them. On average the bladelock has 15% less HP than a ranger or paladin, but using their spellslots / invocations for Shield gives then a 22 AC. They also get all the Arcane list defensive spells including Blur, and Mirror Image making them MUCH more tanky than other martials in terms of AC. Add in 8 tmp HP at the start of every combat (Fiendish Resilience is for casting before combat not during combat obviously) and the blade lock has MORE hp and MORE AC than the Ranger easy.
Hmm.
Drow, blade pact, Celestial Warlock. Drow High Magic for on demand detect magic, levitate, and dispel magic. First level Rogue for expertise in persuasion and deception, along with stealth, sleight of hand, and thieves' tools. Level 1 feat, skilled, athletics, acrobatics, performance.
Starting stats, Str 8, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 16.
Invocations: Level 2, Agonizing Blast, Mask of Many Faces. Level 5, Eldritch Smite. Level 7, Improved Pact Weapon. Level 9, Lifedrinker. Level 11+ Mystic Arcanum.
Feats: Level 1, Skilled. Level 4, Drow High Magic. Level 8 +2 Cha. Level 12 +2 Cha.
I like how this looks.
The new Warlock can still drop 8d6 damage on everything in a 20ft radius at level 5. That's blasting.
At those low levels I would much rather have Shield, Sleep, Grease, False Life, Absorb Elements, Silvery Barbs etc than the ones you listed. Even at higher levels several of these remain useful.
With an Eldritch Invocation, you can snag a Fire Shield, which functions similiarly to Shadow of Moil, but lasts 10 minutes and requires no Concentration. That can get you through several battles in a dungeon, assuming they're close to back-to-back. Same damage, but SoM dims ligth around you instead of offering light. You can't cast Fire Shield back to back, but you do have multiple uses of Armor of Agathys and you can lean into Hellish Rebuke as well now.
Bladesinger might be a "better" gish but the warlock was built more to be a thorn tank, whereas bladesinger is a dodge tank. Different playstyles. Well, used to be, but its all on the same list now, so... ymmv.
We're getting off topic, but I can't help but ask. Why do you say that Fire Shield has similar functionality to Shadow of Moil? Really what makes Shadow of Moil so powerful, is that it makes you heavily obscured to others. Fire Shield gives you resistance to fire damage or cold damage, which is nice but not remotely close. And rather more situational, I must say.
Edit: In fact, a comparable spell to Shadow of moil is Greater Invisibility, just without the extra damage.
I don't see how you could use invocations for Shield. And Shield spell works for one attack. So, by burning all your 1st level slots, you can protect yourself, like, three or four times. In a day. Yay? Makes sense for full casters who have nothing better to do with 1st level slots and generally avoid getting targeted and hit altogether, but warlocks better still be a bit more conservative with their half-caster spell slots, avoid damaging spells and prefer lasting debuffs and control to get the most bang for their buck. Fog Cloud, Grease, and Tasha's Hideous Laughter will be way better for warlocks thanks to their SADness.
Fullcaster power once per day, optionally. It's not weak, sure, and it's kind of the other half of the class, but I still kinda think Mystic Arcanum shouldn't have been moved into invocations.
shield stays in effect until the beginning of your next turn. It can easily help against multiple attacks with one casting
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Eldritch Blast is not a blast, ironically. Fireball is a blast. Big AoE damage that can potentially end the encounter or seriously change the balance in one casting. Eldritch Blast is basically a heavy crossbow in the hands of a fighter with a Crossbow Expert feat. 1d10+5 single-target damage is good enough to be a primary source of steady, consistent damage output that measures up to martials, but it's not anything BIG.
Like I said before, the thing with paladins' and rangers' spellcasting is that they have spells that don't care about spellcasting ability modifier at all, they can easily use those at full potential even with negative Wis/Cha. Warlocks being SAD unlocks control spells for them, which is good, it makes warlocks stand apart from how ranger and paladin use spells. I like the Mystic Arcanum design overall, but I wish they didn't just take four features away form a class to give warlocks an option to buy back what was theirs for free.
Using an invocation to get a Lightly Armored feat, in which you already have two benefits out of three, is a waste. -1HP/level go a long way. It's often a difference between being KO'd in three hits or four hits, give or take. "You don't need a two-handed weapon when you can EB to deal 1d10+AS from range" - that's not what I play bladelock for. "Just stop being yourself and do the default thing" is not a fun advice. As for paladins, they have the most staying power in the frontlines with all their buffs and healing. It's gonna take a while for a paladin to deplete all their resources, and even then they're still ironclad warriors armed with martial weapons and fighting styles, probably even masteries if we're to believe JC. And in OneDnD so far, paladins can easily be dexadins with archery fighting style and ranged smites.
It's like employment - because it basically is, in a magical fantasy way. What company (patron) you work for doesn't matter as much as your specialization/qualification (pact boon). If you're an HR manager, your job is similar, be it Amazon or Walmart or Netflix. If you're a trained soldier, your job will be more or less the same, whether you serve US, North Korea, or as a mercenary in a PMC.
What? Are you seriously trying to compare half caster warlock to a Paladin to justify gaining shields. Rangers have a better argument for gaining heavy armor in that case. Warlocks come with the best single target ranged cantrip and require a free hand to cast many spells. Bladelock would be forced to take a feat to cast spells in melee while eldritch blasters would automatically have a free hand with a shield.
Blasting is technically dropping heavy damage at range. If full casters are Bard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Wizard only two of them can drop 8d6 damage at 5th level, so I wouldn’t use that as the standard for blasting. Also guess what the the one dnd Warlock can do at 5th once a day? Drop a fireball via Mystic Arcanum.
Nothing you said really resonates with me, but especially not this part.
The bladelock IS a martial half-caster of Arcane magic. Of the same format as a Paladin? No, but that's neither here nor there. After all, the Ranger is not merely a Primal Paladin. They are quite different from that. So, why turn the Warlock into just merely being an Arcane Paladin? Seems like a waste.
The 1DD Warlock is really a sort of swiss-army-knife, able to half-way fill several different roles, without being the same jack-of-all-trades that the 5e Bard was (but the 1DD Bard doesn't appear to be). If I wanted to see something different for the 1DD Warlock, it would be something like half-way filling the Expert role (skill and tool benefits, for example, like a Pact of the Forge or something), and a reworked Fey patron that makes them a half-decent Primal caster (so Half-Arcane, Half-Primal -- maybe letting them pick spells from both the Arcane and Primal spell lists), and a reworked Celestial patron that does the same for a half-decent Divine caster. That's how I see the Warlock: not a Martial who gave up some Warrior capabilities to be a half-caster, but a character who mixes a lesser amount of Arcane casting and special abilities to also half-way fill other niches. In that way, I see their role (swiss-army-knife) as being a replacement for the 5e Bard ... because the 1DD Bard seems to be something else now.
IF you're looking for an Arcane Paladin or Arcane Ranger, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. And I don't think that's where the Warlock should be directed. If I was going to redirect some existing class into an Arcane Martial, it would be the Artificer.
From my understanding they tried something like that with sorcerer in the first 5e playtest and people hated it. People typically prefer classes to stay some what like they remember them. So it makes sense for that to not resonant with you. At this point Warlock almost has to have Pact magic in some form. It’s been a core of the class for 10 years now.
My only real complaints about the 1DD warlock are:
1- I wish the Pact Boons allowed any of the 3 spell casting stats, instead of this one being forced to take these 2, and the other pact boon forcing you to pick these other 2, etc. Just let all Pacts pick their spell stat as Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma. I don't see why Pact of the Tome can't be Charisma based, or why Pact of the Blade can't be Intelligence based.
2- I wish you weren't _forced_ to take Eldritch Blast ... and possibly weren't forced to take Hex. Just let me take 2 other Warlock and/or Arcane cantrips. Maybe I want EB and/or Hex, maybe I don't.
3- This is probably already true, but the wording implies via omission it's not true: it should be explicit that when a Warlock gets new Cantrips, they can pick Arcane cantrips ... OR Warlock cantrips. In a weird sort of way, this would actually make me a little less concerned about #1 (because my Pact of the Tome Warlock/Bladesinger Wizard could be Intelligence based, and use one of their extra cantrip picks to take Pact Weapon). (the wording for Sorcerer and Wizard cantrip/spell preparation has similarly missing language -- they can pick/prepare Arcane spells, but a Wizard can't prepare a Wizard spell that they created via Modify Spell + Create Spell, because that spell is of type Wizard, not Arcane).
The Warlock can take "arcane" cantrips. It cannot take "warlock" cantrips. You only get the "warlock" cantrips you start the game with.
The rules say what you can do.
My suggestion for blending Pact Magic with a long rest based mechanic, a message I posted on Jeremy Crawford's Twitter.
After further consideration I'm going to have to come down on the, "the Warlock changes are bad" side. The 2014 Warlock basically gave full caster power, but limited by limited spell slots and a lack of utility. They compensated with invocations that provided some low level spells, and the high level Mystic Arcanum. The 2023 version guts this completely. A half caster sees level 5 slots at level 17. Giving them invocations for on demand spells is pointless, because they already have that utility from the low level spell slots they get. They're a utility caster with more utility. Big deal.
Getting one spell per level a day does not replace that power.
Eldritch Blast with Agonizing Blast is baseline damage, not something that can carry a class.
If you want an armored caster with some martial ability, play a cleric. If you want an arcane caster that can actually do something, take Lightly Armored and play a Wizard. I would suggest a revision for Pact Magic.
Instead of two slots at the highest level (up to level 5) it provides two slots at the highest level (up to level 5) and two slots of a level lower (up to level 4).
To provide a constant power level, instead of short rest recharges, move "Eldritch Master" renamed "Eldritch Recovery" to level 1, and scale it. At level 1 you can use it once. At level 5 twice. At level 11, three times, and level 17, four times. This would probably require dropping the level 11 and 17 spell slot increases. They'd not have more than four slots, but at level 17 they could use them five times per long rest. This makes the power level of Warlock consistent over an adventuring day.
My suspicion is that they don't want the bladesingers to dip into bladelock to be SAD, and break the subclass. He doesn't want a new hexadin, to understand us.
Which makes me wonder why they designed the bladelock so that you can hit with your spellcasting ability from level 1. I guess they didn't want to make it too weak just to avoid dips. It's the problem of multiclasses, which are a nightmare for class design.