beside that bracers of defense are rare how many have really seen bracers of defense dropped in a game and how many have seen armors +1 - +3 of all kinds light, medium, heavy
i would be betting at least 5-10x more often does armor drop then bracers of defense, not to mention when medium armor drops it will be much more easier for you to get that armor, or a shield ( most don't use shields ), for a bracer of defense you will be fighting with : barbarians, sorcerers, wizards, monks and if it is a group decision you can bet you will be at the bottom of these 3 classes to get the bracers.
And as some already said, needing to have access to a rare magical item to put a minor fix on the AC issue is bad design ....
As for the why should a hexblade need more ac as monks, rogues, bards ..... - bards, wizards, sorcerers get shield spell ( and have more then enough spell slots ) - rogues have cunning action which lets them disengage from melee - monks have patient defense which lets them disengage from melee - figther, paladin, clerics have heavy armor and can use a shield - barbarians have unarmored defense and damage resistance - druid can shape shift to bolster HP and cast spells
- Rangers & Warlocks ( Rangers have med. armor + shield tough ) have no tools to get away from melee in their class / subclass which is why the hexblade as the class supposed to be in melee needs at least the same armor prof's as a ranger
In the games i lead i ignore plainly this UA version of the hexblade and use a converted to 2024 version of the 5e hexblade. Should a player ever really want to play this version of the UA hexblade i recommend him to take a paladin / fighter dip
sidenote: imo a 1/19 Paladin/Fiend, 1/19 Paladin/Celestial will outperform a 1/19 hexblade or 20 hexblade in each and every tier of play, with 6/14 its the same as with 1/19
a little dpR calc for a 1/19 Celestial : 86 dpR with greatsword, add another +74 burst if something needs to die now not adj. for hit chance though
Agreed. I am done arguing with people trying to convince me that the UA hexblade is good and well designed. Its terrible and anyone who has a grasp of the game knows it. Hopefully WoTc got enough REAL feedback from people like us and they give hexblade another UA, hopefully a half decent one this time, before release.
The assumption that magic items are superfluous is not consistent with the other guidelines "The D&D game assumes that magic items appear sporadically and that they are a boon unless an item bears a curse." "The Magic Items Awarded by Level table shows the number of magic items a D&D party typically gains during a campaign, totaling one hundred magic items by level 20."
So, no, D&D is assumed to operate with a certain amount of magic items and that those items have an impact.
Page 136 of Xanathar's supports my argument and states explicitly what's implicit in the 2014 DMG, emphasis mine:
Characters and monsters are built to face each other without the help of magic items, which means that having a magic item always makes a character more powerful or versatile than a generic character of the same level. As a DM, you never have to worry about awarding magic items just so the characters can keep up with the campaign's threats. Magic items are truly prizes. Are they useful? Absolutely. Are they necessary? No.
This is the very definition of superfluous. They are not needed.
This sidebar seems to be missing from the D&D Beyond version of Xanathar's, which is puzzling. But it's right there in the print version, stating explicitly what I said: 5E (both versions) is designed so that magic items are superfluous.
beside that bracers of defense are rare how many have really seen bracers of defense dropped in a game and how many have seen armors +1 - +3 of all kinds light, medium, heavy
i would be betting at least 5-10x more often does armor drop then bracers of defense, not to mention when medium armor drops it will be much more easier for you to get that armor, or a shield ( most don't use shields ), for a bracer of defense you will be fighting with : barbarians, sorcerers, wizards, monks and if it is a group decision you can bet you will be at the bottom of these 3 classes to get the bracers.
And as some already said, needing to have access to a rare magical item to put a minor fix on the AC issue is bad design ....
As for the why should a hexblade need more ac as monks, rogues, bards ..... - bards, wizards, sorcerers get shield spell ( and have more then enough spell slots ) - rogues have cunning action which lets them disengage from melee - monks have patient defense which lets them disengage from melee - figther, paladin, clerics have heavy armor and can use a shield - barbarians have unarmored defense and damage resistance - druid can shape shift to bolster HP and cast spells
- Rangers & Warlocks ( Rangers have med. armor + shield tough ) have no tools to get away from melee in their class / subclass which is why the hexblade as the class supposed to be in melee needs at least the same armor prof's as a ranger
In the games i lead i ignore plainly this UA version of the hexblade and use a converted to 2024 version of the 5e hexblade. Should a player ever really want to play this version of the UA hexblade i recommend him to take a paladin / fighter dip
sidenote: imo a 1/19 Paladin/Fiend, 1/19 Paladin/Celestial will outperform a 1/19 hexblade or 20 hexblade in each and every tier of play, with 6/14 its the same as with 1/19
a little dpR calc for a 1/19 Celestial : 86 dpR with greatsword, add another +74 burst if something needs to die now not adj. for hit chance though
What magic items appear in a game, has more to do with the DM than any other factor.
the only method where bracers might be considered less common is random drops. Which is still a DM choice. And even in that case, in 2024 random items are based on monster type, so its still heavily influenced by the DM. In the case where the DM is rolling magic items, its fairly unlikely you will get any specific item you want. whether its 2 % or 4%, (this is the actual difference in rate in the 2024 d100 tables) If you arent rolling like 30 magic items, of the right treasure type per level range, which seems unlikely, you are not likely to see either one. And then its decided by the group who gets what.
No one has said magical items would fix anything related to hexblade or balance. My contention is that hexblade doesnt need more than 18 Ac to be viable.
And to be 100% clear, I am not the one bringing magic items into this. My analysis and playtests all had no magic items assumed. Someone said that a flaw of hexblade and unarmored defenses is that you cant upgrade their AC via magic items, which is not true. bracers are the same rarity as armor+1. If you arent getting them, its due to a choice of the DM. If the dm is using, magic shops, whishlists, or crafting you are just as likely to get them as any other item of its rarity.
As for comparing defenses;
warlocks have spells, and defense boosters from invocations.
warlock has:
invocations:
armor of shadows (essentially medium armor AC with low investment, and heavy armor AC with high investment)
fiendish vigor, which essentially means +12 max HP from level 2, which you cant upgrade their cast in battle in emergencies
lessons of the first ones: which can give you things like lucky (force rerolls), tough (increase ho by 2 per level), musician inspiration to everyone (aka save rerolls) or magic initiate which gives can give you low level defensive spells of your choice and cantrips, and castings of it.
lifedrinker: 4.5+ con hp recovery per turn, using hit dice.
Pact of the chain, which includes summons which can give a bonus to saves, and one that can frightern enenemies(if you get investment)
repelling blast: which can push creatures away, (reduces need to disengage, doesnt cost a BA) (muti creatures if you chose eldritch blast)
gift of protectors: avoid death once.
spells:
blade ward, essentially +2.5 AC on average versus melee attacks. a cantrip, so infinite use.
any level 1 spell or cantrip, from the cleric, wizard, druid list (via initiate) or ritual(tome) that has defensive application
arms of hadar (disables reactions)
Bane (reduces hit rate)
protection from evil/good
armor of agathys
darkness (+devil sight)
mirror image
fear
magic circle
summon fey (darkness every turn)
synaptic static
shadow of moil
then the classic control spells, hold series, hypnotic pattern, hideous laughter, banishment
many of these spells effects can last or drastically change the whole enconter in terms of mitigating damage.
As for how many spells they have, the warlock doesnt need to cast tons of spells per encounter, they have strong baseline damage and defenses from invocations. and class features. Many of their spells are designed to give lasting benefits, which are more efficient in terms if effectiveness per spell slot.
they also have more high teir spells per day for their level than other casters, until like level 11 (but still more level 5 spells than anyone after that), unless the DM will never let your party get at least one short rest per day. Which to be 100% honest is probably ridiculously unbalanced DMing. Especially since taking a SR is meant to be mostly a player initiated activity (which the dm could interrupt, but should not interupt 100% of the time) with even 1 SR, the warlock gets 5 top teir spells per day from level 2-10, which sorcerer, wizard, druid, bard will not have, even if they use arcane recovery/sacrifice spell points.
but the point is, Warlocks have tons of very powerful and useful active defenses,
But this paradigm of getting away from melee, is not a common melee paradigm. Hexblade, as presented in this UA would rarely want to escape melee. Monks/fighters/barbarians in 2024 are not trying to escape melee. the main point of disengage is getting to the guy you want to melee for a monk, or possibly helping/saving a team member. The only class who can disengage as a common strategy without huge downsides is rogue, and thats because it has both a BA disengage AND has like 4/5ths of its offense in its main action. (unlike monk who loses half its DPR if it uses disengage)
Hexblade doesnt have an issue taking enemy attention, and in fact, its better if they target the hexblade than most casters, 3/4ths of the barbarians, rogues, rangers, most fighters,
because they can have up to 18 Ac baseline, 20 with accursed shield, they can have high temp HP boosts at the start of any fight, tough feat and lucky feat, They have the aformentioned defensive options. They deal damage if they get hit (unyielding will) and reduce damage (armor of hexes)
if the hexblade is running away, its fairly likely someone else with less mitigation is taking the hit.
now its totally possible to make a hexblade or warlock with a lot less defensive potential, who fears melee. but thats a choice.
RE: your sidenote, exactly by what metric are you suggesting those builds outperform hexblade? and explain how its the case.you also say in every teir of play, but only mention level 20.
celestial patron provides exactly 1 damage buff once per round, + Cha modifier once per round and only on damage from a spell which does radiant or fire damage. it only provides 2 defense buffs, temp HP once per day, and resistence to radiant damage. celestial spirit can reduce damage taken by 5.5 avg per round.
hexblade unyielding will provides avg of 7-14 damage per round (1 to 2ntargets) 2 AC in melee with your enemy, -10-20 damage taken, 25% greater chance for an enemy to fail a save, like say staggering strike. +.05* dice from attacks per round (19 crit)
and, always being behind on levels means always losing out on something useful for warlocks, they will be one spell level behind half the time, and features behind the other half.
By level 20, the only thing a paladin dip provides is 2 level 1 spells, weapon mastery, and lay on hands with a pool of 5 hp. As boring as the warlock level 20 feature may be, its objectively 2 more level 5 spells per day. Which is objectively way more valuable that lay on hands 5 hp and 2 level 1 spells. it all comes down to weapon mastery. in which case i would say fighter is a better dip.
also, those numbers of DPR not including accuracy are not special. really, any warlock with gwm gets 81. any warlock with dual wielder/weapon mastery nick can get 77.5, any warlock with shadow blade and dual wielder/nick gets, gets 90.5
the bonus from crits on 19 can be between 2.5- 9 on average depending on which of the aformentioned styles you choose, of which the highest is dual wielding shadow blade. so essentially 4-8 dpr from that feature. 7 from unyielding will
celestial is a fine warlock, if your goal is to support the team with recovery effects, giving up damage occaisionally. but there is no particular reason to do that as a melee build. and no benefit to taking or dealing damage or debuffing targets over the hexblade. every heal spell could be another spell. Hexblade recovers 22.5 to 47.5 hp per day via hexcurse, depending on your charisma, the celestial recovers 14-73 depending on level. (btw they wont recover more hp per day with that feature until level 14)
essentially hexblade is more durable, better damage and debuffs(hindering hex) with a spell list that better supports the playstyle.
fiend has better hp recovery but on average worse mitigation Hurl through hell dpr wise is like using explosive hex on 4 targets. id say hurl through hell is superior, but nit suoerior enough to say its a better melee build, it has no other features that increase dpr over the course of a day, and its spell list isnt designed to work well with martial play. It plays best as a turret, not a mobile attacker/defender
The assumption that magic items are superfluous is not consistent with the other guidelines "The D&D game assumes that magic items appear sporadically and that they are a boon unless an item bears a curse." "The Magic Items Awarded by Level table shows the number of magic items a D&D party typically gains during a campaign, totaling one hundred magic items by level 20."
So, no, D&D is assumed to operate with a certain amount of magic items and that those items have an impact.
Page 136 of Xanathar's supports my argument and states explicitly what's implicit in the 2014 DMG, emphasis mine:
Characters and monsters are built to face each other without the help of magic items, which means that having a magic item always makes a character more powerful or versatile than a generic character of the same level. As a DM, you never have to worry about awarding magic items just so the characters can keep up with the campaign's threats. Magic items are truly prizes. Are they useful? Absolutely. Are they necessary? No.
This is the very definition of superfluous. They are not needed.
This sidebar seems to be missing from the D&D Beyond version of Xanathar's, which is puzzling. But it's right there in the print version, stating explicitly what I said: 5E (both versions) is designed so that magic items are superfluous.
Xanathar's predates and is superseded by the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide. I get what you are saying, but there is a standard that has been set by official published books and the notion that D&D is designed around characters without magic items is a case of "do what I say, not what I do." If you play through official modules, you will get +X attack items, +X defense items, and a host of other items. "The Magic Items Awarded by Level table shows the number of magic items a D&D party typically gains during a campaign, totaling one hundred magic items by level 20. The table shows how many items of each rarity are meant to be handed out during each of the four tiers of play." (DMG 2024) This sets the standard. To say otherwise is dishonest, not on your part, but on Xanathar's and the DMG. You're welcome to play a low magic or high magic setting within D&D, but anything that deviates from established norms of D&D should be reviewed in session 0. (I would suggest reviewing even standard fare, just to manage expectations.)
I agree with your earlier statement that a "fix needs to come in the features of the subclass itself." However, magic items must also be taken into account, as avenues for power scaling, as options for rounding out a character, or as potential abuses that need may warrant action.
beside that bracers of defense are rare how many have really seen bracers of defense dropped in a game and how many have seen armors +1 - +3 of all kinds light, medium, heavy
i would be betting at least 5-10x more often does armor drop then bracers of defense, not to mention when medium armor drops it will be much more easier for you to get that armor, or a shield ( most don't use shields ), for a bracer of defense you will be fighting with : barbarians, sorcerers, wizards, monks and if it is a group decision you can bet you will be at the bottom of these 3 classes to get the bracers.
And as some already said, needing to have access to a rare magical item to put a minor fix on the AC issue is bad design ....
As for the why should a hexblade need more ac as monks, rogues, bards ..... - bards, wizards, sorcerers get shield spell ( and have more then enough spell slots ) - rogues have cunning action which lets them disengage from melee - monks have patient defense which lets them disengage from melee - figther, paladin, clerics have heavy armor and can use a shield - barbarians have unarmored defense and damage resistance - druid can shape shift to bolster HP and cast spells
- Rangers & Warlocks ( Rangers have med. armor + shield tough ) have no tools to get away from melee in their class / subclass which is why the hexblade as the class supposed to be in melee needs at least the same armor prof's as a ranger
In the games i lead i ignore plainly this UA version of the hexblade and use a converted to 2024 version of the 5e hexblade. Should a player ever really want to play this version of the UA hexblade i recommend him to take a paladin / fighter dip
sidenote: imo a 1/19 Paladin/Fiend, 1/19 Paladin/Celestial will outperform a 1/19 hexblade or 20 hexblade in each and every tier of play, with 6/14 its the same as with 1/19
a little dpR calc for a 1/19 Celestial : 86 dpR with greatsword, add another +74 burst if something needs to die now not adj. for hit chance though
What magic items appear in a game, has more to do with the DM than any other factor.
the only method where bracers might be considered less common is random drops. Which is still a DM choice. And even in that case, in 2024 random items are based on monster type, so its still heavily influenced by the DM. In the case where the DM is rolling magic items, its fairly unlikely you will get any specific item you want. whether its 2 % or 4%, (this is the actual difference in rate in the 2024 d100 tables) If you arent rolling like 30 magic items, of the right treasure type per level range, which seems unlikely, you are not likely to see either one. And then its decided by the group who gets what.
No one has said magical items would fix anything related to hexblade or balance. My contention is that hexblade doesnt need more than 18 Ac to be viable.
And to be 100% clear, I am not the one bringing magic items into this. My analysis and playtests all had no magic items assumed. Someone said that a flaw of hexblade and unarmored defenses is that you cant upgrade their AC via magic items, which is not true. bracers are the same rarity as armor+1. If you arent getting them, its due to a choice of the DM. If the dm is using, magic shops, whishlists, or crafting you are just as likely to get them as any other item of its rarity.
As for comparing defenses;
warlocks have spells, and defense boosters from invocations.
warlock has:
invocations:
armor of shadows (essentially medium armor AC with low investment, and heavy armor AC with high investment)
fiendish vigor, which essentially means +12 max HP from level 2, which you cant upgrade their cast in battle in emergencies
lessons of the first ones: which can give you things like lucky (force rerolls), tough (increase ho by 2 per level), musician inspiration to everyone (aka save rerolls) or magic initiate which gives can give you low level defensive spells of your choice and cantrips, and castings of it.
lifedrinker: 4.5+ con hp recovery per turn, using hit dice.
Pact of the chain, which includes summons which can give a bonus to saves, and one that can frightern enenemies(if you get investment)
repelling blast: which can push creatures away, (reduces need to disengage, doesnt cost a BA) (muti creatures if you chose eldritch blast)
gift of protectors: avoid death once.
spells:
blade ward, essentially +2.5 AC on average versus melee attacks. a cantrip, so infinite use.
any level 1 spell or cantrip, from the cleric, wizard, druid list (via initiate) or ritual(tome) that has defensive application
arms of hadar (disables reactions)
Bane (reduces hit rate)
protection from evil/good
armor of agathys
darkness (+devil sight)
mirror image
fear
magic circle
summon fey (darkness every turn)
synaptic static
shadow of moil
then the classic control spells, hold series, hypnotic pattern, hideous laughter, banishment
many of these spells effects can last or drastically change the whole enconter in terms of mitigating damage.
As for how many spells they have, the warlock doesnt need to cast tons of spells per encounter, they have strong baseline damage and defenses from invocations. and class features. Many of their spells are designed to give lasting benefits, which are more efficient in terms if effectiveness per spell slot.
they also have more high teir spells per day for their level than other casters, until like level 11 (but still more level 5 spells than anyone after that), unless the DM will never let your party get at least one short rest per day. Which to be 100% honest is probably ridiculously unbalanced DMing. Especially since taking a SR is meant to be mostly a player initiated activity (which the dm could interrupt, but should not interupt 100% of the time) with even 1 SR, the warlock gets 5 top teir spells per day from level 2-10, which sorcerer, wizard, druid, bard will not have, even if they use arcane recovery/sacrifice spell points.
but the point is, Warlocks have tons of very powerful and useful active defenses,
But this paradigm of getting away from melee, is not a common melee paradigm. Hexblade, as presented in this UA would rarely want to escape melee. Monks/fighters/barbarians in 2024 are not trying to escape melee. the main point of disengage is getting to the guy you want to melee for a monk, or possibly helping/saving a team member. The only class who can disengage as a common strategy without huge downsides is rogue, and thats because it has both a BA disengage AND has like 4/5ths of its offense in its main action. (unlike monk who loses half its DPR if it uses disengage)
Hexblade doesnt have an issue taking enemy attention, and in fact, its better if they target the hexblade than most casters, 3/4ths of the barbarians, rogues, rangers, most fighters,
because they can have up to 18 Ac baseline, 20 with accursed shield, they can have high temp HP boosts at the start of any fight, tough feat and lucky feat, They have the aformentioned defensive options. They deal damage if they get hit (unyielding will) and reduce damage (armor of hexes)
if the hexblade is running away, its fairly likely someone else with less mitigation is taking the hit.
now its totally possible to make a hexblade or warlock with a lot less defensive potential, who fears melee. but thats a choice.
RE: your sidenote, exactly by what metric are you suggesting those builds outperform hexblade? and explain how its the case.you also say in every teir of play, but only mention level 20.
celestial patron provides exactly 1 damage buff once per round, + Cha modifier once per round and only on damage from a spell which does radiant or fire damage. it only provides 2 defense buffs, temp HP once per day, and resistence to radiant damage. celestial spirit can reduce damage taken by 5.5 avg per round.
hexblade unyielding will provides avg of 7-14 damage per round (1 to 2ntargets) 2 AC in melee with your enemy, -10-20 damage taken, 25% greater chance for an enemy to fail a save, like say staggering strike. +.05* dice from attacks per round (19 crit)
and, always being behind on levels means always losing out on something useful for warlocks, they will be one spell level behind half the time, and features behind the other half.
By level 20, the only thing a paladin dip provides is 2 level 1 spells, weapon mastery, and lay on hands with a pool of 5 hp. As boring as the warlock level 20 feature may be, its objectively 2 more level 5 spells per day. Which is objectively way more valuable that lay on hands 5 hp and 2 level 1 spells. it all comes down to weapon mastery. in which case i would say fighter is a better dip.
also, those numbers of DPR not including accuracy are not special. really, any warlock with gwm gets 81. any warlock with dual wielder/weapon mastery nick can get 77.5, any warlock with shadow blade and dual wielder/nick gets, gets 90.5
the bonus from crits on 19 can be between 2.5- 9 on average depending on which of the aformentioned styles you choose, of which the highest is dual wielding shadow blade. so essentially 4-8 dpr from that feature. 7 from unyielding will
celestial is a fine warlock, if your goal is to support the team with recovery effects, giving up damage occaisionally. but there is no particular reason to do that as a melee build. and no benefit to taking or dealing damage or debuffing targets over the hexblade. every heal spell could be another spell. Hexblade recovers 22.5 to 47.5 hp per day via hexcurse, depending on your charisma, the celestial recovers 14-73 depending on level. (btw they wont recover more hp per day with that feature until level 14)
essentially hexblade is more durable, better damage and debuffs(hindering hex) with a spell list that better supports the playstyle.
fiend has better hp recovery but on average worse mitigation Hurl through hell dpr wise is like using explosive hex on 4 targets. id say hurl through hell is superior, but nit suoerior enough to say its a better melee build, it has no other features that increase dpr over the course of a day, and its spell list isnt designed to work well with martial play. It plays best as a turret, not a mobile attacker/defender
Spells and invocations are not a substitute for a good base AC, that is always on, can't be removed in 99% of cases and does not require additional or limited resources to use. Spells are the warlock feature, what they do to play the game, if your defense of not giving warlock hexblade good is AC is that 'use spells for defense instead of other things' then you have completely lost the plot. IF I'm using my spells and resources just to exist in melee, then might as well take fighter, exist better in melee and have more features that boost my dmg and defense more than any of the things warlock has access to, since I am still not getting spells to do with as I please anyway not to mention most of the spells you mention are concentration spells, which can be dropped.
By what metric do you compare armor of shadows to medium armor? Armor of shadows is a +1 studded leather, which with 14 DEX gets you 15 AC which is garbage for a character who wants to exist primarily in melee. Half-plate gets you 17 with the same stat, THAT is medium armor. Saying that warlock can get a baseline of 18 AC is where your argument becomes completely invalid and you prove my point that you are either a bladelock hater or just have no business testing material because you have no idea what good design or balance remotely is. Do not take this personally but stick to playing at casual tables, testing and evaluating material is not for you.
For warlock to get 18 AC (which can be improved to 20 with accursed shield) you mean that you take armor of shadows (another invocation tax but will not get into that), and put 20 in DEX. If I am putting 20 in DEX, it means I am semi-dumping CHA and at that point everything warlock has (including the spells that by your metric are what you are using for defense) becomes absolutely dreadful because most things scale with CHA. If I want to max DEX I am better off playing rouge, fighter with dual wield, paladin with dual wield (and genie), Monk, or a 1000 other things before taking hexblade and maxing out DEX (with this metric you get like 1 or 2 uses of hexbaldes curse, so you ain't getting accursed shield most of the time anyway, spell save DC becomes non-existent so the feature you praised so much harrowing hex becomes almost useless because most spells you are casting as an action require a saving throw).
Warlock can't be durable without maxing DEX and at that point the rest of the features seize to function.
At every turn you keep convincing me that you have no idea what you are talking about, either you did not really playtest and are making up scenarios based on a very wrong and misguided opinion, you played at a very casual table where monsters where hitting you with pillows, or you rolled for stats and started the game with inflated stats. With point buy the best you are looking at is STR 13, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 8, WIS 9, CHA 17 (if you want GWM) or STR 8, DEX 14/16, CON 14/16, INT 8, WIS 10, CHA 17. This mean your armor of shadows is not giving you more than 15-16 AC and your CON isn't that great if you want to get the 16 DEX, which means you might drop concentration sometimes and relying on CON spells for increased survivability (which is what you keep going back to every single time you try to defend this hexblade), becomes a liability not a guarantee.
The dmg from Unyielding Will and Exploding hex don't scale and are negligible (avrg of 7 dmg for will and 10.5 for exploding hex as a lvl 14 feature), only increasing based on the number of enemies around which is not a great metric to assess dmg boosting abilities, not to mention unyielding will relies on being hit and not failing the CON save and exploding hex is a once per day thing which means its a consolation prize at best. And saying the hexblade comes with the shield spell is not saying much considering you get it when you already have 2nd level slots which you might be ok with using them for shield, but that lasts for exactly 2 levels after which you get 3rd level spell slots which you definitely are not gonna be using for shield. As a TRUE warlock enjoyer, I can assure you most of us would rather fall unconscious then use a 3rd level slot for shield. Most of the 'powerful' active defensive abilities you mentioned are tied to the same resource, spells, which you have exactly 2 of until lvl 11 and in an actual game of DnD you do not get to short rest after every single encounter, you have to manage those very limited resources.
Lifedrinker needs you to roll hit dice every time, meaning its not and once per turn 4.5+con heal, its a once per turn, up to your level number of times per long rest, heal, which is much worse than what you are trying to make it out to be.
Paladin/fighter dips don't provide much at level 20 true, but I would rather start with armor prof and push back everything a level than rely on bandaid fixes to my paper AC while trying to be in melee, and multiclassing should never feel force, it should be a choice the player makes when they want to create a fantasy which the base classes and their subclasses do not capture entirely (ex. 2014 hexblade + paladin vengence or oathbreaker to make a DeathKnight style of character).
At the end of the day everything you mentioned above, is available to the base warlock class, everything except accursed shield, which means an blastlock can get everything plus add an extra layer of free consistent protection by staying 120+ feet away from the enemy instead of tempting fate with a measly +2 to AC while being in the heat of things. The bottom line is that this hexblade does not provide nearly enough tools to convince anyone (apart from you apparently) to pick it up and go into melee, instead of dipping fighter or paladin and picking literally any other subclass (archfey provides a 100 teems more defensive tools and utility then this hexblade does). The actual hexblade subclass provides one defensive tool at level 3, tied to yet another limited resource, which has 2 very restrictive conditions to use, accursed shield, which by all metrics and in the opinion of ALL actual bladelock enjoyers, is one of the worst features ever seen on a subclass. Armor of hexes is the 2nd defensive tool, but it comes in way too late for what it does, it scales poorly because dmg scales much quicker at later levels and is yet again tied to a limited resource and is also restricted by the fact in can only be used against a specific target making it not reliable. In this state hexblade is definitely one of the worst choices for a melee warlock, and since it is designed to be exactly that, it makes it redundant and useless, and when a subclass is not picked to fill the role it is designed for and instead people are picking other subclasses to fit its role better, that means something is terribly amiss, it is by all possible metrics, a design failure.
But I digress, I am giving you the courtesy of reading everything you write, which is saying a lot since most of it makes little to no sense and is not reflective of the actual in-game DnD experience, but I doubt you are doing the same since you keep bringing up the same things and we keep telling you why they make no sense and you either can't seem to understand or you simply don't want to. The argument is getting stale with you and is going nowhere so I am not gonna keep wasting neither my time nor yours. I am still happy to bounce ideas around with others on this argument because most of us like the hexblade and want an actual fun, enjoyable and playable version of it, which I am convinced is not something you yourself want. The original hexblade was poorly designed because of the issues it created with multiclassing, which DMs could have stopped at their tables if they wanted to, (and was actually terrible to take at later levels because the features gained beyond level 1 where limited and weak), and I understand it left a bad taste in a lot of mouths leading to the DnD community to be split in two groups, the bladelock enjoyers and the hexblade haters, which you seem to be one of the latter. I do not blame you for it, a lot of people share your view, however, anyone who is objective and has played DnD long enough, or has at least basic understanding of game design and balancing, will admit it that this version of the hexblade requires heavy revisions and further UA testing to get to the right spot, and one of the key things it needs is a fix to the warlocks AC which is not fit for a frontliner not to mention the unexciting, lackluster and limited features combined with a complete desecration of the actual 'Hexbalde's Curse feature
The assumption that magic items are superfluous is not consistent with the other guidelines "The D&D game assumes that magic items appear sporadically and that they are a boon unless an item bears a curse." "The Magic Items Awarded by Level table shows the number of magic items a D&D party typically gains during a campaign, totaling one hundred magic items by level 20."
So, no, D&D is assumed to operate with a certain amount of magic items and that those items have an impact.
Page 136 of Xanathar's supports my argument and states explicitly what's implicit in the 2014 DMG, emphasis mine:
Characters and monsters are built to face each other without the help of magic items, which means that having a magic item always makes a character more powerful or versatile than a generic character of the same level. As a DM, you never have to worry about awarding magic items just so the characters can keep up with the campaign's threats. Magic items are truly prizes. Are they useful? Absolutely. Are they necessary? No.
This is the very definition of superfluous. They are not needed.
This sidebar seems to be missing from the D&D Beyond version of Xanathar's, which is puzzling. But it's right there in the print version, stating explicitly what I said: 5E (both versions) is designed so that magic items are superfluous.
Xanathar's predates and is superseded by the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide. I get what you are saying, but there is a standard that has been set by official published books and the notion that D&D is designed around characters without magic items is a case of "do what I say, not what I do." If you play through official modules, you will get +X attack items, +X defense items, and a host of other items. "The Magic Items Awarded by Level table shows the number of magic items a D&D party typically gains during a campaign, totaling one hundred magic items by level 20. The table shows how many items of each rarity are meant to be handed out during each of the four tiers of play." (DMG 2024) This sets the standard. To say otherwise is dishonest, not on your part, but on Xanathar's and the DMG. You're welcome to play a low magic or high magic setting within D&D, but anything that deviates from established norms of D&D should be reviewed in session 0. (I would suggest reviewing even standard fare, just to manage expectations.)
I agree with your earlier statement that a "fix needs to come in the features of the subclass itself." However, magic items must also be taken into account, as avenues for power scaling, as options for rounding out a character, or as potential abuses that need may warrant action.
Players don’t control what magic items they get. It requires GM fiat to get the exact magic item you want. As a GM I usually don’t give players the exact thing they are asking for, but something similar instead.
Players don’t control what magic items they get. It requires GM fiat to get the exact magic item you want. As a GM I usually don’t give players the exact thing they are asking for, but something similar instead.
No one said that players control the magic items they get.
In the context of this conversation, that is basically saying you don't give them the defensive item the exact defensive item they are asking for, but a similar defensive item instead. That's fine, but it doesn't change that there is an expectation of magic items being received, regardless of the specific items awarded, regardless of whether the GM uses the suggested magic item wish list, the magic items as written in a published adventure (your party of 4 wizards find +1 Plate Armor, Yay!), a random table/treasure generator, or some other method, there is a standard established by official sources. You aren't expected to break the balance by underawarding or overdoing (unless you go nuts), but there is a standard nonetheless.
Players don’t control what magic items they get. It requires GM fiat to get the exact magic item you want. As a GM I usually don’t give players the exact thing they are asking for, but something similar instead.
No one said that players control the magic items they get.
In the context of this conversation, that is basically saying you don't give them the defensive item the exact defensive item they are asking for, but a similar defensive item instead. That's fine, but it doesn't change that there is an expectation of magic items being received, regardless of the specific items awarded, regardless of whether the GM uses the suggested magic item wish list, the magic items as written in a published adventure (your party of 4 wizards find +1 Plate Armor, Yay!), a random table/treasure generator, or some other method, there is a standard established by official sources. You aren't expected to break the balance by underawarding or overdoing (unless you go nuts), but there is a standard nonetheless.
My only point is that doesn’t matter because the player doesn’t pick what magic items they get. When a class is designed you don’t design it based on what magic items they could get even if there is an assumption they will get some magic items. This conversation is being derailed because y’all are arguing over whether or not magic items are considered in design. Since players don’t pick their magic items every player at different tables will have different experiences with magic items. That should have nothing to do with the design of a subclass.
Players don’t control what magic items they get. It requires GM fiat to get the exact magic item you want. As a GM I usually don’t give players the exact thing they are asking for, but something similar instead.
No one said that players control the magic items they get.
In the context of this conversation, that is basically saying you don't give them the defensive item the exact defensive item they are asking for, but a similar defensive item instead. That's fine, but it doesn't change that there is an expectation of magic items being received, regardless of the specific items awarded, regardless of whether the GM uses the suggested magic item wish list, the magic items as written in a published adventure (your party of 4 wizards find +1 Plate Armor, Yay!), a random table/treasure generator, or some other method, there is a standard established by official sources. You aren't expected to break the balance by underawarding or overdoing (unless you go nuts), but there is a standard nonetheless.
My only point is that doesn’t matter because the player doesn’t pick what magic items they get. When a class is designed you don’t design it based on what magic items they could get even if there is an assumption they will get some magic items. This conversation is being derailed because y’all are arguing over whether or not magic items are considered in design. Since players don’t pick their magic items every player at different tables will have different experiences with magic items. That should have nothing to do with the design of a subclass.
Regardless of whether or not a player can get the exact magic item they want, IMO magic items should feel as a boost in power not an equalizer. For this argument’s sake, an item such as bracers of defense should feel like its boosting you AC to a value which you otherwise shouldn’t be able to get, not to a value that you should have regardless to operate properly in the frontline.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Agreed. I am done arguing with people trying to convince me that the UA hexblade is good and well designed. Its terrible and anyone who has a grasp of the game knows it. Hopefully WoTc got enough REAL feedback from people like us and they give hexblade another UA, hopefully a half decent one this time, before release.
Page 136 of Xanathar's supports my argument and states explicitly what's implicit in the 2014 DMG, emphasis mine:
Characters and monsters are built to face each other without the help of magic items, which means that having a magic item always makes a character more powerful or versatile than a generic character of the same level. As a DM, you never have to worry about awarding magic items just so the characters can keep up with the campaign's threats. Magic items are truly prizes. Are they useful? Absolutely. Are they necessary? No.
This is the very definition of superfluous. They are not needed.
This sidebar seems to be missing from the D&D Beyond version of Xanathar's, which is puzzling. But it's right there in the print version, stating explicitly what I said: 5E (both versions) is designed so that magic items are superfluous.
What magic items appear in a game, has more to do with the DM than any other factor.
the only method where bracers might be considered less common is random drops. Which is still a DM choice. And even in that case, in 2024 random items are based on monster type, so its still heavily influenced by the DM. In the case where the DM is rolling magic items, its fairly unlikely you will get any specific item you want. whether its 2 % or 4%, (this is the actual difference in rate in the 2024 d100 tables) If you arent rolling like 30 magic items, of the right treasure type per level range, which seems unlikely, you are not likely to see either one. And then its decided by the group who gets what.
No one has said magical items would fix anything related to hexblade or balance. My contention is that hexblade doesnt need more than 18 Ac to be viable.
And to be 100% clear, I am not the one bringing magic items into this. My analysis and playtests all had no magic items assumed. Someone said that a flaw of hexblade and unarmored defenses is that you cant upgrade their AC via magic items, which is not true. bracers are the same rarity as armor+1. If you arent getting them, its due to a choice of the DM. If the dm is using, magic shops, whishlists, or crafting you are just as likely to get them as any other item of its rarity.
As for comparing defenses;
warlocks have spells, and defense boosters from invocations.
warlock has:
invocations:
armor of shadows (essentially medium armor AC with low investment, and heavy armor AC with high investment)
fiendish vigor, which essentially means +12 max HP from level 2, which you cant upgrade their cast in battle in emergencies
lessons of the first ones: which can give you things like lucky (force rerolls), tough (increase ho by 2 per level), musician inspiration to everyone (aka save rerolls) or magic initiate which gives can give you low level defensive spells of your choice and cantrips, and castings of it.
lifedrinker: 4.5+ con hp recovery per turn, using hit dice.
Pact of the chain, which includes summons which can give a bonus to saves, and one that can frightern enenemies(if you get investment)
repelling blast: which can push creatures away, (reduces need to disengage, doesnt cost a BA) (muti creatures if you chose eldritch blast)
gift of protectors: avoid death once.
spells:
blade ward, essentially +2.5 AC on average versus melee attacks. a cantrip, so infinite use.
any level 1 spell or cantrip, from the cleric, wizard, druid list (via initiate) or ritual(tome) that has defensive application
arms of hadar (disables reactions)
Bane (reduces hit rate)
protection from evil/good
armor of agathys
darkness (+devil sight)
mirror image
fear
magic circle
summon fey (darkness every turn)
synaptic static
shadow of moil
then the classic control spells, hold series, hypnotic pattern, hideous laughter, banishment
and hexblade itself adds shield, arcane recovery, bestow curse, staggering smite, wrathful smite
many of these spells effects can last or drastically change the whole enconter in terms of mitigating damage.
As for how many spells they have, the warlock doesnt need to cast tons of spells per encounter, they have strong baseline damage and defenses from invocations. and class features. Many of their spells are designed to give lasting benefits, which are more efficient in terms if effectiveness per spell slot.
they also have more high teir spells per day for their level than other casters, until like level 11 (but still more level 5 spells than anyone after that), unless the DM will never let your party get at least one short rest per day. Which to be 100% honest is probably ridiculously unbalanced DMing. Especially since taking a SR is meant to be mostly a player initiated activity (which the dm could interrupt, but should not interupt 100% of the time) with even 1 SR, the warlock gets 5 top teir spells per day from level 2-10, which sorcerer, wizard, druid, bard will not have, even if they use arcane recovery/sacrifice spell points.
but the point is, Warlocks have tons of very powerful and useful active defenses,
But this paradigm of getting away from melee, is not a common melee paradigm. Hexblade, as presented in this UA would rarely want to escape melee. Monks/fighters/barbarians in 2024 are not trying to escape melee. the main point of disengage is getting to the guy you want to melee for a monk, or possibly helping/saving a team member. The only class who can disengage as a common strategy without huge downsides is rogue, and thats because it has both a BA disengage AND has like 4/5ths of its offense in its main action. (unlike monk who loses half its DPR if it uses disengage)
Hexblade doesnt have an issue taking enemy attention, and in fact, its better if they target the hexblade than most casters, 3/4ths of the barbarians, rogues, rangers, most fighters,
because they can have up to 18 Ac baseline, 20 with accursed shield, they can have high temp HP boosts at the start of any fight, tough feat and lucky feat, They have the aformentioned defensive options. They deal damage if they get hit (unyielding will) and reduce damage (armor of hexes)
if the hexblade is running away, its fairly likely someone else with less mitigation is taking the hit.
now its totally possible to make a hexblade or warlock with a lot less defensive potential, who fears melee. but thats a choice.
RE: your sidenote, exactly by what metric are you suggesting those builds outperform hexblade? and explain how its the case.you also say in every teir of play, but only mention level 20.
celestial patron provides exactly 1 damage buff once per round, + Cha modifier once per round and only on damage from a spell which does radiant or fire damage. it only provides 2 defense buffs, temp HP once per day, and resistence to radiant damage. celestial spirit can reduce damage taken by 5.5 avg per round.
hexblade unyielding will provides avg of 7-14 damage per round (1 to 2ntargets) 2 AC in melee with your enemy, -10-20 damage taken, 25% greater chance for an enemy to fail a save, like say staggering strike. +.05* dice from attacks per round (19 crit)
and, always being behind on levels means always losing out on something useful for warlocks, they will be one spell level behind half the time, and features behind the other half.
By level 20, the only thing a paladin dip provides is 2 level 1 spells, weapon mastery, and lay on hands with a pool of 5 hp. As boring as the warlock level 20 feature may be, its objectively 2 more level 5 spells per day. Which is objectively way more valuable that lay on hands 5 hp and 2 level 1 spells. it all comes down to weapon mastery. in which case i would say fighter is a better dip.
also, those numbers of DPR not including accuracy are not special. really, any warlock with gwm gets 81. any warlock with dual wielder/weapon mastery nick can get 77.5, any warlock with shadow blade and dual wielder/nick gets, gets 90.5
the bonus from crits on 19 can be between 2.5- 9 on average depending on which of the aformentioned styles you choose, of which the highest is dual wielding shadow blade. so essentially 4-8 dpr from that feature. 7 from unyielding will
celestial is a fine warlock, if your goal is to support the team with recovery effects, giving up damage occaisionally. but there is no particular reason to do that as a melee build. and no benefit to taking or dealing damage or debuffing targets over the hexblade. every heal spell could be another spell. Hexblade recovers 22.5 to 47.5 hp per day via hexcurse, depending on your charisma, the celestial recovers 14-73 depending on level. (btw they wont recover more hp per day with that feature until level 14)
essentially hexblade is more durable, better damage and debuffs(hindering hex) with a spell list that better supports the playstyle.
fiend has better hp recovery but on average worse mitigation Hurl through hell dpr wise is like using explosive hex on 4 targets. id say hurl through hell is superior, but nit suoerior enough to say its a better melee build, it has no other features that increase dpr over the course of a day, and its spell list isnt designed to work well with martial play. It plays best as a turret, not a mobile attacker/defender
Xanathar's predates and is superseded by the 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide. I get what you are saying, but there is a standard that has been set by official published books and the notion that D&D is designed around characters without magic items is a case of "do what I say, not what I do." If you play through official modules, you will get +X attack items, +X defense items, and a host of other items. "The Magic Items Awarded by Level table shows the number of magic items a D&D party typically gains during a campaign, totaling one hundred magic items by level 20. The table shows how many items of each rarity are meant to be handed out during each of the four tiers of play." (DMG 2024) This sets the standard. To say otherwise is dishonest, not on your part, but on Xanathar's and the DMG. You're welcome to play a low magic or high magic setting within D&D, but anything that deviates from established norms of D&D should be reviewed in session 0. (I would suggest reviewing even standard fare, just to manage expectations.)
I agree with your earlier statement that a "fix needs to come in the features of the subclass itself." However, magic items must also be taken into account, as avenues for power scaling, as options for rounding out a character, or as potential abuses that need may warrant action.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Spells and invocations are not a substitute for a good base AC, that is always on, can't be removed in 99% of cases and does not require additional or limited resources to use.
Spells are the warlock feature, what they do to play the game, if your defense of not giving warlock hexblade good is AC is that 'use spells for defense instead of other things' then you have completely lost the plot. IF I'm using my spells and resources just to exist in melee, then might as well take fighter, exist better in melee and have more features that boost my dmg and defense more than any of the things warlock has access to, since I am still not getting spells to do with as I please anyway not to mention most of the spells you mention are concentration spells, which can be dropped.
By what metric do you compare armor of shadows to medium armor? Armor of shadows is a +1 studded leather, which with 14 DEX gets you 15 AC which is garbage for a character who wants to exist primarily in melee. Half-plate gets you 17 with the same stat, THAT is medium armor. Saying that warlock can get a baseline of 18 AC is where your argument becomes completely invalid and you prove my point that you are either a bladelock hater or just have no business testing material because you have no idea what good design or balance remotely is. Do not take this personally but stick to playing at casual tables, testing and evaluating material is not for you.
For warlock to get 18 AC (which can be improved to 20 with accursed shield) you mean that you take armor of shadows (another invocation tax but will not get into that), and put 20 in DEX. If I am putting 20 in DEX, it means I am semi-dumping CHA and at that point everything warlock has (including the spells that by your metric are what you are using for defense) becomes absolutely dreadful because most things scale with CHA. If I want to max DEX I am better off playing rouge, fighter with dual wield, paladin with dual wield (and genie), Monk, or a 1000 other things before taking hexblade and maxing out DEX (with this metric you get like 1 or 2 uses of hexbaldes curse, so you ain't getting accursed shield most of the time anyway, spell save DC becomes non-existent so the feature you praised so much harrowing hex becomes almost useless because most spells you are casting as an action require a saving throw).
Warlock can't be durable without maxing DEX and at that point the rest of the features seize to function.
At every turn you keep convincing me that you have no idea what you are talking about, either you did not really playtest and are making up scenarios based on a very wrong and misguided opinion, you played at a very casual table where monsters where hitting you with pillows, or you rolled for stats and started the game with inflated stats. With point buy the best you are looking at is STR 13, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 8, WIS 9, CHA 17 (if you want GWM) or STR 8, DEX 14/16, CON 14/16, INT 8, WIS 10, CHA 17. This mean your armor of shadows is not giving you more than 15-16 AC and your CON isn't that great if you want to get the 16 DEX, which means you might drop concentration sometimes and relying on CON spells for increased survivability (which is what you keep going back to every single time you try to defend this hexblade), becomes a liability not a guarantee.
The dmg from Unyielding Will and Exploding hex don't scale and are negligible (avrg of 7 dmg for will and 10.5 for exploding hex as a lvl 14 feature), only increasing based on the number of enemies around which is not a great metric to assess dmg boosting abilities, not to mention unyielding will relies on being hit and not failing the CON save and exploding hex is a once per day thing which means its a consolation prize at best. And saying the hexblade comes with the shield spell is not saying much considering you get it when you already have 2nd level slots which you might be ok with using them for shield, but that lasts for exactly 2 levels after which you get 3rd level spell slots which you definitely are not gonna be using for shield. As a TRUE warlock enjoyer, I can assure you most of us would rather fall unconscious then use a 3rd level slot for shield. Most of the 'powerful' active defensive abilities you mentioned are tied to the same resource, spells, which you have exactly 2 of until lvl 11 and in an actual game of DnD you do not get to short rest after every single encounter, you have to manage those very limited resources.
Lifedrinker needs you to roll hit dice every time, meaning its not and once per turn 4.5+con heal, its a once per turn, up to your level number of times per long rest, heal, which is much worse than what you are trying to make it out to be.
Paladin/fighter dips don't provide much at level 20 true, but I would rather start with armor prof and push back everything a level than rely on bandaid fixes to my paper AC while trying to be in melee, and multiclassing should never feel force, it should be a choice the player makes when they want to create a fantasy which the base classes and their subclasses do not capture entirely (ex. 2014 hexblade + paladin vengence or oathbreaker to make a DeathKnight style of character).
At the end of the day everything you mentioned above, is available to the base warlock class, everything except accursed shield, which means an blastlock can get everything plus add an extra layer of free consistent protection by staying 120+ feet away from the enemy instead of tempting fate with a measly +2 to AC while being in the heat of things.
The bottom line is that this hexblade does not provide nearly enough tools to convince anyone (apart from you apparently) to pick it up and go into melee, instead of dipping fighter or paladin and picking literally any other subclass (archfey provides a 100 teems more defensive tools and utility then this hexblade does). The actual hexblade subclass provides one defensive tool at level 3, tied to yet another limited resource, which has 2 very restrictive conditions to use, accursed shield, which by all metrics and in the opinion of ALL actual bladelock enjoyers, is one of the worst features ever seen on a subclass. Armor of hexes is the 2nd defensive tool, but it comes in way too late for what it does, it scales poorly because dmg scales much quicker at later levels and is yet again tied to a limited resource and is also restricted by the fact in can only be used against a specific target making it not reliable. In this state hexblade is definitely one of the worst choices for a melee warlock, and since it is designed to be exactly that, it makes it redundant and useless, and when a subclass is not picked to fill the role it is designed for and instead people are picking other subclasses to fit its role better, that means something is terribly amiss, it is by all possible metrics, a design failure.
But I digress, I am giving you the courtesy of reading everything you write, which is saying a lot since most of it makes little to no sense and is not reflective of the actual in-game DnD experience, but I doubt you are doing the same since you keep bringing up the same things and we keep telling you why they make no sense and you either can't seem to understand or you simply don't want to. The argument is getting stale with you and is going nowhere so I am not gonna keep wasting neither my time nor yours. I am still happy to bounce ideas around with others on this argument because most of us like the hexblade and want an actual fun, enjoyable and playable version of it, which I am convinced is not something you yourself want. The original hexblade was poorly designed because of the issues it created with multiclassing, which DMs could have stopped at their tables if they wanted to, (and was actually terrible to take at later levels because the features gained beyond level 1 where limited and weak), and I understand it left a bad taste in a lot of mouths leading to the DnD community to be split in two groups, the bladelock enjoyers and the hexblade haters, which you seem to be one of the latter. I do not blame you for it, a lot of people share your view, however, anyone who is objective and has played DnD long enough, or has at least basic understanding of game design and balancing, will admit it that this version of the hexblade requires heavy revisions and further UA testing to get to the right spot, and one of the key things it needs is a fix to the warlocks AC which is not fit for a frontliner not to mention the unexciting, lackluster and limited features combined with a complete desecration of the actual 'Hexbalde's Curse feature
Players don’t control what magic items they get. It requires GM fiat to get the exact magic item you want. As a GM I usually don’t give players the exact thing they are asking for, but something similar instead.
No one said that players control the magic items they get.
In the context of this conversation, that is basically saying you don't give them the defensive item the exact defensive item they are asking for, but a similar defensive item instead. That's fine, but it doesn't change that there is an expectation of magic items being received, regardless of the specific items awarded, regardless of whether the GM uses the suggested magic item wish list, the magic items as written in a published adventure (your party of 4 wizards find +1 Plate Armor, Yay!), a random table/treasure generator, or some other method, there is a standard established by official sources. You aren't expected to break the balance by underawarding or overdoing (unless you go nuts), but there is a standard nonetheless.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
My only point is that doesn’t matter because the player doesn’t pick what magic items they get. When a class is designed you don’t design it based on what magic items they could get even if there is an assumption they will get some magic items. This conversation is being derailed because y’all are arguing over whether or not magic items are considered in design. Since players don’t pick their magic items every player at different tables will have different experiences with magic items. That should have nothing to do with the design of a subclass.
Regardless of whether or not a player can get the exact magic item they want, IMO magic items should feel as a boost in power not an equalizer.
For this argument’s sake, an item such as bracers of defense should feel like its boosting you AC to a value which you otherwise shouldn’t be able to get, not to a value that you should have regardless to operate properly in the frontline.