Valor Bard / Warlock 1 -> Conjure minor elements as bard spell, attack, eldritch blast x4, dual wield attack, off hand attack and if you use it at end game 9th lvl cme with the update thats ( scimitar ) 1d6 + 4d10 + 1d6 + 1d6 + 35 ( 7x +5 attribute ) + 7x 7d8 ( cme @9th lvl ) ~300 dps / Round w/o any magic items Bladesinger can do the same iirc .....
Let's make this Warlock 2 so the numbers match up. I assume a Pact of the Blade Scimitar? At least one of the weapon attacks will need to be using Dexterity instead of Charisma to hit (+2 or more, but not likely to be +5).
It's important to note the difference. Let's compare it to Firebolt. And as an edge case, let's also look at a Selesnia Initiate* pure UA Hexblade Warlock using Harrowing Hex.
* makes Conjure Minor Elemental a Warlock spell
We'll use a Pact Weapon Scimitar and Dagger. No magic items. 20 Charisma. Level 20. I think the Dex only matters if we normalize for hit chance, which I am not doing. The Hexblade can use a weapon with a larger die since they can't use light weapons with Harrowing Hex. Let's use a Halberd.
College of Valor Bard with Eldritch Blast and Agonizing Blast (Scimitar Weapon Mastery via Weapon Master Feat):
Scimitar: 1d6 + 5
Second Scimitar: 1d6
Scimitar: 1d6
4x Eldritch Blast 4d10 +20
7x CME: 49d8
Average: 278 damage for one Attack action and a Bonus Action.
Pure College of Valor Bard with Fire Bolt (Scimitar Weapon Mastery via Weapon Master Feat):
Scimitar: 1d6 + 5
Second Scimitar: 1d6
Scimitar: 1d6
Fire bolt 4d10
4x CME: 28d8
Average: 163.5 damage for one Attack action and a Bonus Action.
Selesnia UA Hexblade with Harrowing Hex (Halberd Weapon Mastery via Weapon Master):
Halberd: 1d10 +5
Cleave: 1d10
4x Eldritch Blast 4d10 +20
6 x CME: 42d8
Average: 247 damage for one Attack action and a Bonus Action.
I think, really, the difference here is that's easier for a Bard to get access to CME and upcast it. Without CME, the above Hexblade will be dealing 58 damage per round if there are two adjacent targets.
I feel the Harrowing Hex feature pushing you towards Cleave while the standard attack and cast allow for more weapon masteries, if you decide you want to invest a feat for those perks, or feats like Polearm Master. Light Weapons won't be completely useless, but Harrowing Hex will lock them out of triggering a second attack from the Light property, even if their bonus action would be available if Harrowing Hex didn't use it (ie, they don't need to cast Hex, change the target of Hex, or something else).
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.
The problem with this approach is that if the 2024 Hexblade wants to use a shield, they have to first take the Lightly Armored feat because that is the only armor-related feat that grants shield training. And what this means is that a 2024 Hexblade has to use their first two feats (4th and 8th level) to gain medium armor and shield training. Worse, it means effectively throwing away a feat because they already have Light Armor training (but not shield training).
Considering most campaigns end or fizzle out by or before 12th level, this means the 2024 Hexblade will, at most, get exactly one feat not dedicated to simply getting the armor and shield training the subclass had baked in with the 2014 version.
My own fix is that ALL armor-related feats bundle in shield training, but it's confounding to me that the folks in charge of the 2024 rules didn't do that as well.
they wanted getting a shield and medium armor to be more costly for classes who have neither. They did UAs where armor was much easier to obtain for all classes. You could get an armor proficiency as a origin feat.
there was tremendous push back to how easy it was for certain classes that were supposed to not have the base durability of martial classes to gain it, and it was saying that it should be less than what 2014 even offered. Arcane casters were specifically singled out,
In 2024 they didnt want arcane casters to easily gain medium armor/shields. They want it to be costly in terms of feats, or require multiclassing, which dms can easily not allow if they want a more straightfoward balancining. They want them to have to choose between dex or con for AC versus concentrtiom, or make a signifigant investment.
thats why the UA has specifically avoided hexblade with medium armor in 2 iterations.
this is again wrong on so many things. 1.) explain to me, how a dm will easily not allow MC, it is a core feature in 2024, as soon as a dm disallows that we are already in the realm of homebrew 2.) the +2 only works when the cursed target ( if the hexblade even has curses left to begin with ) is within 10', best case scenario with his curses he will have an uptime of 25-30% so that's not even worth a +1 AC 3.) why jump all these loops of harmstringing yourself of picking 4+ invocations and be pigeonholed into a completly useless subclass 4.) it might have been there intent to make it more difficult for arcane caster's to get better AC with feats, what it is doing is they are just picking a 1 lvl dip of ftr or paladin 5.) again, they need better AC then monks & rogue e.g. because these 2 classes can disengage from melee a hexblade/ftr/barb/paladin can't
no offense meant, but have you ever played in higher then t1 games at a table, because of how you explain it sure sounds like you haven't, a AC 18 ( best case for hexblade ) in t3+ is worth nothing. And why should opponents attack the "tank" with AC 22-25 when there's an easy target sitting in melee, oh he has maybe 30 HP more when he takes tough + has fiendish vigor up, at that stage thats not even lasting 1 round of combat ( +12 to hit vs 18 ac = 75% vs the 40-55% hit chance of someone who really is supposed to be in melee and each doing 20-30+ dmg; most of the Monsters having 3 attacks ).
AC 25 => 3x 25 x 0.4 = 30 incoming dmg on avg AC 18 => 3x 25 x 0.75 = 56 incoming dmg on avg
as for how to reach AC 25 ( paladin, others can reach it pretty easy too ): - heavy armor + shield + def. FS = 21 ( shield of faith +2, +1 shield, +1 armor ) or just use shield spell ( easy to get via background and that is imo 100x more valuable then tough and lucky together )
So, i actually playtested this class and subclasses at levels 1-18 across like 24 or so encounters: no magic items, excepted silvered weaapons on one of the hexblades. all encounters in the Hard range (old deadly)
1)The Dm in 5e is supposed to adapt the game however they think benefits the table. You say homebrew like its a bad word when almost every table has its own house rules, and homebrew. Even adventuring league, is essentially an offcal set of house rules. The dmg officially tells you this, and advises you on ways to alter or adapt the game.
2)AC has a high value in 5e. 1 AC (fighting style) is equivalent in value to 5DPR (twf, dueling) things may vary, but 2 AC for the most dangerous part the fight is a big deal. Warlock and hexblade is a class focused on exceling against one enemy at a time. They should be spending the majority of the time within 10 feet of their prime target, and its ok and good that if they can't, they are less efficient. That creates interesting incentives. They even give them a feature that gives them some of the best chase potential.
3)You dont have to pick any innvocations if you dont want to, but its a different thing entirely to say, i shouldnt have to use any of these features designed to improve my ability to survive and deal damage in melee. AND it would be very unbalanced to design a warlock subclass giving it large baseline defense/survivability while not considering people can use innvocations on top of that.
4) Disengaging for a martial, as i have said is rarely useful for any 'warrior" except Rogue. 2024 monk is actually hardwired to tank. Mitigating damage is probably the most important thing they do. Lets say you use dodge, the best thing you can do is stay in range so your deflect attacks/disadvantage to be attacked is useful. A monk disengaging is giving up 50-60% of its damage, and usually its subclass gimmick, and a monk has to melee to be effective every turn. If you are not moving far enough that enemies cant walk up to you, disengaging does very little for you defensively. and a lot lost offensively. Also monks are likely grappling as thats the psuedo mastery of UA strikes. And, back to hexblades, they dont need more AC than fighters/barbarians/paladins to melee. Thats what you are talking about here. they already have access to up to 16-18 AC without any subclass. Barbarian has 17AC with constant disadvantage.
5) have you ever played t3 with zero magic iitems? because the game is balanced without magic items in mind. I have specifically with this class, and it it was one of the least in danger classes. Yes AC becomes less effective in parties without magic items, for everybody, and the hexblade can get 20 base AC with accursed armor, and they have magic items that add AC. but they dont even need it. They get much more powerful defensive spells than paladin, like shaodws of moil, synaptic static, and in t3 they have 3 level 5 spells per SR (as much as other full casters for the whole day), and in t4 they will have 4. They can hypnotic pattern, hold monster.
If you introduce tons of magic items, its up to you to do it fairly, and also find the right difficulty to create proper levels of challenge. but following DMG encounter rules, and no magic items, with a 4 man party, the warlock has zero trouble being in melee, without disengaging, staight up face tanking from 1-20. In fact its way easier than barbarian or fighter to do so. the most difficult teir is t2, and its not actually difficult, just more difficult than t1, t3 and t4. RAW magic items just makes things easier.
i tested it until 18, and basically its a full caster with martial defenses and focus fire. Aka its easy mode. Foresight means you have permanent dsadvantage and advantage, you can control dangerous monsters, or enable your ally to control them. At this point the hexblade and warlock in general is kinda dominating regular martials.
and for your comparison: what teir is this? and in this requires 2 very rare magic items, out of the 7 reccomended for the whole party, so i assume you are giving them wahtever magic items they want, because random item drop that would be unlikely
A 25 AC fighter/paladin is using a shield, the 22AC fighter would be a more apt comparison, but thats OK because thats why warlock has concentration spells, to adjust its playstyle.
t3:
25 AC fighter 25*.4*3=30
21-23 (bracers/ring)AC warlock with shadows of moil. 36%/25% hit rate. cha build: 25*3*.36=27 or for dex build: 25*3*.25=18.75
to mention - 10-15 damage from target per round
less damage taken than a fighter.
or, if you want to maintain your concentration on offense, synaptic static, -3.5 attack. for 42.5%/32.5% that will stack with other sources of disadvantage, and let you deal full dpr damage while defensive as a shield using warrior.
or you can hold monster giving everyone critical attacks and setting the monster's attacks per round to zero.
And thats the big flaw in you guys calculus., the warlock gets powerful magic, mostly specifically designed to let it use magic in addition to martial attacks.
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.
The problem with this approach is that if the 2024 Hexblade wants to use a shield, they have to first take the Lightly Armored feat because that is the only armor-related feat that grants shield training. And what this means is that a 2024 Hexblade has to use their first two feats (4th and 8th level) to gain medium armor and shield training. Worse, it means effectively throwing away a feat because they already have Light Armor training (but not shield training).
Considering most campaigns end or fizzle out by or before 12th level, this means the 2024 Hexblade will, at most, get exactly one feat not dedicated to simply getting the armor and shield training the subclass had baked in with the 2014 version.
My own fix is that ALL armor-related feats bundle in shield training, but it's confounding to me that the folks in charge of the 2024 rules didn't do that as well.
they wanted getting a shield and medium armor to be more costly for classes who have neither. They did UAs where armor was much easier to obtain for all classes. You could get an armor proficiency as a origin feat.
there was tremendous push back to how easy it was for certain classes that were supposed to not have the base durability of martial classes to gain it, and it was saying that it should be less than what 2014 even offered. Arcane casters were specifically singled out,
In 2024 they didnt want arcane casters to easily gain medium armor/shields. They want it to be costly in terms of feats, or require multiclassing, which dms can easily not allow if they want a more straightfoward balancining. They want them to have to choose between dex or con for AC versus concentrtiom, or make a signifigant investment.
thats why the UA has specifically avoided hexblade with medium armor in 2 iterations.
this is again wrong on so many things. 1.) explain to me, how a dm will easily not allow MC, it is a core feature in 2024, as soon as a dm disallows that we are already in the realm of homebrew 2.) the +2 only works when the cursed target ( if the hexblade even has curses left to begin with ) is within 10', best case scenario with his curses he will have an uptime of 25-30% so that's not even worth a +1 AC 3.) why jump all these loops of harmstringing yourself of picking 4+ invocations and be pigeonholed into a completly useless subclass 4.) it might have been there intent to make it more difficult for arcane caster's to get better AC with feats, what it is doing is they are just picking a 1 lvl dip of ftr or paladin 5.) again, they need better AC then monks & rogue e.g. because these 2 classes can disengage from melee a hexblade/ftr/barb/paladin can't
no offense meant, but have you ever played in higher then t1 games at a table, because of how you explain it sure sounds like you haven't, a AC 18 ( best case for hexblade ) in t3+ is worth nothing. And why should opponents attack the "tank" with AC 22-25 when there's an easy target sitting in melee, oh he has maybe 30 HP more when he takes tough + has fiendish vigor up, at that stage thats not even lasting 1 round of combat ( +12 to hit vs 18 ac = 75% vs the 40-55% hit chance of someone who really is supposed to be in melee and each doing 20-30+ dmg; most of the Monsters having 3 attacks ).
AC 25 => 3x 25 x 0.4 = 30 incoming dmg on avg AC 18 => 3x 25 x 0.75 = 56 incoming dmg on avg
as for how to reach AC 25 ( paladin, others can reach it pretty easy too ): - heavy armor + shield + def. FS = 21 ( shield of faith +2, +1 shield, +1 armor ) or just use shield spell ( easy to get via background and that is imo 100x more valuable then tough and lucky together )
So, i actually playtested this class and subclasses at levels 1-18 across like 24 or so encounters: no magic items, excepted silvered weaapons on one of the hexblades. all encounters in the Hard range (old deadly)
1)The Dm in 5e is supposed to adapt the game however they think benefits the table. You say homebrew like its a bad word when almost every table has its own house rules, and homebrew. Even adventuring league, is essentially an offcal set of house rules. The dmg officially tells you this, and advises you on ways to alter or adapt the game.
2)AC has a high value in 5e. 1 AC (fighting style) is equivalent in value to 5DPR (twf, dueling) things may vary, but 2 AC for the most dangerous part the fight is a big deal. Warlock and hexblade is a class focused on exceling against one enemy at a time. They should be spending the majority of the time within 10 feet of their prime target, and its ok and good that if they can't, they are less efficient. That creates interesting incentives. They even give them a feature that gives them some of the best chase potential.
3)You dont have to pick any innvocations if you dont want to, but its a different thing entirely to say, i shouldnt have to use any of these features designed to improve my ability to survive and deal damage in melee. AND it would be very unbalanced to design a warlock subclass giving it large baseline defense/survivability while not considering people can use innvocations on top of that.
4) Disengaging for a martial, as i have said is rarely useful for any 'warrior" except Rogue. 2024 monk is actually hardwired to tank. Mitigating damage is probably the most important thing they do. Lets say you use dodge, the best thing you can do is stay in range so your deflect attacks/disadvantage to be attacked is useful. A monk disengaging is giving up 50-60% of its damage, and usually its subclass gimmick, and a monk has to melee to be effective every turn. If you are not moving far enough that enemies cant walk up to you, disengaging does very little for you defensively. and a lot lost offensively. Also monks are likely grappling as thats the psuedo mastery of UA strikes. And, back to hexblades, they dont need more AC than fighters/barbarians/paladins to melee. Thats what you are talking about here. they already have access to up to 16-18 AC without any subclass. Barbarian has 17AC with constant disadvantage.
5) have you ever played t3 with zero magic iitems? because the game is balanced without magic items in mind. I have specifically with this class, and it it was one of the least in danger classes. Yes AC becomes less effective in parties without magic items, for everybody, and the hexblade can get 20 base AC with accursed armor, and they have magic items that add AC. but they dont even need it. They get much more powerful defensive spells than paladin, like shaodws of moil, synaptic static, and in t3 they have 3 level 5 spells per SR (as much as other full casters for the whole day), and in t4 they will have 4. They can hypnotic pattern, hold monster.
If you introduce tons of magic items, its up to you to do it fairly, and also find the right difficulty to create proper levels of challenge. but following DMG encounter rules, and no magic items, with a 4 man party, the warlock has zero trouble being in melee, without disengaging, staight up face tanking from 1-20. In fact its way easier than barbarian or fighter to do so. the most difficult teir is t2, and its not actually difficult, just more difficult than t1, t3 and t4. RAW magic items just makes things easier.
i tested it until 18, and basically its a full caster with martial defenses and focus fire. Aka its easy mode. Foresight means you have permanent dsadvantage and advantage, you can control dangerous monsters, or enable your ally to control them. At this point the hexblade and warlock in general is kinda dominating regular martials.
and for your comparison: what teir is this? and in this requires 2 very rare magic items, out of the 7 reccomended for the whole party, so i assume you are giving them wahtever magic items they want, because random item drop that would be unlikely
A 25 AC fighter/paladin is using a shield, the 22AC fighter would be a more apt comparison, but thats OK because thats why warlock has concentration spells, to adjust its playstyle.
t3:
25 AC fighter 25*.4*3=30
21-23 (bracers/ring)AC warlock with shadows of moil. 36%/25% hit rate. cha build: 25*3*.36=27 or for dex build: 25*3*.25=18.75
to mention - 10-15 damage from target per round
less damage taken than a fighter.
or, if you want to maintain your concentration on offense, synaptic static, -3.5 attack. for 42.5%/32.5% that will stack with other sources of disadvantage, and let you deal full dpr damage while defensive as a shield using warrior.
or you can hold monster giving everyone critical attacks and setting the monster's attacks per round to zero.
And thats the big flaw in you guys calculus., the warlock gets powerful magic, mostly specifically designed to let it use magic in addition to martial attacks.
1: Not permitting broken MC is not really homebrewing its just keeping things balanced and fun for everyone. But yes, homebrew is a big part of DnD in general.
2. +2 AC is pretty mediocre, the fighting style is good because it adds on top of armor and shields and is always on regardless of the situation (as long as wearing armor), +2 tied to a limited resource and with 2 very restrictive conditions (within 10feet of a particular target and not wearing any armor or shields) is practically useless, and anyone who wants good defense will just MC for armor. The hexblade should have features that reward focusing you cruse target, but this UA instead takes a different approach, it punishes you for not being within 10feet of that target, which is bad design and not appealing at all to play with. Its not interesting to have crappy armor if your not sticking religiously to 1 target, its annoying and unappealing. Also, inescapable hex, is just bad, with the way its worded (move straight.) it means if there are any enemies, obstacles or hazards between you and you target, the feature does nothing.
3. "You don't have to take any invocations you don't want to", exactly, but accursed shield basically says you either take AoS, or this feature is useless (studded leather becomes objectively better, because its a +2 baseline with no restrictions). Regardless, even if accursed shield stacked with light armor, it would still be garbage, no frontline melee character is gonna have a good time existing in melee with 14 AC or a conditional 16 (17 if you sacrifice CON to invest more into DEX which is not what warlocks want to do). I will say it again, I would rather push my features 1 level back and dip into fighter for armor, and if MCing is basically necessary to make this version of hexblade playable, then it is poorly designed. Invocations are mini features that allow you to customize your warlock, not an excuse to design poor subclass features that depend on invocations to work (and in this case its still would be bad). The only invocations which boost survivability are AoS (which is the worst invocation at lvl 1 and one of the worst in general), Fiendish vigor (which drops off in effectiveness at later levels) and Lifedrinker which gives you some healing tied to your hit dice usage. None of these make u survivable enough to excuse the lack of good AC in the hexblade subclass.
4. I have no idea where you are getting an 18 AC from for hexblades, I assume you are thinking a 16 in DEX which with AoS gives you 16AC and with accursed shield gets you to 18, a value which is highly conditional and easy to lose, so its not reliable and its bad. You keep comparing the hexblade to martial classes, when those are only base classes, not subclasses, a fighter or a paladin can have 21 AC without any magic items or subclass features, and you keep saying Barbarian has constant disadvantage but that has nothing to do with their AC, its reckless attack which is a trade-off feature, attacks you do are at advantage but enemies also attack you with the same advantage, you do not have to do that, its a choice, and if we are looking at everything, Barbs have rage which mitigates 50% of all physical dmg taken, plus they have a D12 hit die not a D8, so you cant compare it with hexblade. The AC current hexblades have is conditional, unreliable, and plain poor. Again, I would rather MC for armor profs. and at that point since 50% of my hexblades curse is gonna do nothing for the entirety of the campaign (because it does not work while wearing armor), then I would rather take a different subclass, which makes the hexblade, a non-choice for melee bladelocks, which makes it obsolete since that is the role its supposed to fit. If the subclass is not excelling at its own niche, then it has no reason to exist. Bladesingers get INT to AC while unarmored and they are not a martial subclass they are a full caster subclass, if bladesingers can add their whole INT to their AC for up to 5 combats a day, while still having full caster capabilities, then the hexblade should also get a feature which gives it a significant and scaling AC boost that allows it to melee reliably without having to MC.
5. You reasoning seems to assume that Warlock is gonna use its concentration and its spell slots to get the defenses it needs, so basically all the cool offensive spells the expanded spell list gives you get thrown out the window because I have to use my spell slots to not die basically. Bladesingers can also do that, but hey, they also get +5 to their AC while in bladesong. And you keep assuming warlocks are investing their feats on ASIs to boost DEX, that is not something which as a warlock I wanna do. To get 20 AC I need a 20 in DEX, AoS, and be within 10feet of my curse target. That is a lot of conditions to fulfill for an AC value which is outclassed by the base AC of other martials without magic items, not to mention that an AC of 20 at tier 4 is basically nothing seeing monsters have like +15 to hit at those levels. Now why would I invest so much in DEX and AoS to get an 18 AC (conditional 20), when i can grab half-plate and fighting style defense from 1 level of fighter and have a base AC of 18 (20 if I decide to wield a shield)? The answer is pretty simple, no on would. Everyone would MC with fighter, get their base 18-20 AC (you can even invest a bit in STR instead of DEX and grab full-plate + defense for a 19 AC and wield a heavy weapon and go for GWM) and just take another subclass (archfey is probably the best), so now I have a good base AC, no conditions or limited uses and no tax on my invocations (a 1 lvl tax for MC but that is less punishing then what you are suggesting with the hexblade), and take an actual useful subclass and teleport around freely while also getting either defensive, offensive or utility options, but I am fully capable of staying in the frontline with a good AC (which can be upgraded through magical armor which is more common than items that boost unarmored AC) even when I run out of my subclass feature's uses.
You keep saying the same things and never address any counter arguments. If a 1 lvl dip in either fighter/paladin is more effective and appealing than the hexblade itself for bladelock builds, than the hexblade is a failed design (and that is the consensus of the majority of bladelock players and DnD content creators: treantmonk and colby themselves acknowledged that even you take this subclass dipping for armor and ignoring accursed shield is still the better way to go [not saying that those two ppl have to be believed no matter what, but in this case they are right]).
Regarding your numbers: It makes no sense that you compare a base AC fighter without features and magic items, with the warlock that has a rare and uncommon magic items (both of which are taking up an attunement slot) and a concentration spell going on (that isn't even in the 2024 rules technically speaking) and compare the tankiness of those 2. Concentration can be lost, spells can be counterspelledor dispelled and with 2 items that require attunement you are seriously limiting the options the hexblade has in terms of customization and items used (not to mention you are assuming 18/20 DEX which isn't realistic unless you are using all your feats on increasing DEX which is boring an unappealing). No matter how you look at it, the current hexblade is a fail when it comes to a subclass that supports a martial/melee archetype for warlock and even ignoring the other features which have problems of their own (hexblades curse literally does nothing at lvl3, malign brutality has 2 of 3 features which are super limited and restrictive to use, Armor of Hexes is just ok, and the capstone is just 2 features which should be part of the base hexblade's curse and exploding curse which is pretty lackluster dmg and only usable once per long rest), the biggest problem remains the lack of good, reliable, easy to turn on and maintain/always on AC, and if in the upcoming book, bladesingers get to add their INT to their AC, then hexblades are also entitled to have a feature which add their CHA to AC. Regardless of where they go with the hexblade (I hope they listen to our feedback and release another UA dedicated to the hexbalde becuase the current UA is a hot mess) the AC issue needs to be fixed. If this UA hexblade is remotely close to its release version then the designers at WoTC will have confirmed that they dont care about the feedback and are just rushing to vomit out content. In that case I would rather give my money to some 3rd party content creators which are more player oriented and creative than what the WoTC designers are proving to be and look for my fun elsewhere, because this hexblade (together with most of the latest UA material they showcased) is just an uninspired letdown.
What is or how are you getting these individual numbers in the formula cha build: 25*3*.36=27 or for dex build: 25*3*.25=18.75?
Shadows of Moil is in Xanathar's Guide to Everything which is still valid under the 2024 edition until spell is updated.
As far as the numbers, I believe Gwar1 is adjusting the DPR numbers for hit chances based on typical ACs for a given level. I don't know the method they are using, but it is probably more accurate than my method of assuming all attacks hit.
Here is a DPR Calculator that will give the DPR for a given attack. The article on Math of D&D Optimization (also linked from the Calculator itself) is based on the 2014 rules so it may have some with the update. The calculator is preprogrammed with some of those assumptions, but is flexible enough to accommodate variations. Also, note that the calculator represents outgoing damage and thus does not model any kind of resistance or damage reduction.
1: Not permitting broken MC is not really homebrewing its just keeping things balanced and fun for everyone. But yes, homebrew is a big part of DnD in general.
Disallowing multiclassing and disallowing a specific combination are both changing the rules at your house. It's a house rule. That's okay. Every house rule is (hopefully) keeping things balanced and fun for everyone. Conjure Minor Elementals can give some crazy damage numbers. If you decide to ban it, that would be a house rule too.
What is or how are you getting these individual numbers in the formula cha build: 25*3*.36=27 or for dex build: 25*3*.25=18.75?
Shadows of Moil is in Xanathar's Guide to Everything which is still valid under the 2024 edition until spell is updated.
As far as the numbers, I believe Gwar1 is adjusting the DPR numbers for hit chances based on typical ACs for a given level. I don't know the method they are using, but it is probably more accurate than my method of assuming all attacks hit.
Here is a DPR Calculator that will give the DPR for a given attack. The article on Math of D&D Optimization (also linked from the Calculator itself) is based on the 2014 rules so it may have some with the update. The calculator is preprogrammed with some of those assumptions, but is flexible enough to accommodate variations. Also, note that the calculator represents outgoing damage and thus does not model any kind of resistance or damage reduction.
1: Not permitting broken MC is not really homebrewing its just keeping things balanced and fun for everyone. But yes, homebrew is a big part of DnD in general.
Disallowing multiclassing and disallowing a specific combination are both changing the rules at your house. It's a house rule. That's okay. Every house rule is (hopefully) keeping things balanced and fun for everyone. Conjure Minor Elementals can give some crazy damage numbers. If you decide to ban it, that would be a house rule too.
Not saying MC should be disallowed, in fact MCing can open up fun and interesting character ideas. In fact I had a long discussion about this with my current DM who does not really like MCing in his games, however, disallowing certain combinations or even specific exploits (such as Bard + warlock just to exploit their extra attack with EB) is usually a good idea unless you want to end up with a single player at the table becoming the 'main character' and the others start feeling as playing in someone else's game. Allowing a dual wielding Valor bard that at level 6 can make a two weapon attacks and 2 EB attacks plus an additional weapon attack as a BA action is not a good idea IMO.
Not saying MC should be disallowed, in fact MCing can open up fun and interesting character ideas. In fact I had a long discussion about this with my current DM who does not really like MCing in his games, however, disallowing certain combinations or even specific exploits (such as Bard + warlock just to exploit their extra attack with EB) is usually a good idea unless you want to end up with a single player at the table becoming the 'main character' and the others start feeling as playing in someone else's game. Allowing a dual wielding Valor bard that at level 6 can make a two weapon attacks and 2 EB attacks plus an additional weapon attack as a BA action is not a good idea IMO.
The classes should be balanced around the interaction, but a College of Valor Bard 6/Warlock 1 isn't a problem. It's Bard 10 when they can pick up Conjure Minor Elementals via Magical Secrets. More specifically, anyone who can cast Conjure Minor Elementals can "abuse" it. A College of Lore Bard can start it at level 7 via Magical Discoveries. A pure College of Valor Bard can still pull shenanigans at level 11 by using CME and a multi attack spell like Jim's Magic Missile (Acquisitions Incorporated) or Scorching Ray and then at level 14 use Battle Magic to get an extra weapon attack as a bonus action.
Eldritch Blast is efficient because it's a cantrip and the number of times it triggers CME scales for free, but if you want something dead and have the resources, a Wizard (let's say an Evoker Wizard for the +5 or more to the damage) with two Level 9 spell slots can cast Conjure Minor Elementals and then either Scorching Ray or Jim's Magic Missile. If every attack hits, a level 9 Jim's Magic Missile will deal an average of 22d4 + 5 + 77d8 ~ 406.5 damage or Scorching Ray will deal an average of 20d6 + 5 + 70d8 ~ 390 damage.
It's not the Cantrip, Weapon, or Levelled Spell that gets you. It's the Conjure Minor Elementals damage.
I found another shenanigan. Mark of the Storm (Eberron) will probably still add Conjure Minor Elementals to your class list, meaning that Mark of Storm Fiend Warlocks (for Scorching Ray) have the potential to be beastly.
Before Level 7, this will probably be a once or twice a day burst. Level 7+, and especially at level 20, this can easily be a per encounter (if you can take a short rest) or even two to three times per encounter.
If a GM has to step in and take away official options from players, that's house ruling unbalanced options.
Let's make this Warlock 2 so the numbers match up. I assume a Pact of the Blade Scimitar? At least one of the weapon attacks will need to be using Dexterity instead of Charisma to hit (+2 or more, but not likely to be +5).
It's important to note the difference. Let's compare it to Firebolt. And as an edge case, let's also look at a Selesnia Initiate* pure UA Hexblade Warlock using Harrowing Hex.
* makes Conjure Minor Elemental a Warlock spell
We'll use a Pact Weapon Scimitar and Dagger. No magic items. 20 Charisma. Level 20. I think the Dex only matters if we normalize for hit chance, which I am not doing. The Hexblade can use a weapon with a larger die since they can't use light weapons with Harrowing Hex. Let's use a Halberd.
College of Valor Bard with Eldritch Blast and Agonizing Blast (Scimitar Weapon Mastery via Weapon Master Feat):
Average: 278 damage for one Attack action and a Bonus Action.
Pure College of Valor Bard with Fire Bolt (Scimitar Weapon Mastery via Weapon Master Feat):
Average: 163.5 damage for one Attack action and a Bonus Action.
Selesnia UA Hexblade with Harrowing Hex (Halberd Weapon Mastery via Weapon Master):
Average: 247 damage for one Attack action and a Bonus Action.
I think, really, the difference here is that's easier for a Bard to get access to CME and upcast it. Without CME, the above Hexblade will be dealing 58 damage per round if there are two adjacent targets.
I feel the Harrowing Hex feature pushing you towards Cleave while the standard attack and cast allow for more weapon masteries, if you decide you want to invest a feat for those perks, or feats like Polearm Master. Light Weapons won't be completely useless, but Harrowing Hex will lock them out of triggering a second attack from the Light property, even if their bonus action would be available if Harrowing Hex didn't use it (ie, they don't need to cast Hex, change the target of Hex, or something else).
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
So, i actually playtested this class and subclasses at levels 1-18 across like 24 or so encounters: no magic items, excepted silvered weaapons on one of the hexblades. all encounters in the Hard range (old deadly)
1)The Dm in 5e is supposed to adapt the game however they think benefits the table. You say homebrew like its a bad word when almost every table has its own house rules, and homebrew. Even adventuring league, is essentially an offcal set of house rules. The dmg officially tells you this, and advises you on ways to alter or adapt the game.
2)AC has a high value in 5e. 1 AC (fighting style) is equivalent in value to 5DPR (twf, dueling) things may vary, but 2 AC for the most dangerous part the fight is a big deal. Warlock and hexblade is a class focused on exceling against one enemy at a time. They should be spending the majority of the time within 10 feet of their prime target, and its ok and good that if they can't, they are less efficient. That creates interesting incentives. They even give them a feature that gives them some of the best chase potential.
3)You dont have to pick any innvocations if you dont want to, but its a different thing entirely to say, i shouldnt have to use any of these features designed to improve my ability to survive and deal damage in melee. AND it would be very unbalanced to design a warlock subclass giving it large baseline defense/survivability while not considering people can use innvocations on top of that.
4) Disengaging for a martial, as i have said is rarely useful for any 'warrior" except Rogue. 2024 monk is actually hardwired to tank. Mitigating damage is probably the most important thing they do. Lets say you use dodge, the best thing you can do is stay in range so your deflect attacks/disadvantage to be attacked is useful. A monk disengaging is giving up 50-60% of its damage, and usually its subclass gimmick, and a monk has to melee to be effective every turn. If you are not moving far enough that enemies cant walk up to you, disengaging does very little for you defensively. and a lot lost offensively. Also monks are likely grappling as thats the psuedo mastery of UA strikes. And, back to hexblades, they dont need more AC than fighters/barbarians/paladins to melee. Thats what you are talking about here. they already have access to up to 16-18 AC without any subclass. Barbarian has 17AC with constant disadvantage.
5) have you ever played t3 with zero magic iitems? because the game is balanced without magic items in mind. I have specifically with this class, and it it was one of the least in danger classes. Yes AC becomes less effective in parties without magic items, for everybody, and the hexblade can get 20 base AC with accursed armor, and they have magic items that add AC. but they dont even need it. They get much more powerful defensive spells than paladin, like shaodws of moil, synaptic static, and in t3 they have 3 level 5 spells per SR (as much as other full casters for the whole day), and in t4 they will have 4. They can hypnotic pattern, hold monster.
If you introduce tons of magic items, its up to you to do it fairly, and also find the right difficulty to create proper levels of challenge. but following DMG encounter rules, and no magic items, with a 4 man party, the warlock has zero trouble being in melee, without disengaging, staight up face tanking from 1-20. In fact its way easier than barbarian or fighter to do so. the most difficult teir is t2, and its not actually difficult, just more difficult than t1, t3 and t4. RAW magic items just makes things easier.
i tested it until 18, and basically its a full caster with martial defenses and focus fire. Aka its easy mode. Foresight means you have permanent dsadvantage and advantage, you can control dangerous monsters, or enable your ally to control them. At this point the hexblade and warlock in general is kinda dominating regular martials.
and for your comparison: what teir is this? and in this requires 2 very rare magic items, out of the 7 reccomended for the whole party, so i assume you are giving them wahtever magic items they want, because random item drop that would be unlikely
A 25 AC fighter/paladin is using a shield, the 22AC fighter would be a more apt comparison, but thats OK because thats why warlock has concentration spells, to adjust its playstyle.
t3:
25 AC fighter 25*.4*3=30
21-23 (bracers/ring)AC warlock with shadows of moil. 36%/25% hit rate. cha build: 25*3*.36=27 or for dex build: 25*3*.25=18.75
to mention - 10-15 damage from target per round
less damage taken than a fighter.
or, if you want to maintain your concentration on offense, synaptic static, -3.5 attack. for 42.5%/32.5% that will stack with other sources of disadvantage, and let you deal full dpr damage while defensive as a shield using warrior.
or you can hold monster giving everyone critical attacks and setting the monster's attacks per round to zero.
And thats the big flaw in you guys calculus., the warlock gets powerful magic, mostly specifically designed to let it use magic in addition to martial attacks.
Where in the 2024 PHB is shadows of moil?
What is or how are you getting these individual numbers in the formula cha build: 25*3*.36=27 or for dex build: 25*3*.25=18.75?
1: Not permitting broken MC is not really homebrewing its just keeping things balanced and fun for everyone. But yes, homebrew is a big part of DnD in general.
2. +2 AC is pretty mediocre, the fighting style is good because it adds on top of armor and shields and is always on regardless of the situation (as long as wearing armor), +2 tied to a limited resource and with 2 very restrictive conditions (within 10feet of a particular target and not wearing any armor or shields) is practically useless, and anyone who wants good defense will just MC for armor. The hexblade should have features that reward focusing you cruse target, but this UA instead takes a different approach, it punishes you for not being within 10feet of that target, which is bad design and not appealing at all to play with. Its not interesting to have crappy armor if your not sticking religiously to 1 target, its annoying and unappealing. Also, inescapable hex, is just bad, with the way its worded (move straight.) it means if there are any enemies, obstacles or hazards between you and you target, the feature does nothing.
3. "You don't have to take any invocations you don't want to", exactly, but accursed shield basically says you either take AoS, or this feature is useless (studded leather becomes objectively better, because its a +2 baseline with no restrictions). Regardless, even if accursed shield stacked with light armor, it would still be garbage, no frontline melee character is gonna have a good time existing in melee with 14 AC or a conditional 16 (17 if you sacrifice CON to invest more into DEX which is not what warlocks want to do). I will say it again, I would rather push my features 1 level back and dip into fighter for armor, and if MCing is basically necessary to make this version of hexblade playable, then it is poorly designed. Invocations are mini features that allow you to customize your warlock, not an excuse to design poor subclass features that depend on invocations to work (and in this case its still would be bad). The only invocations which boost survivability are AoS (which is the worst invocation at lvl 1 and one of the worst in general), Fiendish vigor (which drops off in effectiveness at later levels) and Lifedrinker which gives you some healing tied to your hit dice usage. None of these make u survivable enough to excuse the lack of good AC in the hexblade subclass.
4. I have no idea where you are getting an 18 AC from for hexblades, I assume you are thinking a 16 in DEX which with AoS gives you 16AC and with accursed shield gets you to 18, a value which is highly conditional and easy to lose, so its not reliable and its bad. You keep comparing the hexblade to martial classes, when those are only base classes, not subclasses, a fighter or a paladin can have 21 AC without any magic items or subclass features, and you keep saying Barbarian has constant disadvantage but that has nothing to do with their AC, its reckless attack which is a trade-off feature, attacks you do are at advantage but enemies also attack you with the same advantage, you do not have to do that, its a choice, and if we are looking at everything, Barbs have rage which mitigates 50% of all physical dmg taken, plus they have a D12 hit die not a D8, so you cant compare it with hexblade. The AC current hexblades have is conditional, unreliable, and plain poor. Again, I would rather MC for armor profs. and at that point since 50% of my hexblades curse is gonna do nothing for the entirety of the campaign (because it does not work while wearing armor), then I would rather take a different subclass, which makes the hexblade, a non-choice for melee bladelocks, which makes it obsolete since that is the role its supposed to fit. If the subclass is not excelling at its own niche, then it has no reason to exist. Bladesingers get INT to AC while unarmored and they are not a martial subclass they are a full caster subclass, if bladesingers can add their whole INT to their AC for up to 5 combats a day, while still having full caster capabilities, then the hexblade should also get a feature which gives it a significant and scaling AC boost that allows it to melee reliably without having to MC.
5. You reasoning seems to assume that Warlock is gonna use its concentration and its spell slots to get the defenses it needs, so basically all the cool offensive spells the expanded spell list gives you get thrown out the window because I have to use my spell slots to not die basically. Bladesingers can also do that, but hey, they also get +5 to their AC while in bladesong. And you keep assuming warlocks are investing their feats on ASIs to boost DEX, that is not something which as a warlock I wanna do. To get 20 AC I need a 20 in DEX, AoS, and be within 10feet of my curse target. That is a lot of conditions to fulfill for an AC value which is outclassed by the base AC of other martials without magic items, not to mention that an AC of 20 at tier 4 is basically nothing seeing monsters have like +15 to hit at those levels. Now why would I invest so much in DEX and AoS to get an 18 AC (conditional 20), when i can grab half-plate and fighting style defense from 1 level of fighter and have a base AC of 18 (20 if I decide to wield a shield)? The answer is pretty simple, no on would. Everyone would MC with fighter, get their base 18-20 AC (you can even invest a bit in STR instead of DEX and grab full-plate + defense for a 19 AC and wield a heavy weapon and go for GWM) and just take another subclass (archfey is probably the best), so now I have a good base AC, no conditions or limited uses and no tax on my invocations (a 1 lvl tax for MC but that is less punishing then what you are suggesting with the hexblade), and take an actual useful subclass and teleport around freely while also getting either defensive, offensive or utility options, but I am fully capable of staying in the frontline with a good AC (which can be upgraded through magical armor which is more common than items that boost unarmored AC) even when I run out of my subclass feature's uses.
You keep saying the same things and never address any counter arguments. If a 1 lvl dip in either fighter/paladin is more effective and appealing than the hexblade itself for bladelock builds, than the hexblade is a failed design (and that is the consensus of the majority of bladelock players and DnD content creators: treantmonk and colby themselves acknowledged that even you take this subclass dipping for armor and ignoring accursed shield is still the better way to go [not saying that those two ppl have to be believed no matter what, but in this case they are right]).
Regarding your numbers: It makes no sense that you compare a base AC fighter without features and magic items, with the warlock that has a rare and uncommon magic items (both of which are taking up an attunement slot) and a concentration spell going on (that isn't even in the 2024 rules technically speaking) and compare the tankiness of those 2. Concentration can be lost, spells can be counterspelledor dispelled and with 2 items that require attunement you are seriously limiting the options the hexblade has in terms of customization and items used (not to mention you are assuming 18/20 DEX which isn't realistic unless you are using all your feats on increasing DEX which is boring an unappealing). No matter how you look at it, the current hexblade is a fail when it comes to a subclass that supports a martial/melee archetype for warlock and even ignoring the other features which have problems of their own (hexblades curse literally does nothing at lvl3, malign brutality has 2 of 3 features which are super limited and restrictive to use, Armor of Hexes is just ok, and the capstone is just 2 features which should be part of the base hexblade's curse and exploding curse which is pretty lackluster dmg and only usable once per long rest), the biggest problem remains the lack of good, reliable, easy to turn on and maintain/always on AC, and if in the upcoming book, bladesingers get to add their INT to their AC, then hexblades are also entitled to have a feature which add their CHA to AC. Regardless of where they go with the hexblade (I hope they listen to our feedback and release another UA dedicated to the hexbalde becuase the current UA is a hot mess) the AC issue needs to be fixed. If this UA hexblade is remotely close to its release version then the designers at WoTC will have confirmed that they dont care about the feedback and are just rushing to vomit out content. In that case I would rather give my money to some 3rd party content creators which are more player oriented and creative than what the WoTC designers are proving to be and look for my fun elsewhere, because this hexblade (together with most of the latest UA material they showcased) is just an uninspired letdown.
Shadows of Moil is in Xanathar's Guide to Everything which is still valid under the 2024 edition until spell is updated.
As far as the numbers, I believe Gwar1 is adjusting the DPR numbers for hit chances based on typical ACs for a given level. I don't know the method they are using, but it is probably more accurate than my method of assuming all attacks hit.
Here is a DPR Calculator that will give the DPR for a given attack. The article on Math of D&D Optimization (also linked from the Calculator itself) is based on the 2014 rules so it may have some with the update. The calculator is preprogrammed with some of those assumptions, but is flexible enough to accommodate variations. Also, note that the calculator represents outgoing damage and thus does not model any kind of resistance or damage reduction.
Disallowing multiclassing and disallowing a specific combination are both changing the rules at your house. It's a house rule. That's okay. Every house rule is (hopefully) keeping things balanced and fun for everyone. Conjure Minor Elementals can give some crazy damage numbers. If you decide to ban it, that would be a house rule too.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Not saying MC should be disallowed, in fact MCing can open up fun and interesting character ideas. In fact I had a long discussion about this with my current DM who does not really like MCing in his games, however, disallowing certain combinations or even specific exploits (such as Bard + warlock just to exploit their extra attack with EB) is usually a good idea unless you want to end up with a single player at the table becoming the 'main character' and the others start feeling as playing in someone else's game. Allowing a dual wielding Valor bard that at level 6 can make a two weapon attacks and 2 EB attacks plus an additional weapon attack as a BA action is not a good idea IMO.
The classes should be balanced around the interaction, but a College of Valor Bard 6/Warlock 1 isn't a problem. It's Bard 10 when they can pick up Conjure Minor Elementals via Magical Secrets. More specifically, anyone who can cast Conjure Minor Elementals can "abuse" it. A College of Lore Bard can start it at level 7 via Magical Discoveries. A pure College of Valor Bard can still pull shenanigans at level 11 by using CME and a multi attack spell like Jim's Magic Missile (Acquisitions Incorporated) or Scorching Ray and then at level 14 use Battle Magic to get an extra weapon attack as a bonus action.
Eldritch Blast is efficient because it's a cantrip and the number of times it triggers CME scales for free, but if you want something dead and have the resources, a Wizard (let's say an Evoker Wizard for the +5 or more to the damage) with two Level 9 spell slots can cast Conjure Minor Elementals and then either Scorching Ray or Jim's Magic Missile. If every attack hits, a level 9 Jim's Magic Missile will deal an average of 22d4 + 5 + 77d8 ~ 406.5 damage or Scorching Ray will deal an average of 20d6 + 5 + 70d8 ~ 390 damage.
It's not the Cantrip, Weapon, or Levelled Spell that gets you. It's the Conjure Minor Elementals damage.
I found another shenanigan. Mark of the Storm (Eberron) will probably still add Conjure Minor Elementals to your class list, meaning that Mark of Storm Fiend Warlocks (for Scorching Ray) have the potential to be beastly.
Before Level 7, this will probably be a once or twice a day burst. Level 7+, and especially at level 20, this can easily be a per encounter (if you can take a short rest) or even two to three times per encounter.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.