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.
Items, particularly magic items, absolutely factor into a class's design because it affects the options available to them. Having a Warlock in +X plate with a +X shield wouldn't be untouchable, but has multiple impacts (reduced reliance on Dexterity and defensive spells/invocations being big impacts). Now, no one has been clamoring for a heavy armor wearing hexblade, but it is notable that if the subclass grants medium armor proficiency, it's just one feat away. Even with medium armor proficiency, there are some interesting options (nonmagic armor will get you to AC 16 with a 14 DEX, but magic armor can get you spells, Darkvision, and higher AC).
It doesn't matter if the players can buy and sell, or craft magic items in your game, the classes are designed in a context where magic items exist and there is a certain standard of distribution. You don't want any class reliant on specific acquired magic items to function effectively (the Artificer being an odd duck), but you also don't want a surprise magic item to throw the balance out of whack.
Sometimes managing that balance means controls on the items, sometimes it means controls on the class feature. I've never used it, but I imagine if a Sorcerer got a hold of a Mizzium Apparatus (Uncommon, Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica), it would be fairly busted because of the Sorcerer's Font of Magic. The answer here is to revise the magic item and you get the Hat of Wizardry and Hat of Many Spells. I can only guess at WotC's logic, but I suspect they are trying to head off potential abuse, warranted or not.
They should go back to the original Hexblade, built around light armor and no shield. If they want to keep accursed shield, make it while not using a shield. It might be interesting to see an updated Mettle class feature. (Evasion but for different saves. Back in the day, it was Reflex (DEX Save), Fortitude (CON maybe STR saves), and Will (everything else) and Mettle gave you Evasion for Fortitude and Will saves.) Is the current version, "when you fail a very specific save, you can choose to pass" effects?
Except the original Hexblade did not have medium armor or shield proficiency. It's fine for people on the internet to draw the conclusion that it was inspired by Elric. In my opinion, the Hexblade Patron is a combination of the original Hexblade concept and the Tome of Magic (3.5) Pact Magic (which originally included references to Kas and some the 5e Invocations). The fact that parallels exist does not mean that was the inspiration for the original class (It was 1-20 class back then). The Medium Armor proficiency was added in 4e, but was not part of the original concept.
The Hexblade in 5e (and its older 3.5e version) is very clearly inspired by Elric of Melniboné from Michael Moorcock’s novels.
Elric is:
A sorcerer-swordsman, both a skilled warrior and a wielder of arcane power.
Bound to Stormbringer, a sentient, cursed, soul-drinking black sword that grants him strength and magical might — but also manipulates and corrupts him.
Torn between being empowered by this weapon and being enslaved by it, which is exactly the bargain/curse dynamic that D&D’s Hexblade channels.
When 3.5e first introduced the Hexblade as a base class, designers even described it as a dark, arcane warrior whose powers stem from a mysterious curse or weapon. That’s basically Elric in D&D form.
In 5e, when they reimagined the Hexblade as a Warlock Patron, they leaned further into:
Elric/Stormbringer archetype → a cursed/sentient weapon grants the pact magic.
Shadowfell/Raven Queen → added gothic dark-fantasy origins for those weapons.
Elric of Melniboné and Stormbringer are probably the single biggest inspirations for the Hexblade fantasy, even if D&D also mixes in broader cursed-weapon and shadow-magic tropes.
Yeah and no one is denying that. It does not mean however, that designers should be bound by those constraints to make the subclass be exactly Elric. They can poy hommage to the original inspiration but still do their own thing. It just needs to function for 5.5 and not suck.
ETA: Ah, this is my ignorance showing, then. I am unfamiliar with 3/3x/4.
No worries. It's only relevant as a history of the class design. It might still be Elric inspired, but I think there are other elements at play.
Still, regardless of that history, 2014 introduced a version of the Hexblade and to replace it with a completely different class and call it the same, is dishonest. It would be like if the 2024 ruleset updated Dwarves to be nimble arboreal creatures with an affinity for spellcasting.
When 3.5e first introduced the Hexblade as a base class, designers even described it as a dark, arcane warrior whose powers stem from a mysterious curse or weapon. That’s basically Elric in D&D form.
I don't know where you go that from, but it wasn't Complete Warrior.
Complete Warrior had the Hexblade, Complete Arcane had the Warlock, and Tome of Magic had the really interesting Binder. All of these can be considered inspirations of the current Warlock and Hexblade.
In any case, back to the 2024 Hexblade. I don't think it needs medium armor proficiency. If a character wants to wear medium armor, take a feat at 4th. I do think that accursed shield is awful.
"While you aren't wielding a shield, when you hit the target cursed by your Hexblade's Curse with a melee attack, you can choose to impose disadvantage on attacks against you until the start of your next turn"? Seems too strong, but is it? Creates an anti-taunt effect, protects against sneak attack, and roughly translates to a +3.8 AC (which is what I am worried about). If you are wanting a striker role, rather than a defender, it is interesting. If you are wanting a defender role, it's not helpful unless you can combine it with some sort of battle field control. It also pushes the melee (Hex-Blade and Blade-adjacents).
ETA: Ah, this is my ignorance showing, then. I am unfamiliar with 3/3x/4.
No worries. It's only relevant as a history of the class design. It might still be Elric inspired, but I think there are other elements at play.
Still, regardless of that history, 2014 introduced a version of the Hexblade and to replace it with a completely different class and call it the same, is dishonest. It would be like if the 2024 ruleset updated Dwarves to be nimble arboreal creatures with an affinity for spellcasting.
When 3.5e first introduced the Hexblade as a base class, designers even described it as a dark, arcane warrior whose powers stem from a mysterious curse or weapon. That’s basically Elric in D&D form.
I don't know where you go that from, but it wasn't Complete Warrior.
Complete Warrior had the Hexblade, Complete Arcane had the Warlock, and Tome of Magic had the really interesting Binder. All of these can be considered inspirations of the current Warlock and Hexblade.
In any case, back to the 2024 Hexblade. I don't think it needs medium armor proficiency. If a character wants to wear medium armor, take a feat at 4th. I do think that accursed shield is awful.
"While you aren't wielding a shield, when you hit the target cursed by your Hexblade's Curse with a melee attack, you can choose to impose disadvantage on attacks against you until the start of your next turn"? Seems too strong, but is it? Creates an anti-taunt effect, protects against sneak attack, and roughly translates to a +3.8 AC (which is what I am worried about). If you are wanting a striker role, rather than a defender, it is interesting. If you are wanting a defender role, it's not helpful unless you can combine it with some sort of battle field control. It also pushes the melee (Hex-Blade and Blade-adjacents).
While your proposed fix is interesting, interesting is not always good.
now this might just be my opinion, but from a melee oriented subclass, I want a static fix to my AC.The feature given to the genie paladin should have been given to the hexblade, allowing you to get AC from CHA. While some might think that would be too good because you are getting too much out of you primary stat, new warlocks have gone from being very SAD to probably the most MAD class in the game (bladelocks not EB warlocks). You still need CHA and CON mainly like you used too, but now you need DEX if you want decent AC since medium armor is not longer attached to hexblade and if you want to be carrying a greatsword you also need a 13 in STR even though you don't use it for anything.
Allowing hexblades to get AC from CHA (while unarmored/lightly armored and no shield) would do a couple of things, first it would deter multiclassing and reward pure hexblades, secondly, the most important, it would fix the AC problem without making you even more MAD and thirdly it would, IMO, be flavorful and interesting.
In my proposed fix, you would get the AC bonus while concentrating on a spell (something which warlocks want to do anyway, while not being completely risk free). It would not be directly tied to hexblades curse so you cans still have your defenses up if you run out of that feature (and even if you run out of spell slots thanks to blade ward) but still synergizes with hexblades curse (since you can apply it with hex and bestow curse which have concentration).
Thats just my take, wrong or right as it may be, the bottom line is, whatever they ens up doing, hexblades need access to good AC that is not dependent on a limited use feature or too easy to lose (like your guy running 10 feet away from you), either through some feature unique to hexblade, straight up medium armor prof, or a new invocation which fixes warlock AC (requiring PotB so that only bladelocks can take it).
Yeah and no one is denying that. It does not mean however, that designers should be bound by those constraints to make the subclass be exactly Elric. They can poy hommage to the original inspiration but still do their own thing. It just needs to function for 5.5 and not suck.
No worries. It's only relevant as a history of the class design. It might still be Elric inspired, but I think there are other elements at play.
Still, regardless of that history, 2014 introduced a version of the Hexblade and to replace it with a completely different class and call it the same, is dishonest. It would be like if the 2024 ruleset updated Dwarves to be nimble arboreal creatures with an affinity for spellcasting.
I don't know where you go that from, but it wasn't Complete Warrior.
Complete Warrior had the Hexblade, Complete Arcane had the Warlock, and Tome of Magic had the really interesting Binder. All of these can be considered inspirations of the current Warlock and Hexblade.
In any case, back to the 2024 Hexblade. I don't think it needs medium armor proficiency. If a character wants to wear medium armor, take a feat at 4th. I do think that accursed shield is awful.
"While you aren't wielding a shield, when you hit the target cursed by your Hexblade's Curse with a melee attack, you can choose to impose disadvantage on attacks against you until the start of your next turn"? Seems too strong, but is it? Creates an anti-taunt effect, protects against sneak attack, and roughly translates to a +3.8 AC (which is what I am worried about). If you are wanting a striker role, rather than a defender, it is interesting. If you are wanting a defender role, it's not helpful unless you can combine it with some sort of battle field control. It also pushes the melee (Hex-Blade and Blade-adjacents).
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
While your proposed fix is interesting, interesting is not always good.
now this might just be my opinion, but from a melee oriented subclass, I want a static fix to my AC.The feature given to the genie paladin should have been given to the hexblade, allowing you to get AC from CHA. While some might think that would be too good because you are getting too much out of you primary stat, new warlocks have gone from being very SAD to probably the most MAD class in the game (bladelocks not EB warlocks). You still need CHA and CON mainly like you used too, but now you need DEX if you want decent AC since medium armor is not longer attached to hexblade and if you want to be carrying a greatsword you also need a 13 in STR even though you don't use it for anything.
Allowing hexblades to get AC from CHA (while unarmored/lightly armored and no shield) would do a couple of things, first it would deter multiclassing and reward pure hexblades, secondly, the most important, it would fix the AC problem without making you even more MAD and thirdly it would, IMO, be flavorful and interesting.
In my proposed fix, you would get the AC bonus while concentrating on a spell (something which warlocks want to do anyway, while not being completely risk free). It would not be directly tied to hexblades curse so you cans still have your defenses up if you run out of that feature (and even if you run out of spell slots thanks to blade ward) but still synergizes with hexblades curse (since you can apply it with hex and bestow curse which have concentration).
Thats just my take, wrong or right as it may be, the bottom line is, whatever they ens up doing, hexblades need access to good AC that is not dependent on a limited use feature or too easy to lose (like your guy running 10 feet away from you), either through some feature unique to hexblade, straight up medium armor prof, or a new invocation which fixes warlock AC (requiring PotB so that only bladelocks can take it).