My objection here isnt the power level of light armor getting the feature, its the idea that customizable classes/features cant have any synergies/features that develop them because anything that builds upon a choice a player makes is a 'tax' That just means that the more customizable a class is, the less it can develop any of its themes/playstyles and features. Which is exactly the opposite of the purpose of a customizable class
the question becomes whether the customization the class allows is real or simply theory. Most warlocks outside of this UA class would not likely take the mage armor invocation. Even as a PotB melee character, the limited, customizable invocation slot is too valuable for a +1 AC. Creating a subclass feature that essentially relies on making that choice is not inherently bad, if it makes it worth it. People can reasonably disagree if this extra +2 makes it a “good” choice for their PC. However, it is certainly eliminating the choice of taking a different invocation in order to make this feature work.
The class also has a feature (it’s best IMO until level 14) around making concentration checks. Lacking CON prof, taking eldritch mind or using a feat (or both) would best utilize this feature. Potentially another choice eliminated.
PotB is already a heavy invocation ask - one the player is making willingly, I grant. 3 minimum just for the attack portion. Potentially smite, the 9th level extra dmg one, eldritch mind, false life one; now armor of shadows. Again, no one is forced to take any and certainly not all of these; but the customization starts to dwindle the more features rely on specific choices. That is not always a bad thing, but the feature(s) best be worth it, both mechanically and from a vibes standpoint. They should feel good to make the choice, not feel forced. Make me excited to make that choice, instead of feeling obligated.
Previous comments here have noted that bladelocks (and hexblades specifically) can use their invocations and spell slots for: AC boosting, temp HPs, damage increase, debuffing foes, buffing themselves, on top of utility. That is the mechanical draw and niche of the class. The reality is that a player will make choices, and those choices will limit what else the PC can do. Good design will make those choices both good and interesting, even if a trade-off.
Players don’t like feeling forced into choices to make something work, especially when it does not seem fun or make sense. This the idea of a tax. There is no flavor or other reason why the AC bonus should be restricted to no armor. Dance bard (not a great subclass IMO) is at least flavored as a “free movement” subclass and gets scaling AC from it. The barbarian version is thematic, but again also bad mechanically. 3e prestige classes often forced feat, skill, or MC choices that were suboptimal, but the payoff was deemed worth it (and again were tied to a theme usually).
The only current 2024 warlock subclass feature that “forces” a choice is the celestial’s fire/radiance spell dmg boost. There are ways to make that work within the class, we can debate their appeal/efficacy. But even if you rarely use it, it is not IMO as critical to the main draw of the subclass. In contrast, the goolock feature that makes hex “good” opens possibilities. The fey and fiend subclasses imply a playstyle, but don’t really limit or require any other choices be made to function as intended, or most importantly, as a player imagines. The HB shouldn’t either, other than be flavored as a weapon-user (and melee IMO).
To add: it is disingenuous to compare class feature options like Druid’s warden (or the similar features for clerics, rangers, etc) to accursed shield. The former is a clear choice preference for the player - usually more spellcaster vs. more martial. The fact these “cancel” other armor proficiency is the point of that option, and does not negatively impact the player or PC if selected. It will generally fit the theme the player is going for without any detriment.
i think most players accept and welcome building off of existing class, both within the class and with subclasses. From a design standpoint, these will enhance both mechanically and thematically. Frenzy in 2024 builds on reckless attack for someone that enjoys dealing massive dmg; note the 2014 version was a detriment and considered a bad option and thus subclass.
Where thematically is a Hexblade the “free movement” or “unarmored” gish? Why would they be as dexterous as a monk (who attacks using DEX) when they likely focus their inner power (via CHA / PotB) for combat? Does their weapon-patron encourage being hit due to bloodlust? If so, why an AC boost? Surely more power from being hit / bloodied would work better. accursed shield in particular feels like trying to be too clever. Scared to give the HB “too good” AC, but giving a boost by giving a lesser version of what we give other classes/subclasses. I think it’s actually a worse design concept by far than tying most/all powers to hex spell.
Forcing the hex spell in 1st UA was explicit - you will use hex to get extra powers, and will give you a scaling number of uses for free. The trade off is your concentration slot and the possibility of not having anything if no hex. Most felt correctly that the trade was too steep, but I think thematically and mechanically it could work.
Accursed shield slightly hides the ball - it requires 2 resources (with no reason other than fear or laziness IMO) but the subclass doesn’t provide both. Yes, the class provides, but at an opportunity cost. The bladelock will likely use most of its limited resources for combat (both offense and defense), but when have they “used” enough? And for what return on that resource spend?
Hex, AoA, mirror image, arcane recovery, shield - all good options for spells - can’t use them all though. Definitely can’t use more than 3 total per short rest for most of your career. 5-7 invocations make up the gap for utility. PotB, extra attack, false life - maybe resilient mind, eldritch smite, bonus dmg at 9th.
In practice, those “options” are dwindling fast. Yes, I as a player chose the “expensive” playstyle, and those will help me match (in some cases exceed) other weapon users. Is 90% of my resources/choices enough for that capability (I’m assuming it is)? Should my subclass add a feature that asks for another 5%? If so, I want a lot more in exchange than +2 AC, conditionally.
You can get light armor, then at 3, you need to not use light armor to any use out of that feature (unarmored defense) Whether the alternate AC methods are as good depends on your stat investment and what armor you have access to. Accursed shield has different benefits and usecases than unarmored defense,. Features design is sometimes about enhancing playstyles, not just increasing numbers. But really, i dont think whether Unarmored defense is better than Accursed shield is relevant, The question is the idea of having subclass features which are more optimal based on what aspects of the main class you are using. How features compare to each other is a different question.
Of course it's relevant. You have to compare what other level 3 characters are getting to determine balance. Unyielding Will is good, but it's once per Long Rest, Hungering Hex is will be situational as to whether it actually makes you more durable, and Accursed Shield depends on discarding a class feature without providing an adequate replacement. College of Dance Bard is a good stick to measure against. Both are melee front liners. College of Dance gets Unarmored Defense which probably gives you an AC around 15/16 or so that can scale up 18+ (theoretically 20 if you can manage 20s in both Dexterity and Charisma), Agile Strikes gives extra attacks, and Bardic Damage makes your unarmed strikes use Dexterity and deal 1d6 that scales up to 1d12.
By contrast, the Hexblade level 3 features start out with a comparable AC of 15 (17 with accursed shield up), but nothing about them scales other than number of curses per day. Hungering Hex either doesn't trigger during the fight or it does and you lose the AC bonus from the accursed shield. Unyielding Will is cool ... once.
Armor of shadows is a class feature for people who want more ac than light armor offers, just like a druid who wants AC takes primal order: warden.
at level 3, a hexblade who cares about AC based defense has 17chr 16 dex and 14 con. they would have 16 ac with armor of shadows, and 18 AC with armor of shadows.It scales in strength with dex stats. just like monk
at level 3, monk, dancer barbarian and draconic sorcerer cap at 16 AC. (3+3 in stats), medium armor IF you can get the best one would be 17, and give stealth disadvantage. This means they have more potential AC than monk dancer and sorcerer, and equal to a barbarian with a shield who isnt using reckless attacks.
Mage Armor, and therefore, Armor of Shadows does not scale with level. Ever. It's always the same base AC. Worn armor can scale (of sorts) because magic armor can have a bonus up to +3. No invocations or attunement required. To have the same maximum base AC without armor, you have to take the Armor of Shadows Invocation, and attune Bracers of Defense. Certain species or level dips may give you better base AC options. For example, armored AC would cap at 18 if playing a Warforged due to Integrated Protection. Blade Ward (effective 2.5 AC) and Dexterity apply equally to both options so I am not including them.
Accursed Shield is temporary (and there is debate surrounding the interaction with Hex) and is contentious in this context, but if it progresses forward as is, the naked Warlock with an active curse has better maximum AC than the Armored one outside of some edge cases.
College of Dance creates an unarmored, melee focused version of an Arcane Caster, but it gives you Unarmored Defense to use instead of Light Armor ... as a Subclass Feature; no spells or feats are required to make that work.
not only that, but warlock has false life which always gives 12 Hp, so warlock can have more starting HP than dancer, monk, and even barbarian. at level 3.
they get arcane vigor and shield from spells automatically, and the class has access to armor of agathys, (which synergizes with false life and 1 a day unyielding will) mirror images, and has blade ward as a cantrip.
Okay, so now every single Hexblade is going to be Armor of Shadows, Fiendish Vigor, and Pact of the Blade. Every Hexblade is just a carbon copy of every other with no real choice in builds.
Armor of Agathys only synchronizes with False Life if you can constantly prevent yourself from running out of temporary hit points which you probably can't with just False Life. With a level 2 slot, as soon as you take 10+ damage (12+ with False Life) before your next turn, Armor of Agathys ends. Also, remember that Unyielding Will has a few caveats: it will replace your remaining temporary hit points if the roll is higher, and it only triggers when you fail your save for concentration, not when you take damage, so it can't prevent Armor of Agathys from dropping unless you had a concentration spell up (perhaps Blade Ward) and voluntarily or involuntarily fail the save.
fact is warlock has a lot of base features that come around early that allow them to specialize into surviability, improve basic damage, and add utility. And thats why unarmored defense isnt in comparison to accursed shield, armor of shadows is designed to be warlocks version of unarmored defense. As for replacing a class feature, yeah thats how armor proficiency works. if druid chooses primal order: warden, their light armor proficiency is generally a worse option. armor of shadows is essentially +1 AC over light armor, accursed shield is designed to enhance that option.
Warlocks are not struggling to melee/survive at level 1-5 at all.
You have reinforced the point that there is one way to build a Hexblade with the UA. Some people may argue that the class is not effective. I don't know that not being able to hit the same ACs as before is bad. Being locked into one path, however, is bad design. The fact that the subclass is extremely different than it was before, making updating an existing character extremely challenging, understandably leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many. It would be fine if it called something else and wasn't sold as the update for the Hexblade. It's not what says on the tin.
the feature doesnt limit the base class, you can still use light armor, and get the exact same benefit you got using light armor before. Warlock's unarmored defense feature is armor of dhadows. which gives you greater defense than light armor while unarmored, and grows based on your dex stat investment.
When i say its irrelevent, i mean its irrelevent to the question of should subclass features be built with specific synergies based on the main class, and main class choices
The implication that Light Armor doesn't grow based on your Dex investment is inaccurate. Both grow equally. Armored will be one AC less unless you have magic armor or Bracers of Defense.
there are many features which only give a benefit if the player chooses a certain playstyle, builds, action, or features, or uses certain items. Many features are not a benefit for all builds.Many subclasses are designed to take advantage of a small subset of
barbarian's unarmored defense is only a benefit if you have certain attribute spreads. 8 mod points between dex and con,
berserker frenzy only provides any benefit if you use reckless attack.
path of the wildheart: falcon only works if you are not wearing any armor (just like accursed shield)
Paladin, noble genie UA, level 3 Genies Splendor. only works if you wear light armor, or unarmored.
Arcane Archer only does anything for you if you use ranged weapons with the ammunition property.
almost every wizard subclass has features which only benefit certain spell schools
rogues soul knife, psychic blades feature only benefits you if you use the psychic blade in your attack action, (thereby limiting your weapon/mastery selection)
draconic sorcerer kevel 6 feature elemental affinity only gives a benefit if you select damage spells of specific elements.
Some ranger subclasses have synergies while using HM, which not all rangers use.
artificer battle smith's Arcane Empowerment does nothing if you arent using magic weapons. (and the only way to get that built into the class is using replications on weapons)
Artificer Battle Smith is the only semi-valid comparison.
Barbarian Unarmored Defense (allows shields): No class resource is required to use this alternative.
Berserker Frenzy: This is not locked out because of armor and does not require you to make specific choices in building your character beyond the subclass.
Path of the Wild Heart: Unarmored Defense covers your AC without additional resources expended. Still allows shields. There is no class feature that provides for your AC that stacks with Accursed Shield without expending Class Resources.
Paladin, noble genie UA, level 3 Genies Splendor. only works if you wear light armor, or unarmored.
Arcane Archer: This example is like saying Fighter features only benefit you if you Fight. I hope you picked this subclass to Arch Arcanely in your foe's general direction.
Wizard subclasses: Sigh. This is a stretch. The Subclasses that give you features that depend on schools of magic give you free spells of those schools.
Rogue Soul Knife: Again, this is a stretch. The Psychic Blades are Light Weapons with a Mastery Property. You can ignore the mastery property to focus on different ones, but they absolutely synergize with and do not invalidate the Weapon Mastery feature of the core Rogue class.
Draconic Sorcerer: What class feature is this cutting you off from?
Rangers subclasses with a Hunter's Mark Synergy: To be on topic, show me on that prevents the Ranger from using Hunter's Mark.
Artificer Battle Smith requires you to either spend an infusion to make a weapon magical or find one. This would be on par with a Hexblade in the UA needing to take Armor of Shadows or finding a Magic Item that let them cast it without the Invocation if, and only if, you assume a significant number of Hexblades will not take Pact of the Blade (1 class resource versus 2 resources). As a replacement to the 2014 Hexblade concept, this is a much more direct parallel to taking Pact of the Blade, but the UA then requires an additional Invocation.
and thats not a tax, the features/subclasses are made to work with what the class gives you. Invocations are class features for specializing into playstyles or roles. instead of giving every warlock a d10die, they let you get false life max roll. Instead of medium armor, they give you armor of shadows, instead of con proficency, eldritch mind. instead of martial weapon proficiency, pact of the blade. Thete isnt a food tax to use a grill, if you were also given money to buy food. They gave you invocations to 'buy' defense, health, mobility, offense. Certain subclasses expect you to use these choices to get the most out of the features
I heard you wanted a hot dog. I'll give you these condiments as long as you don't use a bun.
To add: it is disingenuous to compare class feature options like Druid’s warden (or the similar features for clerics, rangers, etc) to accursed shield. The former is a clear choice preference for the player - usually more spellcaster vs. more martial. The fact these “cancel” other armor proficiency is the point of that option, and does not negatively impact the player or PC if selected. It will generally fit the theme the player is going for without any detriment.
i think most players accept and welcome building off of existing class, both within the class and with subclasses. From a design standpoint, these will enhance both mechanically and thematically. Frenzy in 2024 builds on reckless attack for someone that enjoys dealing massive dmg; note the 2014 version was a detriment and considered a bad option and thus subclass.
Where thematically is a Hexblade the “free movement” or “unarmored” gish? Why would they be as dexterous as a monk (who attacks using DEX) when they likely focus their inner power (via CHA / PotB) for combat? Does their weapon-patron encourage being hit due to bloodlust? If so, why an AC boost? Surely more power from being hit / bloodied would work better. accursed shield in particular feels like trying to be too clever. Scared to give the HB “too good” AC, but giving a boost by giving a lesser version of what we give other classes/subclasses. I think it’s actually a worse design concept by far than tying most/all powers to hex spell.
Forcing the hex spell in 1st UA was explicit - you will use hex to get extra powers, and will give you a scaling number of uses for free. The trade off is your concentration slot and the possibility of not having anything if no hex. Most felt correctly that the trade was too steep, but I think thematically and mechanically it could work.
Accursed shield slightly hides the ball - it requires 2 resources (with no reason other than fear or laziness IMO) but the subclass doesn’t provide both. Yes, the class provides, but at an opportunity cost. The bladelock will likely use most of its limited resources for combat (both offense and defense), but when have they “used” enough? And for what return on that resource spend?
Hex, AoA, mirror image, arcane recovery, shield - all good options for spells - can’t use them all though. Definitely can’t use more than 3 total per short rest for most of your career. 5-7 invocations make up the gap for utility. PotB, extra attack, false life - maybe resilient mind, eldritch smite, bonus dmg at 9th.
In practice, those “options” are dwindling fast. Yes, I as a player chose the “expensive” playstyle, and those will help me match (in some cases exceed) other weapon users. Is 90% of my resources/choices enough for that capability (I’m assuming it is)? Should my subclass add a feature that asks for another 5%? If so, I want a lot more in exchange than +2 AC, conditionally.
I dont know what disingenuous means to you, but to me that suggests trying to decieve. I used that point because they are the same, except with less options.
Armor of shadows is the feature for warlocks that is designed to give you more AC than the base option, its for people who are willing to give up other features to be better at dealing with attacks. The same way that defense fighting style is for people who would rather get more defense. The fact that other warlocks might not be interested in it is fine, thats a player choice. it might be underpowered, thats a balance issue, but the fact remains its supposed to be a defensive feature for warlocks that is an improvement on light armor. Every single choice you ever make has an opportunity cost, if it didnt then its not a real choice.
And i have tested multiple hexblades, with this UA. warlock gets a lot of invocations, by level 2 you have 3 invocations, by level 5 you have 5. Sure you could use your invocations on something else, thats the nature of customization choices, you choose the type of charachter you want to build. I literally started running out of invocations that thematically fit, or offered something to enhance the playstyle each charachter was going for. Hexblade is working within the already existing options and ways in which warlocks handle defense and offense, it not adding a fighter on top the warlock class. In 2024, warlock base class has tools to be a melee type, hexblade is adding on ti that. And you are free to ignore accursed shield, its one bullet point in 1 of 3 features they give you at level 3. If 2 conditional ac if you are unarmored doesnt fit your build, then ignore it. On the vast majority of subclasses there is some feature/subfrature which i personally dont use. But i wouldnt say its crazy for designers to say hey, warlocks who use magic armor get an additional benefit on this subclass.
Thematically, warlock was designed to be a class who uses forbidden magical knowledge given to them by shady powerful forces to obtain quick power. Thats why the base class made mage armor its best armor option. The warlock didnt spend years training with armor and weapons and learning spell formulas, they made a pact and got magical shortcuts. Hence pact of the blade magically gives them the ability to match. And armor of shadows is magical defense that can give them AC that rivals medium/heavy armor. Hexblade isnt introducing a new theme here, its using the already existing class option for increased defence. Its not changing the warlock theme, its building on it. They have AC to rival full martials, both originating from their pact, and they did it without the rigorous training mundane martials go through.
armor does not scale with level, you can find a new item if the DM or luck gives you one. bracers of defense is a new rare magic item, armor+1 is a new rare magic item. The charachter's AC from mage armor scales with dex investment, as you say, mage armor will always give you more AC than a vanilla light armor. Keep in mind there is no expectation in 5e that you will get any specific magic item. And no expectation that you will need magic items to win/be effective.. If your DM gives you armor +1, they could give you bracers. The point here is that armor of shadows is the innvocation for having better AC than light armor provides. Thats how warlocks are designed to get better AC, cast a spell they got from their patron infinitely
Getting one extra use from armor of agathys is synergy. and you will at times get more. I tested it, it happens. But also, you can get false life at level 2, when armor of agathys is only 5 temp hp, So, in that case you basically start off with 12 temp hp agathys, which at low levels can last you 2-3 hits instead of one. And there racial ways to reduce damage, this adds to it. As fr unyielding will, yes you said it, a hexblade can always have concentration up, and they can choose to fail a save. I did it a couple of times. The point of what i was saying is that hexblade is not lacking durability, if they want it. As far as dancer not needing spells or feats, some subclasses build on what is in the base class, and some basically take features from other classes to build something new. Most subclasses build on whats there, warlock already has the option of specializing into martial, its redundant and counter productive to create a subclass that just makes all the choices you could have made with base class, this was a big complaint about the Brawler UA.
there is not one way to build a hexblade in this UA, i am answering the question of how to build a hexblade who can play with a basic stand around hitting each other playstyle. I built 4 hexblades and i could have built more. You can opt for a darkness/devil eye style, you could use reach weapons and jump/expeditious, you can build a con focused HP sponge that loves you trying to hit them. I built a dual wielding mid ranged skirmisher with elven accuracy. You can build a primary bebuff controller. However, if you want to build a high AC, high HP general tanker, you have less options, but thats true of every class. because the question tells you the answer. Choose AC, Choose HP, Choose defensive techniques that reduce chance to get hit.
I would say that there are rough edges in terms of customizing, but its not accursed shield. its things like having no access to martial weapons for dual wielding, not having free castings of an offensive or defensive spell in the 2-10 level range, no native mastery holds you back (though i understand niche protection) Needing 13 str to use heavy weaps. That said you can deal with these things, (and i did) But yeah, 1 invocation wasnt holding me back at all.
the point of my list wasnt saying these are the exact same thing as accursed shield, the point was that there are many subclass features that will offer no benefit unless you play with a specific subset of the classes pkaystyles.
which is in response to the assertion that no subclass features offer you a negative benefit unless you play a certain way. I quickly had to point out accursed shield is not a negative benefit, because you can simply not use that bullet point if you dont want to get its benefit, like every other example i gave.
also some of your assertions arent really quite right, path of the wildheart requires you to be unarmored, many barbarians use medium armor. in order for unarmored defense to equal medium armor you need 7 points between constitution and dexterity, which is by no means guaranteed, or even reccomended. Many barbarians never raise con oast 16, and never raise dex past 14. there are also many who go with 14 con and 14 dex so they can improve their mental saves. They literally take a loss to AC unless they built their class a certain way. Which is a lot less changable than invocations.
If you consider having to be unarmored to use accursed shield "giving up" light armor, then using arcane shot requires you 'giving up' all your melee martial weapons. and 'giving up' half your weapon masteries. and 'giving up' your other fighting styles.
As for your hot dog analogy. The class itself gave you bread money, they gave you money for meat. If you dont want to buy a hot dog or a bun with the free money alloted to you for that purpose, you dont want a hotdog. Ignore the half of one of three features they give you at level 3 that improves your hot dogs, that you clearly dont want. And if you want the special hotdog, use the stuff they gave you to make hot dogs, thats what its there for.
Why is it that I could take any combination of invocations with any other warlock subclass and use all their subclass features? Also stop comparing Accused Shield to unarmored defense. We both know we wouldn’t be having this conversation if just gave the warlock unarmored defense. While that would make the choice of Armor of shadows obsolete on the Hexblade it would get far less complaints because there are other invocation options. As it is now the UA design forces you down one path to be able to use the feature at all. Which is actually what 2024 design is supposed to move away from.
armor does not scale with level, you can find a new item if the DM or luck gives you one. bracers of defense is a new rare magic item, armor+1 is a new rare magic item. The charachter's AC from mage armor scales with dex investment, as you say, mage armor will always give you more AC than a vanilla light armor. Keep in mind there is no expectation in 5e that you will get any specific magic item. And no expectation that you will need magic items to win/be effective.. If your DM gives you armor +1, they could give you bracers. The point here is that armor of shadows is the innvocation for having better AC than light armor provides. Thats how warlocks are designed to get better AC, cast a spell they got from their patron infinitely
That is incorrect. Warlocks are designed to use Light Armor (magical or mundane) or invest in Armor of Shadows. It's a choice. Once is a class feature, the other is expending a class resource. The point of the Invocation is to provide Mage Armor, but it is not directly to provide better AC. That is absolutely not the only way for a Warlock to improve their AC (even not including Feats and Multiclassing.
Keep in mind there is no expectation in 5e that you will get any specific magic item.
This is both accurate and inaccurate.
Magic Items Awarded by Level "Player Wish List. Encourage your players to keep a wish list of magic items they hope their characters will find in the course of the campaign. If you want to award a magic item but don’t have a specific magic item in mind, you can pick an item of the appropriate rarity from your players’ wish list."
Crafting Magic Items (this whole section. You would need proficiency in Arcana and have proficiency in Leatherworker's Tools.
For Armor, a Bastion Smithy is of no help, unfortunately.
However, in the end, the core rules provide multiple avenues and guidance towards acquiring +x armor, or another magic item which you desire, such Bracers of Armor +2.
Getting one extra use from armor of agathys is synergy. and you will at times get more. I tested it, it happens. But also, you can get false life at level 2, when armor of agathys is only 5 temp hp, So, in that case you basically start off with 12 temp hp agathys, which at low levels can last you 2-3 hits instead of one.
It's a difference of two hit points. The effectiveness will vary wildly depending on whether you running your level 3 tests as a solo character against CR 1 encounters, CR 2 encounters, or as a member of a party of 4+ tackling level appropriate challenges. In a more at level challenge, getting tagged once by a bruiser for 12+ will be pretty easy and False Life doesn't matter. If Armor of Agathys doesn't get knocked out, you will need an action if you want to refresh it. Edge cases in your favor are cool and all, but I am not building around the enemies consistently rolling terribly.
The point of what i was saying is that hexblade is not lacking durability, if they want it. As far as dancer not needing spells or feats, some subclasses build on what is in the base class, and some basically take features from other classes to build something new. Most subclasses build on whats there, warlock already has the option of specializing into martial, its redundant and counter productive to create a subclass that just makes all the choices you could have made with base class, this was a big complaint about the Brawler UA.
I am really glad the UA Warlock subclass is not lacking in durability. I am. That's awesome. However, it's not a Hexblade. They went from (more) Armored Warlocks to Wizards in melee. I would just like WotC to split the difference and not block Light Armor from the Subclass features. I don't care that it means one less AC than Armor of Shadows barring Magic Items. I just want my Studly Leather armor and my full compliment of Subclass Features. Make the argument that it is unbalanced. Tell me how this would be OP compared to what everyone else gets. Just stop trying to make the case that being forced to take the Armor of Shadows invocation in order to use the already limited Accursed Shield is fine.
there is not one way to build a hexblade in this UA, i am answering the question of how to build a hexblade who can play with a basic stand around hitting each other playstyle. I built 4 hexblades and i could have built more. You can opt for a darkness/devil eye style, you could use reach weapons and jump/expeditious, you can build a con focused HP sponge that loves you trying to hit them. I built a dual wielding mid ranged skirmisher with elven accuracy. You can build a primary bebuff controller. However, if you want to build a high AC, high HP general tanker, you have less options, but thats true of every class. because the question tells you the answer. Choose AC, Choose HP, Choose defensive techniques that reduce chance to get hit.
It's great that the UA subclass allows for a variety of concepts. I'm glad to hear it. However, when upgrading from the 2014 Hexblade, we are already limited by Pact of the Blade replacing proficiency with all martial weapons. We can no longer have dual-wielding Warlock, using Charisma for both weapons. Bows and crossbows are fine as long as we acquire a magic one. That's a new requirement in 2024. Now, in addition to the weapon limitations, we only have Light Armor or Armor of Shadows and are pushed towards Armor of Shadows. That's not really preserving the concept. Sure, it might be interesting to see what the UA subclass can do with 3 levels of Bard (College of Dance), but making a Bladesinger isn't why I'm picking Hexblade; that's not the concept I am updating to 2024.
I would say that there are rough edges in terms of customizing, but its not accursed shield. its things like having no access to martial weapons for dual wielding, not having free castings of an offensive or defensive spell in the 2-10 level range, no native mastery holds you back (though i understand niche protection) Needing 13 str to use heavy weaps. That said you can deal with these things, (and i did) But yeah, 1 invocation wasnt holding me back at all.
2014 Hexblade was restricted by the Two-handed property so that matches up with the Heavy soft restriction well. I wonder if when it releases, we will see a Pact of the Blade Invocation for 2 Pact Weapons. I will never argue for Mastery on a subclass where the base class doesn't have it. I would prefer buffs to Hex/curses rather than free castings.
the point of my list wasnt saying these are the exact same thing as accursed shield, the point was that there are many subclass features that will offer no benefit unless you play with a specific subset of the classes pkaystyles.
And my counter was that these weren't examples of a Subclass ability actually cutting off a class feature.
also some of your assertions arent really quite right, path of the wildheart requires you to be unarmored, many barbarians use medium armor. in order for unarmored defense to equal medium armor you need 7 points between constitution and dexterity, which is by no means guaranteed, or even reccomended. Many barbarians never raise con oast 16, and never raise dex past 14. there are also many who go with 14 con and 14 dex so they can improve their mental saves. They literally take a loss to AC unless they built their class a certain way. Which is a lot less changable than invocations.
I doubt that level 14+ Barbarians are sitting at 14 Con and Dex, even taking into account likely magic items by then. Even so, it is still a stretch because the subclass level 14 ability gives you 3 mutually exclusive options. You can still use Power of the Wilds every Rage while wearing Armor. You cannot use Accursed Shield at all while wearing armor. It's not an equivalent comparison.
If you consider having to be unarmored to use accursed shield "giving up" light armor, then using arcane shot requires you 'giving up' all your melee martial weapons. and 'giving up' half your weapon masteries. and 'giving up' your other fighting styles.
In one attack action, you can Arcane Shot with a Hand Crossbow (or sling or pistol), move, melee with a melee weapon, can you not? I am not restricted from wielding a melee weapon while using Arcane Shot, am I?
I can choose to take masteries for melee weapons if I want. I am not prevented from selecting melee masteries in order to use Arcane Shot, am I?
It is also perfectly fine to take another Fighting Style other than Archery. Arcane Shot allows it.
The Arcane Shot subclass feature may be enhanced by certain choices in your build or masteries, but it does not prevent alternative choices in order to benefit from the sub class feature, does it?
As for your hot dog analogy. The class itself gave you bread money, they gave you money for meat. If you dont want to buy a hot dog or a bun with the free money alloted to you for that purpose, you dont want a hotdog. Ignore the half of one of three features they give you at level 3 that improves your hot dogs, that you clearly dont want. And if you want the special hotdog, use the stuff they gave you to make hot dogs, thats what its there for.
It's your grill analogy, but let's continue.
The class gives you a basic hot dog bun and you can buy a premium bun. You now have chosen your hot dog and the Grillers of the Coast has said you can have your hot dog on your basic bun, but if you want mustard, you have to buy the premium bun and throw away the bun you already have.
Making Hexblade the one unarmored Warlock subclass is a bizarre direction. So make the argument that Accursed Shield is busted if you allow it with Light Armor, if you want. But if you want to make a frontline Hexblade, you are stuck with Armor of Shadows, Pact of the Blade, and Fiendish Vigor.
Why is it that I could take any combination of invocations with any other warlock subclass and use all their subclass features? Also stop comparing Accused Shield to unarmored defense. We both know we wouldn’t be having this conversation if just gave the warlock unarmored defense. While that would make the choice of Armor of shadows obsolete on the Hexblade it would get far less complaints because there are other invocation options. As it is now the UA design forces you down one path to be able to use the feature at all. Which is actually what 2024 design is supposed to move away from.
i am not comparing cursed shield to unarmored defense, i have specifically said unarmored defense is compared to armor of shadows. I am talking about both because yall keep comparing them. accursed shield is a subclass feature that builds on being unarmored.
Different subclasses have different designs, Some subclasses are designed to develop one aspect of the class, some are designed to add new aspects to the class. They only have 4 subclasses in the phb,
they released a haxblade UA that followed the paradigm you are talking about, it didnt make any assumptions about what type of warlock you were building, a signifigant amount of the feedback was, people wanted to see a hexblade that primarily focused on developing the martial side of warlock. That it should work better with blade pact (which is an invocations) It works better with defensive invocation.
The warlock is one of the highly customizable classes, many classes arent that customizable, so this issue crops up less often. The good point about customization is that you can use your choices to develop the builds, the bad part about choices is that every choice has an opportunity cost.
It is not inherently good design to never have a subclass that builds on a choice you made, especially if the main class is full of choices. You end up with generic subclasses that cant focus on a specific fantasy the main class was developing, like the last hexblade. Or you can end up with a subclass that is forced to make the same choices you could have made, and thus doesnt develop the existing choices enough to stand out, like Brawler's unarmed strike features and grappling features.
Is the idea of a Greatsword/katana focused fighter an inherently bad subclass concept? if it exists does it need to give you gwf, and gwm for free, or create similar non stacking features so that they arent seen as having a fighting style/feat tax? Is it great design that the guy who wanted a master two handed swordsman fantasy doesnt have any reason to take great weapon fighting style, and is instead choosing defense or protector fighting styles? That they have a great weapon master replacement feature instead of a feature that enhances their performance while using gwm?
One can say i dont like accursed shield for many reasons, but a 'subclass should never synergize with a customization option because it makes certain choices more rewarding design paradigm. Is a very limiting design paradigm. It means the better you are at creating customization options that capture a fantasy/playstyle, the less you are able to develop thise fantasies/playstyles in subclasses.
Now i can see why people may not like that hexblade is further developing the mage armor as the primary way to increase base AC concept, because they dont want to spend invocations on that, but that was in fact the design of the base class. Armor of shadows is basically there as a medium/heavy armor AC option. (as in it lets you get 13-18 AC at the levels you probably would with medium to heavy armor) I dont think for a class with customization options its a great idea to have the subclasses make those choices redundant, but i cant say it never happens either.
as i said earlier on, for this specific issue it isnt the end of the world if it works with light armor, its still fairly similar power levels
but i really dont want them in general, designing subclasses with the idea that they can never develop a customization option without giving the person that customization option free, or creating a feature that makes that customization option redundant.
I dont think the point of class customization is that you never have to pick one in order to be good at the thing the customization is doing, or that none of these customization options will ever have a strong enough synergy that you may want to pick this option over another option to be good at something.
We have some different design imperatives, my main design imperative for subclasses in 2024 is that they are better designed to work and play within the 2024 framework, not that they are as similar to the old versions as possible. So we may just not really agree on some things related to that.
also, yes i understand magic items place in 5e, and yes they give advice on how to award magic items but in that very chapter
And bastions are labeled as an optional feature, not a base assumption. regardless the point is the game is not designed assuming you will get magic items, or even magic items of yor choice, and even in that case, mage armor has magic items that work with it. If the DM is allowing you to get a rare defensive item for AC they can just as easily give you another rare defensive item for AC.
invocations are not a resource any more than any other selectable feature is a resource. spells are features, spell slots are resources. fighting styles are features, feats are features (hence the shorthand) focus is a resource, subclasses themselves are features, not a resource, just because you can choose. I mean i can see how people can blur the line from a certain perspective, but then you run into a situation where you start to say some classes have no features, or only 1 or two features and i think you ve lost a usable definition of features. But forget semantics, Im saying the class gives you inherently built in, multiple means of armoring yourself. Light armor is baseline, and armor of shadows is the built in method
i dont know every thing in dnd, but what other way does base warlock have to increase AC at all times? not including feats As an aside, Something i was thinking about, if armor of shadows gave medium armor proficiency, would yall object to a feature saying, while wearing medium armor _________________.
a barbarian with the common 16/14 con+dex split only has 15 AC btw, the 14/14 split has 14, neither is better than medium armors 17. you need 18/16 investment to match medium armor with unarmored defense. And few barbarians reach that.
i dont really get the claim accursed shield is taking away your light armor, You can wear light armor just fine, you just dont get the benefits of accursed shield.
Accursed Shield only working while unarmored is fine, imo. I see nothing wrong with some subclasses that develop or synergize with one aspect of a main class that some players may not use/choose. it happens all the time. And its more likely to happen the more choices/versatility a class offers.
Fundamentally i think we just disagree on the purpose of class customization features, and on the role that subclasses have with them. You seem to think(unless i am minunderstanding you) the customization options dont exist as features that define your build, but as resources you should be able to select with low opportunity cost
you also seem to think (correct me if im wrong) that subclasses should never have features that are based off an option a class offers that isnt fairly mercurial, lets say something that takes more than a minute to change (like armor) or perhaps once per level up (invocations/spells/fighting styles)
To me thats a bad design paradigm, because those are probably some of the best things to develop as a subclass for classes that have options imo. A sorcerer subclass based on elemental spells? makes sense. A fighter specializing in dual wielding, unarmed or two handed weapons? makes sense. a warlock subclass based on blade pact, pets/familiars, makes sense. An unarmored savage barbarian subclass? A monk based on monk weapon use, an artificer based on magic weapons, or wondrous items. A psion who really synergizes strongly with certain psionic disciplines, or attack/defense mode. And its weird to me that a subclass who uses magic devices and scrolls might somehow be a better design choice for a rogue than a class built around those ideas as class customization options because then those customizations might be seen as a tax.
to me those are all things that should be possible, and even probable.
As i said, a few pages ago, To me, if light armor works with accursed shield its not the end of the world. I would consider it basically smudging the 'warlocks can specialize for more defense paradigm' they set up in the class in exchange for more ease of use. Its a bit of a scuffed design, sometimes it happens.
but i really dont want them using that paradigm in designing classes/subclasses going forward, of either keeping subclasses general and disconnected from class customization, building less classes with class customization so subclasses dont have less thematic options, or spending subclass resources and design space reinventing/reusing/overiding class customization options
that isnt to say they should ONLY make subclasses like this, but it shouldnt be a non starter.
To add: it is disingenuous to compare class feature options like Druid’s warden (or the similar features for clerics, rangers, etc) to accursed shield. The former is a clear choice preference for the player - usually more spellcaster vs. more martial. The fact these “cancel” other armor proficiency is the point of that option, and does not negatively impact the player or PC if selected. It will generally fit the theme the player is going for without any detriment.
i think most players accept and welcome building off of existing class, both within the class and with subclasses. From a design standpoint, these will enhance both mechanically and thematically. Frenzy in 2024 builds on reckless attack for someone that enjoys dealing massive dmg; note the 2014 version was a detriment and considered a bad option and thus subclass.
Where thematically is a Hexblade the “free movement” or “unarmored” gish? Why would they be as dexterous as a monk (who attacks using DEX) when they likely focus their inner power (via CHA / PotB) for combat? Does their weapon-patron encourage being hit due to bloodlust? If so, why an AC boost? Surely more power from being hit / bloodied would work better. accursed shield in particular feels like trying to be too clever. Scared to give the HB “too good” AC, but giving a boost by giving a lesser version of what we give other classes/subclasses. I think it’s actually a worse design concept by far than tying most/all powers to hex spell.
Forcing the hex spell in 1st UA was explicit - you will use hex to get extra powers, and will give you a scaling number of uses for free. The trade off is your concentration slot and the possibility of not having anything if no hex. Most felt correctly that the trade was too steep, but I think thematically and mechanically it could work.
Accursed shield slightly hides the ball - it requires 2 resources (with no reason other than fear or laziness IMO) but the subclass doesn’t provide both. Yes, the class provides, but at an opportunity cost. The bladelock will likely use most of its limited resources for combat (both offense and defense), but when have they “used” enough? And for what return on that resource spend?
Hex, AoA, mirror image, arcane recovery, shield - all good options for spells - can’t use them all though. Definitely can’t use more than 3 total per short rest for most of your career. 5-7 invocations make up the gap for utility. PotB, extra attack, false life - maybe resilient mind, eldritch smite, bonus dmg at 9th.
In practice, those “options” are dwindling fast. Yes, I as a player chose the “expensive” playstyle, and those will help me match (in some cases exceed) other weapon users. Is 90% of my resources/choices enough for that capability (I’m assuming it is)? Should my subclass add a feature that asks for another 5%? If so, I want a lot more in exchange than +2 AC, conditionally.
I dont know what disingenuous means to you, but to me that suggests trying to decieve. I used that point because they are the same, except with less options.
Armor of shadows is the feature for warlocks that is designed to give you more AC than the base option, its for people who are willing to give up other features to be better at dealing with attacks. The same way that defense fighting style is for people who would rather get more defense. The fact that other warlocks might not be interested in it is fine, thats a player choice. it might be underpowered, thats a balance issue, but the fact remains its supposed to be a defensive feature for warlocks that is an improvement on light armor. Every single choice you ever make has an opportunity cost, if it didnt then its not a real choice.
And i have tested multiple hexblades, with this UA. warlock gets a lot of invocations, by level 2 you have 3 invocations, by level 5 you have 5. Sure you could use your invocations on something else, thats the nature of customization choices, you choose the type of charachter you want to build. I literally started running out of invocations that thematically fit, or offered something to enhance the playstyle each charachter was going for. Hexblade is working within the already existing options and ways in which warlocks handle defense and offense, it not adding a fighter on top the warlock class. In 2024, warlock base class has tools to be a melee type, hexblade is adding on ti that. And you are free to ignore accursed shield, it’s one bullet point in 1 of 3 features they give you at level 3. If 2 conditional ac if you are unarmored doesnt fit your build, then ignore it. On the vast majority of subclasses there is some feature/subfrature which i personally dont use. But i wouldnt say its crazy for designers to say hey, warlocks who use magic armor get an additional benefit
I would say it’s being deceptive as you are not truly comparing the same things, though you appear to think they are. Base class options that enhance 1 aspect (casting vs martial ability) thematically vs a subclass ability tied to choosing 1 from a subset of base class options. Is it crazy for WotC to do this? Not necessarily - but most here seem to agree that it is a bizarre design choice, terribly enacted. Doubly so as in other situations (like dance bard) the offset provides a scaling option and fits a theme.
The martial melee warlock either takes a specific additional invocation (assuming PotB) to enable a class benefit or forgoes any defensive buff. This is again not the same as choosing a fighting style (class feature) - I appreciate your attempt to logic your way to that idea, and that it somehow fits thematically - then the subclass should be explicit on that theme. Ignoring this feature (it’s only 1 of 3 at 3rd level) is not like the ribbon or tertiary features of other classes and subclasses. This would have an impact on every combat encounter from level 3 onward, and defense will be a consideration on every PC (esp a melee character with limited AC options). That said, the HB here is not good enough to “ignore” this feature as unnecessary to a PC. I would argue most would still dip for armor AND take a different subclass as PotB.
This is why this feature moves from choice to burden - you feel forced to take it in lieu of being subpar. That’s the tax aspect - again, there is no mechanical or real theme of the subclass to support being unarmored, nor to the subclass using mage armor instead (again, kudos to inventing some head canon), except this feature. We all support having valid options creating opportunity costs - I can’t pick (generally) both defensive style and duelist. But the player should feel empowered to make that choice and pay that “cost” willingly - not have a choice forced on them.
As others have noted, no other warlock subclass has this interaction. Other classes with somewhat similar interactions have far superior thematic and mechanical execution. There is no reason this couldn’t add to light armor also.
Gwar1 there is no point in comparing armor of shadows to unarmored defense when we are talking about Accursed Shield. Even if an invocation gave you unarmored defense we would still be having this conversation because you would still have to take an invocation to use accursed shield. It’s bad design. There is nothing else that needs to be said about it.
If they want to make this subclass not assume you are taking any invocations they could just bring back a version of hex warrior. It doesn’t have to give any additional armor training, but having hex weapon be something separate from pact weapon could still work in 2024 and gets lessens the need to take PotB. Hexblade Curse can stay the same and they should clarify it does transfer with hex, which makes bestow curse less useful, or they could change it so it doesn’t transfer with hex. Accursed shield and later accursed critical should work on any cursed enemy. They should consider bane, as a curse for this feature.
Altering the core features of Hexblade’s Curse and Hex Warrior strips the subclass of the unique appeal it had since 2014. Many well-regarded content creators agree with this assessment.
If you believe D&D creators have little influence on the game's future or its design direction, I encourage you to watch this video — it might change your mind. www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmkQdeVZA7g
Gwar1 there is no point in comparing armor of shadows to unarmored defense when we are talking about Accursed Shield. Even if an invocation gave you unarmored defense we would still be having this conversation because you would still have to take an invocation to use accursed shield. It’s bad design. There is nothing else that needs to be said about it.
Gwar1 there is no point in comparing armor of shadows to unarmored defense when we are talking about Accursed Shield. Even if an invocation gave you unarmored defense we would still be having this conversation because you would still have to take an invocation to use accursed shield. It’s bad design. There is nothing else that needs to be said about it.
There is no reason a subclass would give you the equivalent of unarmored defense, if you already have an unarmored defense option built into your class.
accursed shield is designed to enhance the armored shadows feature of warlocks (and also work with any source of unarmored play), its not designed to be a generic buff to AC. Or directly compete with your armor option. numerically there isnt a ton of difference in AC between also extending it to light armor, so If they feel like they want to do it, they can do it, but it kinda going against the idea the class design has, which is that warlocks who want baseline passive AC increase, (like from armor) are supposed to take armor of shadows as an innvocation. accursed shield is designed to increase that benefit from just being armored, to having armor+shield.
Essentially the class design says the price of being a better passive tank is an innvocation, and they didnt want the subclass to mitigate that price, override it, they wanted to build on it. If you want to have a shield while using light armor, you cant take the lightly armored feat. They basically didnt want you getting that level of AC without some type of customization.Now on full release they smudge that, but it isnt an illogical idea to validate the main class concepts.
Now, subclasses sometimes invalidate main class design and choices for various reasons, but I dont think its inherently good design to do so. And i definitely dont think they should always do it.
As i said previously, we just fundmentally disagree on whether subclass design should include options that develop choice the player makes as a part of their class. I think its bad design of a customizable class of either the class or its subclasses if subclasses never develop any of the custom options a class presents.
Gwar1 there is no point in comparing armor of shadows to unarmored defense when we are talking about Accursed Shield. Even if an invocation gave you unarmored defense we would still be having this conversation because you would still have to take an invocation to use accursed shield. It’s bad design. There is nothing else that needs to be said about it.
Gwar1 there is no point in comparing armor of shadows to unarmored defense when we are talking about Accursed Shield. Even if an invocation gave you unarmored defense we would still be having this conversation because you would still have to take an invocation to use accursed shield. It’s bad design. There is nothing else that needs to be said about it.
Essentially the class design says the price of being a better passive tank is an innvocation, and they didnt want the subclass to mitigate that price, override it, they wanted to build on it. If you want to have a shield while using light armor, you cant take the lightly armored feat. They basically didnt want you getting that level of AC without some type of customization.Now on full release they smudge that, but it isnt an illogical idea to validate the main class feature
As i said previously, we just fundmentally disagree on whether subclass design should include options that develop choice the player makes as a part of their class. I think its bad design of a customizable class of either the class or its subclasses if subclasses never develop any of the custom options a class presents.
1) Any other instance where a subclass or other option invalidates/overrides a class ability gives a lot more in return. In this instance the design choice is at best weird, at worst plain poor. If I as a player see a benefit to AoS for +1 AC over studded leather, that’s fine. What about this subclass (esp given it is a 2024 update) indicates it should reward the AoS pick? If it just gave the +2 flat out, does it make AoS worse? Do we consider HBs an unarmored warrior now? You might indicate yes, but this being the only feature that alludes to this (as nothing else builds on being unarmored) and the HB history is contradictory.
2) I have not seen anyone disagree with the idea of building off a class choice/option. However, it needs to be done better - make me want to make that choice, instead of feeling obligated. The ranger undead UA does a decent job of this for the Hunters mark feature; most players feel HM is a lackluster ability as the ranger focus (even if it may be mechanically good for early levels) and that class builds on its use. As I’ve said, building off the hex spell as a subclass could work, but that iteration didn’t give enough.
In this instance, most HB players would take AoS for the subclass benefit - not because they love AoS, but because they want the larger AC bonus (and don’t want to lose the feature). This is not rewarding a “choice” - the design is forcing the player’s hand. If there was another feature at 6, and another at 14 that built upon being unarmored (in addition to whatever else HB currently gives), maybe HB becomes the unarmored warrior warlock and makes more design sense.
Gwar1 we already have subclasses that improve optional parts of a class. Wizards are a great example. What they don’t do is have things that increase one specific option unless they also give you that option as part of the feature. If a wizard subclass feature improves a school or type of spell you have many options to choose from, but if it improves a particular spell it gives you the spell as part of the feature. If the you gained mage armor as part of hexblade’s curse we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Gwar1 there is no point in comparing armor of shadows to unarmored defense when we are talking about Accursed Shield. Even if an invocation gave you unarmored defense we would still be having this conversation because you would still have to take an invocation to use accursed shield. It’s bad design. There is nothing else that needs to be said about it.
This is not entirely true. Armor of Shadows is similar in purpose to Unarmored Defense. An equivalent scenario to College of Dance, for example, would be if the UA subclass gave Armor of Shadows as a bonus Invocation. Then, requiring the Warlock to be unarmored and shieldless would be less of an issue (other than the flavor of the Hexblade).
We have some different design imperatives, my main design imperative for subclasses in 2024 is that they are better designed to work and play within the 2024 framework, not that they are as similar to the old versions as possible. So we may just not really agree on some things related to that.
If it's a new subclass, that's fine. If it's an update, it should have enough resemblance to feel like an update and not a bait and switch. The UA Hexblade is not an armored combatant version of Warlock that supplements melee prowess with curses. I don't even care if they are more armored, just as long as they are not less armored than the base Warlock.
also, yes i understand magic items place in 5e, and yes they give advice on how to award magic items but in that very chapter
And bastions are labeled as an optional feature, not a base assumption. regardless the point is the game is not designed assuming you will get magic items, or even magic items of yor choice, and even in that case, mage armor has magic items that work with it. If the DM is allowing you to get a rare defensive item for AC they can just as easily give you another rare defensive item for AC.
Your assumptions about the game conflict with the printed material you quoted. Yes, Bastions are optional. Everything is some degree of optional. Crafting Magic Items are not called out as optional, but you can certainly exclude them, if you want.
invocations are not a resource any more than any other selectable feature is a resource. spells are features, spell slots are resources. fighting styles are features, feats are features (hence the shorthand) focus is a resource, subclasses themselves are features, not a resource, just because you can choose. I mean i can see how people can blur the line from a certain perspective, but then you run into a situation where you start to say some classes have no features, or only 1 or two features and i think you ve lost a usable definition of features. But forget semantics, Im saying the class gives you inherently built in, multiple means of armoring yourself. Light armor is baseline, and armor of shadows is the built in method
Let's define the two as a feature is something that your class always makes available to you (whether constantly or limited in uses). If there is a choice involved, you can generally change it moment to moment with and not when leveling up. Resources generally can only be changed when levelling up or not at all. Anything that can be changed on a long rest is weird grey area by my definition. Fighting Styles, I will classify as a feature because everyone who has it can change them on a long rest. Prepared Spells, I will classify as a resource because it is a mixture of changing them when you level and changing them on a long rest. Spellcasting (slots) would be a feature. That is my terminology. Does that suit you?
As you say, semantics aside, every Warlock created with the 2024 rules can armor themselves with Light Armor. Can every one, 100% of them, use Armor of Shadows? Is it possible to leave character creation unable to cast (invoke?) Armor of Shadows? If so, Armor of Shadows is not built-in.
i dont know every thing in dnd, but what other way does base warlock have to increase AC at all times? not including feats As an aside, Something i was thinking about, if armor of shadows gave medium armor proficiency, would yall object to a feature saying, while wearing medium armor _________________.
In general, no. In addition to the problems Armor of Shadows has, it would be another example of a 2024 Invocation stealing features of the 2014 Hexblade. Independent of that, it would be interesting to see if they add any Invocations that improve Armor of Shadows at some point, either directly increasing AC (unlikely) or by adding rider effects.
a barbarian with the common 16/14 con+dex split only has 15 AC btw, the 14/14 split has 14, neither is better than medium armors 17. you need 18/16 investment to match medium armor with unarmored defense. And few barbarians reach that.
A College of Dance Bard with a 16/16+ Dex+Cha will have a 16 AC and that will likely reach 17 or higher before any additional modifiers.
i dont really get the claim accursed shield is taking away your light armor, You can wear light armor just fine, you just dont get the benefits of accursed shield.
It's not taking it away. In order to use all of a subclass, you have forgo Armor in the update to the armored Warlock Subclass. It gives you feature that you can't use unless you expend a class resource (Armor of Shadows) to access. Hexblades started out as kind of like Arcane Paladin-like casters with light armor, shields, simple weapon, and martial weapon proficiencies in 3.x (I want to say that they debuted in Complete Arcane). In 4e and 2014, they gained the ability to wear Medium Armor. Now, in the UA, they gave the armored spellcaster an ability that only works if unarmored. Just make it a +2 AC while not using a shield. Let's go back to the OG 3.x Hexblades with Light Armor.
Accursed Shield only working while unarmored is fine, imo. I see nothing wrong with some subclasses that develop or synergize with one aspect of a main class that some players may not use/choose. it happens all the time. And its more likely to happen the more choices/versatility a class offers.
Synergizes? Yes. Conflicts without providing a replacement? No.
Fundamentally i think we just disagree on the purpose of class customization features, and on the role that subclasses have with them. You seem to think(unless i am minunderstanding you) the customization options dont exist as features that define your build, but as resources you should be able to select with low opportunity cost
you also seem to think (correct me if im wrong) that subclasses should never have features that are based off an option a class offers that isnt fairly mercurial, lets say something that takes more than a minute to change (like armor) or perhaps once per level up (invocations/spells/fighting styles)
Opportunity costs on resources is fantastic. There should multiple, appealing options for every choice. It's okay if some are subpar, but if they are too disparate, you risk turning a choice into an Illusion. "At 3rd level, choose one: You are immune to having your brain extracted or replaced or as a bonus action, you can deal an extra 1d4 psychic damage when you hit with a melee weapon once per turn." One of these will likely never come up and, as such, will nearly never be taken.
Leaning into certain features/resources is fine as well. Armorer Artificers need smith's tools and they gain proficiency with smith's tools (or a different tool if they are already proficient). Players pick Abjurer Wizards to double down on their abjuration spells. That's fine. College of Dance Bards give you the ability to Riverdance on your opponent's faces, but it conflicts with the ability to use Light Armor. This is fine because the subclass ability that conflicts with Light Armor also gives you an alternative to that feature. It's bundled with the Subclass choice.
As i said, a few pages ago, To me, if light armor works with accursed shield its not the end of the world. I would consider it basically smudging the 'warlocks can specialize for more defense paradigm' they set up in the class in exchange for more ease of use. Its a bit of a scuffed design, sometimes it happens.
And, like I said, if this was a different subclass and not the "you can't use the 2014 version anymore, Hexblade", it would be fine. You wouldn't make a class themed around embodying traditional aspects of Thor using a Monk, right? There is a (fictional) history of flavor that needs to be preserved.
I would absolutely consider using a monk if I felt the chassis met the needs. That's what a class is, its a name for a set of mechanics. Nothing more, nothing less. People get too caught up in the name of a class, and some class fantasy.
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 would absolutely consider using a monk if I felt the chassis met the needs. That's what a class is, its a name for a set of mechanics. Nothing more, nothing less. People get too caught up in the name of a class, and some class fantasy.
IF it met the needs. A monk does not meet the needs of a warhammer wielding armored warrior, does it?
It can. For example, for a long time I have wanted to do a joke character that DW hammer and sickle. Sadly, the damage dice is a bit low on the light hammer and the sickle, however monk fixes that problem.
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.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
the question becomes whether the customization the class allows is real or simply theory. Most warlocks outside of this UA class would not likely take the mage armor invocation. Even as a PotB melee character, the limited, customizable invocation slot is too valuable for a +1 AC. Creating a subclass feature that essentially relies on making that choice is not inherently bad, if it makes it worth it. People can reasonably disagree if this extra +2 makes it a “good” choice for their PC. However, it is certainly eliminating the choice of taking a different invocation in order to make this feature work.
The class also has a feature (it’s best IMO until level 14) around making concentration checks. Lacking CON prof, taking eldritch mind or using a feat (or both) would best utilize this feature. Potentially another choice eliminated.
PotB is already a heavy invocation ask - one the player is making willingly, I grant. 3 minimum just for the attack portion. Potentially smite, the 9th level extra dmg one, eldritch mind, false life one; now armor of shadows. Again, no one is forced to take any and certainly not all of these; but the customization starts to dwindle the more features rely on specific choices. That is not always a bad thing, but the feature(s) best be worth it, both mechanically and from a vibes standpoint. They should feel good to make the choice, not feel forced. Make me excited to make that choice, instead of feeling obligated.
Previous comments here have noted that bladelocks (and hexblades specifically) can use their invocations and spell slots for: AC boosting, temp HPs, damage increase, debuffing foes, buffing themselves, on top of utility. That is the mechanical draw and niche of the class. The reality is that a player will make choices, and those choices will limit what else the PC can do. Good design will make those choices both good and interesting, even if a trade-off.
Players don’t like feeling forced into choices to make something work, especially when it does not seem fun or make sense. This the idea of a tax. There is no flavor or other reason why the AC bonus should be restricted to no armor. Dance bard (not a great subclass IMO) is at least flavored as a “free movement” subclass and gets scaling AC from it. The barbarian version is thematic, but again also bad mechanically. 3e prestige classes often forced feat, skill, or MC choices that were suboptimal, but the payoff was deemed worth it (and again were tied to a theme usually).
The only current 2024 warlock subclass feature that “forces” a choice is the celestial’s fire/radiance spell dmg boost. There are ways to make that work within the class, we can debate their appeal/efficacy. But even if you rarely use it, it is not IMO as critical to the main draw of the subclass. In contrast, the goolock feature that makes hex “good” opens possibilities. The fey and fiend subclasses imply a playstyle, but don’t really limit or require any other choices be made to function as intended, or most importantly, as a player imagines. The HB shouldn’t either, other than be flavored as a weapon-user (and melee IMO).
To add: it is disingenuous to compare class feature options like Druid’s warden (or the similar features for clerics, rangers, etc) to accursed shield. The former is a clear choice preference for the player - usually more spellcaster vs. more martial. The fact these “cancel” other armor proficiency is the point of that option, and does not negatively impact the player or PC if selected. It will generally fit the theme the player is going for without any detriment.
i think most players accept and welcome building off of existing class, both within the class and with subclasses. From a design standpoint, these will enhance both mechanically and thematically. Frenzy in 2024 builds on reckless attack for someone that enjoys dealing massive dmg; note the 2014 version was a detriment and considered a bad option and thus subclass.
Where thematically is a Hexblade the “free movement” or “unarmored” gish? Why would they be as dexterous as a monk (who attacks using DEX) when they likely focus their inner power (via CHA / PotB) for combat? Does their weapon-patron encourage being hit due to bloodlust? If so, why an AC boost? Surely more power from being hit / bloodied would work better. accursed shield in particular feels like trying to be too clever. Scared to give the HB “too good” AC, but giving a boost by giving a lesser version of what we give other classes/subclasses. I think it’s actually a worse design concept by far than tying most/all powers to hex spell.
Forcing the hex spell in 1st UA was explicit - you will use hex to get extra powers, and will give you a scaling number of uses for free. The trade off is your concentration slot and the possibility of not having anything if no hex. Most felt correctly that the trade was too steep, but I think thematically and mechanically it could work.
Accursed shield slightly hides the ball - it requires 2 resources (with no reason other than fear or laziness IMO) but the subclass doesn’t provide both. Yes, the class provides, but at an opportunity cost. The bladelock will likely use most of its limited resources for combat (both offense and defense), but when have they “used” enough? And for what return on that resource spend?
Hex, AoA, mirror image, arcane recovery, shield - all good options for spells - can’t use them all though. Definitely can’t use more than 3 total per short rest for most of your career. 5-7 invocations make up the gap for utility. PotB, extra attack, false life - maybe resilient mind, eldritch smite, bonus dmg at 9th.
In practice, those “options” are dwindling fast. Yes, I as a player chose the “expensive” playstyle, and those will help me match (in some cases exceed) other weapon users. Is 90% of my resources/choices enough for that capability (I’m assuming it is)? Should my subclass add a feature that asks for another 5%? If so, I want a lot more in exchange than +2 AC, conditionally.
Mage Armor, and therefore, Armor of Shadows does not scale with level. Ever. It's always the same base AC. Worn armor can scale (of sorts) because magic armor can have a bonus up to +3. No invocations or attunement required. To have the same maximum base AC without armor, you have to take the Armor of Shadows Invocation, and attune Bracers of Defense. Certain species or level dips may give you better base AC options. For example, armored AC would cap at 18 if playing a Warforged due to Integrated Protection. Blade Ward (effective 2.5 AC) and Dexterity apply equally to both options so I am not including them.
Accursed Shield is temporary (and there is debate surrounding the interaction with Hex) and is contentious in this context, but if it progresses forward as is, the naked Warlock with an active curse has better maximum AC than the Armored one outside of some edge cases.
College of Dance creates an unarmored, melee focused version of an Arcane Caster, but it gives you Unarmored Defense to use instead of Light Armor ... as a Subclass Feature; no spells or feats are required to make that work.
Okay, so now every single Hexblade is going to be Armor of Shadows, Fiendish Vigor, and Pact of the Blade. Every Hexblade is just a carbon copy of every other with no real choice in builds.
Armor of Agathys only synchronizes with False Life if you can constantly prevent yourself from running out of temporary hit points which you probably can't with just False Life. With a level 2 slot, as soon as you take 10+ damage (12+ with False Life) before your next turn, Armor of Agathys ends. Also, remember that Unyielding Will has a few caveats: it will replace your remaining temporary hit points if the roll is higher, and it only triggers when you fail your save for concentration, not when you take damage, so it can't prevent Armor of Agathys from dropping unless you had a concentration spell up (perhaps Blade Ward) and voluntarily or involuntarily fail the save.
You have reinforced the point that there is one way to build a Hexblade with the UA. Some people may argue that the class is not effective. I don't know that not being able to hit the same ACs as before is bad. Being locked into one path, however, is bad design. The fact that the subclass is extremely different than it was before, making updating an existing character extremely challenging, understandably leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many. It would be fine if it called something else and wasn't sold as the update for the Hexblade. It's not what says on the tin.
The implication that Light Armor doesn't grow based on your Dex investment is inaccurate. Both grow equally. Armored will be one AC less unless you have magic armor or Bracers of Defense.
Artificer Battle Smith is the only semi-valid comparison.
Artificer Battle Smith requires you to either spend an infusion to make a weapon magical or find one. This would be on par with a Hexblade in the UA needing to take Armor of Shadows or finding a Magic Item that let them cast it without the Invocation if, and only if, you assume a significant number of Hexblades will not take Pact of the Blade (1 class resource versus 2 resources). As a replacement to the 2014 Hexblade concept, this is a much more direct parallel to taking Pact of the Blade, but the UA then requires an additional Invocation.
I heard you wanted a hot dog. I'll give you these condiments as long as you don't use a bun.
How to add Tooltips.
I dont know what disingenuous means to you, but to me that suggests trying to decieve. I used that point because they are the same, except with less options.
Armor of shadows is the feature for warlocks that is designed to give you more AC than the base option, its for people who are willing to give up other features to be better at dealing with attacks. The same way that defense fighting style is for people who would rather get more defense. The fact that other warlocks might not be interested in it is fine, thats a player choice. it might be underpowered, thats a balance issue, but the fact remains its supposed to be a defensive feature for warlocks that is an improvement on light armor. Every single choice you ever make has an opportunity cost, if it didnt then its not a real choice.
And i have tested multiple hexblades, with this UA. warlock gets a lot of invocations, by level 2 you have 3 invocations, by level 5 you have 5. Sure you could use your invocations on something else, thats the nature of customization choices, you choose the type of charachter you want to build. I literally started running out of invocations that thematically fit, or offered something to enhance the playstyle each charachter was going for. Hexblade is working within the already existing options and ways in which warlocks handle defense and offense, it not adding a fighter on top the warlock class. In 2024, warlock base class has tools to be a melee type, hexblade is adding on ti that. And you are free to ignore accursed shield, its one bullet point in 1 of 3 features they give you at level 3. If 2 conditional ac if you are unarmored doesnt fit your build, then ignore it. On the vast majority of subclasses there is some feature/subfrature which i personally dont use. But i wouldnt say its crazy for designers to say hey, warlocks who use magic armor get an additional benefit on this subclass.
Thematically, warlock was designed to be a class who uses forbidden magical knowledge given to them by shady powerful forces to obtain quick power. Thats why the base class made mage armor its best armor option. The warlock didnt spend years training with armor and weapons and learning spell formulas, they made a pact and got magical shortcuts. Hence pact of the blade magically gives them the ability to match. And armor of shadows is magical defense that can give them AC that rivals medium/heavy armor. Hexblade isnt introducing a new theme here, its using the already existing class option for increased defence. Its not changing the warlock theme, its building on it. They have AC to rival full martials, both originating from their pact, and they did it without the rigorous training mundane martials go through.
@ smite makes right.
armor does not scale with level, you can find a new item if the DM or luck gives you one. bracers of defense is a new rare magic item, armor+1 is a new rare magic item. The charachter's AC from mage armor scales with dex investment, as you say, mage armor will always give you more AC than a vanilla light armor. Keep in mind there is no expectation in 5e that you will get any specific magic item. And no expectation that you will need magic items to win/be effective.. If your DM gives you armor +1, they could give you bracers. The point here is that armor of shadows is the innvocation for having better AC than light armor provides. Thats how warlocks are designed to get better AC, cast a spell they got from their patron infinitely
Getting one extra use from armor of agathys is synergy. and you will at times get more. I tested it, it happens. But also, you can get false life at level 2, when armor of agathys is only 5 temp hp, So, in that case you basically start off with 12 temp hp agathys, which at low levels can last you 2-3 hits instead of one. And there racial ways to reduce damage, this adds to it. As fr unyielding will, yes you said it, a hexblade can always have concentration up, and they can choose to fail a save. I did it a couple of times. The point of what i was saying is that hexblade is not lacking durability, if they want it. As far as dancer not needing spells or feats, some subclasses build on what is in the base class, and some basically take features from other classes to build something new. Most subclasses build on whats there, warlock already has the option of specializing into martial, its redundant and counter productive to create a subclass that just makes all the choices you could have made with base class, this was a big complaint about the Brawler UA.
there is not one way to build a hexblade in this UA, i am answering the question of how to build a hexblade who can play with a basic stand around hitting each other playstyle. I built 4 hexblades and i could have built more. You can opt for a darkness/devil eye style, you could use reach weapons and jump/expeditious, you can build a con focused HP sponge that loves you trying to hit them. I built a dual wielding mid ranged skirmisher with elven accuracy. You can build a primary bebuff controller. However, if you want to build a high AC, high HP general tanker, you have less options, but thats true of every class. because the question tells you the answer. Choose AC, Choose HP, Choose defensive techniques that reduce chance to get hit.
I would say that there are rough edges in terms of customizing, but its not accursed shield. its things like having no access to martial weapons for dual wielding, not having free castings of an offensive or defensive spell in the 2-10 level range, no native mastery holds you back (though i understand niche protection) Needing 13 str to use heavy weaps. That said you can deal with these things, (and i did) But yeah, 1 invocation wasnt holding me back at all.
the point of my list wasnt saying these are the exact same thing as accursed shield, the point was that there are many subclass features that will offer no benefit unless you play with a specific subset of the classes pkaystyles.
which is in response to the assertion that no subclass features offer you a negative benefit unless you play a certain way. I quickly had to point out accursed shield is not a negative benefit, because you can simply not use that bullet point if you dont want to get its benefit, like every other example i gave.
also some of your assertions arent really quite right, path of the wildheart requires you to be unarmored, many barbarians use medium armor. in order for unarmored defense to equal medium armor you need 7 points between constitution and dexterity, which is by no means guaranteed, or even reccomended. Many barbarians never raise con oast 16, and never raise dex past 14. there are also many who go with 14 con and 14 dex so they can improve their mental saves. They literally take a loss to AC unless they built their class a certain way. Which is a lot less changable than invocations.
If you consider having to be unarmored to use accursed shield "giving up" light armor, then using arcane shot requires you 'giving up' all your melee martial weapons. and 'giving up' half your weapon masteries. and 'giving up' your other fighting styles.
As for your hot dog analogy. The class itself gave you bread money, they gave you money for meat. If you dont want to buy a hot dog or a bun with the free money alloted to you for that purpose, you dont want a hotdog. Ignore the half of one of three features they give you at level 3 that improves your hot dogs, that you clearly dont want. And if you want the special hotdog, use the stuff they gave you to make hot dogs, thats what its there for.
Why is it that I could take any combination of invocations with any other warlock subclass and use all their subclass features? Also stop comparing Accused Shield to unarmored defense. We both know we wouldn’t be having this conversation if just gave the warlock unarmored defense. While that would make the choice of Armor of shadows obsolete on the Hexblade it would get far less complaints because there are other invocation options. As it is now the UA design forces you down one path to be able to use the feature at all. Which is actually what 2024 design is supposed to move away from.
That is incorrect. Warlocks are designed to use Light Armor (magical or mundane) or invest in Armor of Shadows. It's a choice. Once is a class feature, the other is expending a class resource. The point of the Invocation is to provide Mage Armor, but it is not directly to provide better AC. That is absolutely not the only way for a Warlock to improve their AC (even not including Feats and Multiclassing.
This is both accurate and inaccurate.
Magic Items Awarded by Level "Player Wish List. Encourage your players to keep a wish list of magic items they hope their characters will find in the course of the campaign. If you want to award a magic item but don’t have a specific magic item in mind, you can pick an item of the appropriate rarity from your players’ wish list."
Crafting Magic Items (this whole section. You would need proficiency in Arcana and have proficiency in Leatherworker's Tools.
For Armor, a Bastion Smithy is of no help, unfortunately.
However, in the end, the core rules provide multiple avenues and guidance towards acquiring +x armor, or another magic item which you desire, such Bracers of Armor +2.
It's a difference of two hit points. The effectiveness will vary wildly depending on whether you running your level 3 tests as a solo character against CR 1 encounters, CR 2 encounters, or as a member of a party of 4+ tackling level appropriate challenges. In a more at level challenge, getting tagged once by a bruiser for 12+ will be pretty easy and False Life doesn't matter. If Armor of Agathys doesn't get knocked out, you will need an action if you want to refresh it. Edge cases in your favor are cool and all, but I am not building around the enemies consistently rolling terribly.
I am really glad the UA Warlock subclass is not lacking in durability. I am. That's awesome. However, it's not a Hexblade. They went from (more) Armored Warlocks to Wizards in melee. I would just like WotC to split the difference and not block Light Armor from the Subclass features. I don't care that it means one less AC than Armor of Shadows barring Magic Items. I just want my Studly Leather armor and my full compliment of Subclass Features. Make the argument that it is unbalanced. Tell me how this would be OP compared to what everyone else gets. Just stop trying to make the case that being forced to take the Armor of Shadows invocation in order to use the already limited Accursed Shield is fine.
It's great that the UA subclass allows for a variety of concepts. I'm glad to hear it. However, when upgrading from the 2014 Hexblade, we are already limited by Pact of the Blade replacing proficiency with all martial weapons. We can no longer have dual-wielding Warlock, using Charisma for both weapons. Bows and crossbows are fine as long as we acquire a magic one. That's a new requirement in 2024. Now, in addition to the weapon limitations, we only have Light Armor or Armor of Shadows and are pushed towards Armor of Shadows. That's not really preserving the concept. Sure, it might be interesting to see what the UA subclass can do with 3 levels of Bard (College of Dance), but making a Bladesinger isn't why I'm picking Hexblade; that's not the concept I am updating to 2024.
2014 Hexblade was restricted by the Two-handed property so that matches up with the Heavy soft restriction well. I wonder if when it releases, we will see a Pact of the Blade Invocation for 2 Pact Weapons. I will never argue for Mastery on a subclass where the base class doesn't have it. I would prefer buffs to Hex/curses rather than free castings.
And my counter was that these weren't examples of a Subclass ability actually cutting off a class feature.
I doubt that level 14+ Barbarians are sitting at 14 Con and Dex, even taking into account likely magic items by then. Even so, it is still a stretch because the subclass level 14 ability gives you 3 mutually exclusive options. You can still use Power of the Wilds every Rage while wearing Armor. You cannot use Accursed Shield at all while wearing armor. It's not an equivalent comparison.
In one attack action, you can Arcane Shot with a Hand Crossbow (or sling or pistol), move, melee with a melee weapon, can you not? I am not restricted from wielding a melee weapon while using Arcane Shot, am I?
I can choose to take masteries for melee weapons if I want. I am not prevented from selecting melee masteries in order to use Arcane Shot, am I?
It is also perfectly fine to take another Fighting Style other than Archery. Arcane Shot allows it.
The Arcane Shot subclass feature may be enhanced by certain choices in your build or masteries, but it does not prevent alternative choices in order to benefit from the sub class feature, does it?
It's your grill analogy, but let's continue.
The class gives you a basic hot dog bun and you can buy a premium bun. You now have chosen your hot dog and the Grillers of the Coast has said you can have your hot dog on your basic bun, but if you want mustard, you have to buy the premium bun and throw away the bun you already have.
Making Hexblade the one unarmored Warlock subclass is a bizarre direction. So make the argument that Accursed Shield is busted if you allow it with Light Armor, if you want. But if you want to make a frontline Hexblade, you are stuck with Armor of Shadows, Pact of the Blade, and Fiendish Vigor.
How to add Tooltips.
i am not comparing cursed shield to unarmored defense, i have specifically said unarmored defense is compared to armor of shadows. I am talking about both because yall keep comparing them. accursed shield is a subclass feature that builds on being unarmored.
Different subclasses have different designs, Some subclasses are designed to develop one aspect of the class, some are designed to add new aspects to the class. They only have 4 subclasses in the phb,
they released a haxblade UA that followed the paradigm you are talking about, it didnt make any assumptions about what type of warlock you were building, a signifigant amount of the feedback was, people wanted to see a hexblade that primarily focused on developing the martial side of warlock. That it should work better with blade pact (which is an invocations) It works better with defensive invocation.
The warlock is one of the highly customizable classes, many classes arent that customizable, so this issue crops up less often. The good point about customization is that you can use your choices to develop the builds, the bad part about choices is that every choice has an opportunity cost.
It is not inherently good design to never have a subclass that builds on a choice you made, especially if the main class is full of choices. You end up with generic subclasses that cant focus on a specific fantasy the main class was developing, like the last hexblade. Or you can end up with a subclass that is forced to make the same choices you could have made, and thus doesnt develop the existing choices enough to stand out, like Brawler's unarmed strike features and grappling features.
Is the idea of a Greatsword/katana focused fighter an inherently bad subclass concept? if it exists does it need to give you gwf, and gwm for free, or create similar non stacking features so that they arent seen as having a fighting style/feat tax? Is it great design that the guy who wanted a master two handed swordsman fantasy doesnt have any reason to take great weapon fighting style, and is instead choosing defense or protector fighting styles? That they have a great weapon master replacement feature instead of a feature that enhances their performance while using gwm?
One can say i dont like accursed shield for many reasons, but a 'subclass should never synergize with a customization option because it makes certain choices more rewarding design paradigm. Is a very limiting design paradigm. It means the better you are at creating customization options that capture a fantasy/playstyle, the less you are able to develop thise fantasies/playstyles in subclasses.
Now i can see why people may not like that hexblade is further developing the mage armor as the primary way to increase base AC concept, because they dont want to spend invocations on that, but that was in fact the design of the base class. Armor of shadows is basically there as a medium/heavy armor AC option. (as in it lets you get 13-18 AC at the levels you probably would with medium to heavy armor) I dont think for a class with customization options its a great idea to have the subclasses make those choices redundant, but i cant say it never happens either.
as i said earlier on, for this specific issue it isnt the end of the world if it works with light armor, its still fairly similar power levels
but i really dont want them in general, designing subclasses with the idea that they can never develop a customization option without giving the person that customization option free, or creating a feature that makes that customization option redundant.
I dont think the point of class customization is that you never have to pick one in order to be good at the thing the customization is doing, or that none of these customization options will ever have a strong enough synergy that you may want to pick this option over another option to be good at something.
@smite makes right.
We have some different design imperatives, my main design imperative for subclasses in 2024 is that they are better designed to work and play within the 2024 framework, not that they are as similar to the old versions as possible. So we may just not really agree on some things related to that.
also, yes i understand magic items place in 5e, and yes they give advice on how to award magic items but in that very chapter
And bastions are labeled as an optional feature, not a base assumption. regardless the point is the game is not designed assuming you will get magic items, or even magic items of yor choice, and even in that case, mage armor has magic items that work with it. If the DM is allowing you to get a rare defensive item for AC they can just as easily give you another rare defensive item for AC.
invocations are not a resource any more than any other selectable feature is a resource. spells are features, spell slots are resources. fighting styles are features, feats are features (hence the shorthand) focus is a resource, subclasses themselves are features, not a resource, just because you can choose. I mean i can see how people can blur the line from a certain perspective, but then you run into a situation where you start to say some classes have no features, or only 1 or two features and i think you ve lost a usable definition of features. But forget semantics, Im saying the class gives you inherently built in, multiple means of armoring yourself. Light armor is baseline, and armor of shadows is the built in method
i dont know every thing in dnd, but what other way does base warlock have to increase AC at all times? not including feats As an aside, Something i was thinking about, if armor of shadows gave medium armor proficiency, would yall object to a feature saying, while wearing medium armor _________________.
a barbarian with the common 16/14 con+dex split only has 15 AC btw, the 14/14 split has 14, neither is better than medium armors 17. you need 18/16 investment to match medium armor with unarmored defense. And few barbarians reach that.
i dont really get the claim accursed shield is taking away your light armor, You can wear light armor just fine, you just dont get the benefits of accursed shield.
Accursed Shield only working while unarmored is fine, imo. I see nothing wrong with some subclasses that develop or synergize with one aspect of a main class that some players may not use/choose. it happens all the time. And its more likely to happen the more choices/versatility a class offers.
Fundamentally i think we just disagree on the purpose of class customization features, and on the role that subclasses have with them. You seem to think(unless i am minunderstanding you) the customization options dont exist as features that define your build, but as resources you should be able to select with low opportunity cost
you also seem to think (correct me if im wrong) that subclasses should never have features that are based off an option a class offers that isnt fairly mercurial, lets say something that takes more than a minute to change (like armor) or perhaps once per level up (invocations/spells/fighting styles)
To me thats a bad design paradigm, because those are probably some of the best things to develop as a subclass for classes that have options imo. A sorcerer subclass based on elemental spells? makes sense. A fighter specializing in dual wielding, unarmed or two handed weapons? makes sense. a warlock subclass based on blade pact, pets/familiars, makes sense. An unarmored savage barbarian subclass? A monk based on monk weapon use, an artificer based on magic weapons, or wondrous items. A psion who really synergizes strongly with certain psionic disciplines, or attack/defense mode. And its weird to me that a subclass who uses magic devices and scrolls might somehow be a better design choice for a rogue than a class built around those ideas as class customization options because then those customizations might be seen as a tax.
to me those are all things that should be possible, and even probable.
As i said, a few pages ago, To me, if light armor works with accursed shield its not the end of the world. I would consider it basically smudging the 'warlocks can specialize for more defense paradigm' they set up in the class in exchange for more ease of use. Its a bit of a scuffed design, sometimes it happens.
but i really dont want them using that paradigm in designing classes/subclasses going forward, of either keeping subclasses general and disconnected from class customization, building less classes with class customization so subclasses dont have less thematic options, or spending subclass resources and design space reinventing/reusing/overiding class customization options
that isnt to say they should ONLY make subclasses like this, but it shouldnt be a non starter.
anyhow thats my opinion.
I would say it’s being deceptive as you are not truly comparing the same things, though you appear to think they are. Base class options that enhance 1 aspect (casting vs martial ability) thematically vs a subclass ability tied to choosing 1 from a subset of base class options. Is it crazy for WotC to do this? Not necessarily - but most here seem to agree that it is a bizarre design choice, terribly enacted. Doubly so as in other situations (like dance bard) the offset provides a scaling option and fits a theme.
The martial melee warlock either takes a specific additional invocation (assuming PotB) to enable a class benefit or forgoes any defensive buff. This is again not the same as choosing a fighting style (class feature) - I appreciate your attempt to logic your way to that idea, and that it somehow fits thematically - then the subclass should be explicit on that theme. Ignoring this feature (it’s only 1 of 3 at 3rd level) is not like the ribbon or tertiary features of other classes and subclasses. This would have an impact on every combat encounter from level 3 onward, and defense will be a consideration on every PC (esp a melee character with limited AC options). That said, the HB here is not good enough to “ignore” this feature as unnecessary to a PC. I would argue most would still dip for armor AND take a different subclass as PotB.
This is why this feature moves from choice to burden - you feel forced to take it in lieu of being subpar. That’s the tax aspect - again, there is no mechanical or real theme of the subclass to support being unarmored, nor to the subclass using mage armor instead (again, kudos to inventing some head canon), except this feature. We all support having valid options creating opportunity costs - I can’t pick (generally) both defensive style and duelist. But the player should feel empowered to make that choice and pay that “cost” willingly - not have a choice forced on them.
As others have noted, no other warlock subclass has this interaction. Other classes with somewhat similar interactions have far superior thematic and mechanical execution. There is no reason this couldn’t add to light armor also.
Gwar1 there is no point in comparing armor of shadows to unarmored defense when we are talking about Accursed Shield. Even if an invocation gave you unarmored defense we would still be having this conversation because you would still have to take an invocation to use accursed shield. It’s bad design. There is nothing else that needs to be said about it.
If they want to make this subclass not assume you are taking any invocations they could just bring back a version of hex warrior. It doesn’t have to give any additional armor training, but having hex weapon be something separate from pact weapon could still work in 2024 and gets lessens the need to take PotB. Hexblade Curse can stay the same and they should clarify it does transfer with hex, which makes bestow curse less useful, or they could change it so it doesn’t transfer with hex. Accursed shield and later accursed critical should work on any cursed enemy. They should consider bane, as a curse for this feature.
Altering the core features of Hexblade’s Curse and Hex Warrior strips the subclass of the unique appeal it had since 2014. Many well-regarded content creators agree with this assessment.
If you believe D&D creators have little influence on the game's future or its design direction, I encourage you to watch this video — it might change your mind. www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmkQdeVZA7g
There is no reason a subclass would give you the equivalent of unarmored defense, if you already have an unarmored defense option built into your class.
accursed shield is designed to enhance the armored shadows feature of warlocks (and also work with any source of unarmored play), its not designed to be a generic buff to AC. Or directly compete with your armor option. numerically there isnt a ton of difference in AC between also extending it to light armor, so If they feel like they want to do it, they can do it, but it kinda going against the idea the class design has, which is that warlocks who want baseline passive AC increase, (like from armor) are supposed to take armor of shadows as an innvocation. accursed shield is designed to increase that benefit from just being armored, to having armor+shield.
Essentially the class design says the price of being a better passive tank is an innvocation, and they didnt want the subclass to mitigate that price, override it, they wanted to build on it. If you want to have a shield while using light armor, you cant take the lightly armored feat. They basically didnt want you getting that level of AC without some type of customization.Now on full release they smudge that, but it isnt an illogical idea to validate the main class concepts.
Now, subclasses sometimes invalidate main class design and choices for various reasons, but I dont think its inherently good design to do so. And i definitely dont think they should always do it.
As i said previously, we just fundmentally disagree on whether subclass design should include options that develop choice the player makes as a part of their class. I think its bad design of a customizable class of either the class or its subclasses if subclasses never develop any of the custom options a class presents.
1) Any other instance where a subclass or other option invalidates/overrides a class ability gives a lot more in return. In this instance the design choice is at best weird, at worst plain poor. If I as a player see a benefit to AoS for +1 AC over studded leather, that’s fine. What about this subclass (esp given it is a 2024 update) indicates it should reward the AoS pick? If it just gave the +2 flat out, does it make AoS worse? Do we consider HBs an unarmored warrior now? You might indicate yes, but this being the only feature that alludes to this (as nothing else builds on being unarmored) and the HB history is contradictory.
2) I have not seen anyone disagree with the idea of building off a class choice/option. However, it needs to be done better - make me want to make that choice, instead of feeling obligated. The ranger undead UA does a decent job of this for the Hunters mark feature; most players feel HM is a lackluster ability as the ranger focus (even if it may be mechanically good for early levels) and that class builds on its use. As I’ve said, building off the hex spell as a subclass could work, but that iteration didn’t give enough.
In this instance, most HB players would take AoS for the subclass benefit - not because they love AoS, but because they want the larger AC bonus (and don’t want to lose the feature). This is not rewarding a “choice” - the design is forcing the player’s hand. If there was another feature at 6, and another at 14 that built upon being unarmored (in addition to whatever else HB currently gives), maybe HB becomes the unarmored warrior warlock and makes more design sense.
Gwar1 we already have subclasses that improve optional parts of a class. Wizards are a great example. What they don’t do is have things that increase one specific option unless they also give you that option as part of the feature. If a wizard subclass feature improves a school or type of spell you have many options to choose from, but if it improves a particular spell it gives you the spell as part of the feature. If the you gained mage armor as part of hexblade’s curse we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
This is not entirely true. Armor of Shadows is similar in purpose to Unarmored Defense. An equivalent scenario to College of Dance, for example, would be if the UA subclass gave Armor of Shadows as a bonus Invocation. Then, requiring the Warlock to be unarmored and shieldless would be less of an issue (other than the flavor of the Hexblade).
If it's a new subclass, that's fine. If it's an update, it should have enough resemblance to feel like an update and not a bait and switch. The UA Hexblade is not an armored combatant version of Warlock that supplements melee prowess with curses. I don't even care if they are more armored, just as long as they are not less armored than the base Warlock.
Your assumptions about the game conflict with the printed material you quoted. Yes, Bastions are optional. Everything is some degree of optional. Crafting Magic Items are not called out as optional, but you can certainly exclude them, if you want.
Let's define the two as a feature is something that your class always makes available to you (whether constantly or limited in uses). If there is a choice involved, you can generally change it moment to moment with and not when leveling up. Resources generally can only be changed when levelling up or not at all. Anything that can be changed on a long rest is weird grey area by my definition. Fighting Styles, I will classify as a feature because everyone who has it can change them on a long rest. Prepared Spells, I will classify as a resource because it is a mixture of changing them when you level and changing them on a long rest. Spellcasting (slots) would be a feature. That is my terminology. Does that suit you?
As you say, semantics aside, every Warlock created with the 2024 rules can armor themselves with Light Armor. Can every one, 100% of them, use Armor of Shadows? Is it possible to leave character creation unable to cast (invoke?) Armor of Shadows? If so, Armor of Shadows is not built-in.
In general, no. In addition to the problems Armor of Shadows has, it would be another example of a 2024 Invocation stealing features of the 2014 Hexblade. Independent of that, it would be interesting to see if they add any Invocations that improve Armor of Shadows at some point, either directly increasing AC (unlikely) or by adding rider effects.
A College of Dance Bard with a 16/16+ Dex+Cha will have a 16 AC and that will likely reach 17 or higher before any additional modifiers.
It's not taking it away. In order to use all of a subclass, you have forgo Armor in the update to the armored Warlock Subclass. It gives you feature that you can't use unless you expend a class resource (Armor of Shadows) to access. Hexblades started out as kind of like Arcane Paladin-like casters with light armor, shields, simple weapon, and martial weapon proficiencies in 3.x (I want to say that they debuted in Complete Arcane). In 4e and 2014, they gained the ability to wear Medium Armor. Now, in the UA, they gave the armored spellcaster an ability that only works if unarmored. Just make it a +2 AC while not using a shield. Let's go back to the OG 3.x Hexblades with Light Armor.
Synergizes? Yes. Conflicts without providing a replacement? No.
Opportunity costs on resources is fantastic. There should multiple, appealing options for every choice. It's okay if some are subpar, but if they are too disparate, you risk turning a choice into an Illusion. "At 3rd level, choose one: You are immune to having your brain extracted or replaced or as a bonus action, you can deal an extra 1d4 psychic damage when you hit with a melee weapon once per turn." One of these will likely never come up and, as such, will nearly never be taken.
Leaning into certain features/resources is fine as well. Armorer Artificers need smith's tools and they gain proficiency with smith's tools (or a different tool if they are already proficient). Players pick Abjurer Wizards to double down on their abjuration spells. That's fine. College of Dance Bards give you the ability to Riverdance on your opponent's faces, but it conflicts with the ability to use Light Armor. This is fine because the subclass ability that conflicts with Light Armor also gives you an alternative to that feature. It's bundled with the Subclass choice.
And, like I said, if this was a different subclass and not the "you can't use the 2014 version anymore, Hexblade", it would be fine. You wouldn't make a class themed around embodying traditional aspects of Thor using a Monk, right? There is a (fictional) history of flavor that needs to be preserved.
How to add Tooltips.
I would absolutely consider using a monk if I felt the chassis met the needs. That's what a class is, its a name for a set of mechanics. Nothing more, nothing less. People get too caught up in the name of a class, and some class fantasy.
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
IF it met the needs. A monk does not meet the needs of a warhammer wielding armored warrior, does it?
How to add Tooltips.
It can. For example, for a long time I have wanted to do a joke character that DW hammer and sickle. Sadly, the damage dice is a bit low on the light hammer and the sickle, however monk fixes that problem.
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