# The Hexblade (Essentials Warlock) is up!



## Obryn (Oct 29, 2010)

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Essentials: Warlock)

First thing I noticed:

Charisma is the primary stat.  Reading more now...  Warlock is one of the most flavorful and most flawed classes in the game.  I wonder how this one will work?

-O


----------



## Obryn (Oct 29, 2010)

OK.  Same HPs and whatnot.

Up to chain armor, and proficiency in military melee weapons.

They have basically Eldritch Blast; the Eldritch Bolt power is barely changed, other than it's Charisma-only.  It also does Force damage.

Still have no choice in At-Wills.  They get Eldritch Bolt + Pact Power.

Pact Weapon is weird.  Not sure about it yet.  It's basically a free magic weapon, if I'm reading it right.  This one has similarities to Greataxe, but it's 1-handed and doesn't have High Crit.

They still use Rods, so we can now expect a Rod Expertise feat.

Aha!  Lots of Weapon + Implement keywords, so that's probably how they'll bypass the Weapliment Tax...  It means we'll probably leave Swordmages hurting, though.

...and holy crap!  They get a serious Striker boost of Con Modifier damage with Warlock attacks, which scales at the 5's.

And summoning!  Hey there!  Kind of a dearth of Encounter powers, though.

Looks neat; I can't wait to know more.

-O


----------



## zoroaster100 (Oct 29, 2010)

The class may be interesting to play. I'd have to see more information. The "solution" of having the hexblade carry around an implement in one hand and manifest a weapon in the other hand seems kind of inelegant in terms of design.  But the class may still be fun to play depending on what the powers look like.


----------



## Syunsuke (Oct 29, 2010)

Hmm... I want my implement turns into pact weapon.
And a pact weapon for star pact must be a light saber !


----------



## fuzzlewump (Oct 29, 2010)

[MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION]

The Pact weapon doesn't appear to be magical, it's stated to use the enhancement bonus of the implement you are using.

I don't like the Infernal at-will. Necrotic damage has to be one of the worst damage types to deal; very few things are vulnerable (are any?) and tons of things are resistant (any undead.) If it was fire and necrotic then we can talk. Also, the rider seems kind of bland. Would have preferred something more thematic to hell and stuff. The general concepts, though, I like.


----------



## The Little Raven (Oct 29, 2010)

Obryn said:


> Kind of a dearth of Encounter powers, though.




It looks like they have improvements to their pact weapon class feature at levels where they normally get an encounter power. These might include new pact-specific encounter powers.


----------



## mkill (Oct 29, 2010)

If infernal pact is Cha + Con and fey pact is Cha + Dex, then it doesn't take much speculation to see Tiefling as Cha + Con/Int and Half-Elf as Cha + Con/Dex.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 29, 2010)

I was really hopeing for a daily weapon attack to steal for my darksun lock. (mule with 18 con sorcerer king pact/templar theme) but even with that disapointment I still love the articale. 


So soul knives are back, but arcane instead of psionic...


----------



## DracoSuave (Oct 29, 2010)

Obryn said:


> Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Essentials: Warlock)
> 
> First thing I noticed:
> 
> ...




MORE importantly, can we get an interesting bet out of it?


----------



## Obryn (Oct 29, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> MORE importantly, can we get an interesting bet out of it?



I'm betting we won't see a weapliment feat tax fix in HotFK. 

-O


----------



## Obryn (Oct 29, 2010)

fuzzlewump said:


> I don't like the Infernal at-will. Necrotic damage has to be one of the worst damage types to deal; very few things are vulnerable (are any?) and tons of things are resistant (any undead.)



Ew, yeah.  On the other hand, it's not like that at-will is hugely more interesting than Eldritch Bolt...

-O


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 29, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> MORE importantly, can we get an interesting bet out of it?




You really enjoyed your time as Bieber?

Either way, I like the new warlock. Simple and straight to the point while retaining flavor. I love how they made special pactblades for the warlock, so that the choice of pact isn't decided by how much damage you want to deal - my guess is that the pact "dagger" won't be doing d4 damage.


----------



## DracoSuave (Oct 29, 2010)

fuzzlewump said:


> [MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION]
> 
> The Pact weapon doesn't appear to be magical, it's stated to use the enhancement bonus of the implement you are using.
> 
> I don't like the Infernal at-will. Necrotic damage has to be one of the worst damage types to deal; very few things are vulnerable (are any?) and tons of things are resistant (any undead.) If it was fire and necrotic then we can talk. Also, the rider seems kind of bland. Would have preferred something more thematic to hell and stuff. The general concepts, though, I like.




Then use the eldritch bolt instead?


----------



## fuzzlewump (Oct 29, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> Then use the eldritch bolt instead?



Eldritch bolt is ranged and Soul Eater is melee. Not exactly interchangeable. I'd use them both in different situations.

[MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION] Yeah, eldritch bolt is completely bland.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 29, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> Then use the eldritch bolt instead?




I was supprised that it wasn't edritch blast or strike... infact I almost wanted eldritch bolt to be melee or ranged and do 1[w] or 1d10


----------



## DracoSuave (Oct 29, 2010)

Obryn said:


> I'm betting we won't see a weapliment feat tax fix in HotFK.
> 
> -O




I bet Versatile Expertise already exists.


----------



## Obryn (Oct 29, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> I bet Versatile Expertise already exists.



On the tiers > On the 5's.

Bonus effect, even minor > no bonus effect at all.

Class with focus on weapon OR implement > class which needs both.

So yeah, it exists.  But there's a reason I gave out Expertise for free in the past, and have stopped giving it for free now.  The old expertise feats were simple math patches.  The new ones are math patches with style.

Needing separate weapons and implements isn't beneficial at all - it's been a class handicap from the beginning of 4e, usually due to an extra magic item tax.  Needing to take two expertise feats, or a poor cousin to the new expertise feats, because a class has mixed weapons and implements is a mechanically unjustified oddity.  Unless you're going to argue that swordmages were so powerful they needed to be kept down in comparison to other classes?

-O


----------



## DracoSuave (Oct 29, 2010)

Obryn said:


> On the tiers > On the 5's.
> 
> Bonus effect, even minor > no bonus effect at all.
> 
> ...




I can't say the new ones aren't good, they are.  I like them.

And weapliment users currently have staff expertise to help them along... and it's actually pretty decent to turn a staff into a reach weapon.


----------



## thewok (Oct 29, 2010)

The Little Raven said:


> It looks like they have improvements to their pact weapon class feature at levels where they normally get an encounter power. These might include new pact-specific encounter powers.



I'm thinking it'll be like Power Strike or Backstab.  "You gain another use of your Pact Weapon encounter power per encounter."


----------



## Xris Robin (Oct 29, 2010)

I like it... except for what appears to be an inability to choose encounter powers.  Those are the best powers.


----------



## Obryn (Oct 29, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> I can't say the new ones aren't good, they are.  I like them.
> 
> And weapliment users currently have staff expertise to help them along... and it's actually pretty decent to turn a staff into a reach weapon.



Oh heck yeah - it's great!  If you can use a staff!

If, say, you're tied to using heavy or light blades, however...

-O


----------



## Obryn (Oct 29, 2010)

Christopher Robin said:


> I like it... except for what appears to be an inability to choose encounter powers.  Those are the best powers.



This is kind of a theme with Essentials classes, though.  "If you love interesting Encounter powers, mostly look elsewhere."

-O


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 29, 2010)

Two things I really like about the devil.

1) the aura of intimidation - totally a fluff thing, but given crunchy backup.
2) the fact that they are forced to serve out of fear, and that you (usually) summon the same devil who will have a grudge. Small things but they should provide lots of fun. 

More of that, Mearls!!


----------



## yesnomu (Oct 29, 2010)

I'm fairly conflicted about this one. On one hand:


At-wills put me to sleep. Fluff up Soul Eater as much as you want, it's never going to be exciting. Why is Eldritch "Bolt" not a free power like Magic Missile? Especially galling since you'll want to be Human for another at-will, but Hexblades need a good secondary stat...
C'mon, can *one* E-class besides the Mage get encounter power options?
"Exploiting loopholes"? Hated by devils? Way to take the edginess out of the class.
Where'd Dex come from? Why aren't Eladrin natural Fey pact'ers?
Star pact was way cooler than fey, they should have swapped which one went in Dragon.
A single-target Sorcerer (damage-wise)? They know that sorcs need to AoE to keep up, right?
On the other:


Summoning classes are sweet. Having a personal devil that ridicules and insults you at every turn is adorable.
Nice fix to the weaplement problem, channeling your implement into a blade.
Cervantes is now a fully supported class.
So it's not my ideal class, but it's flavorful and interesting. It doesn't make me grind my teeth like the Sentinel. I could see myself playing one! A Human one, at least.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Oct 29, 2010)

Jack99 said:


> Two things I really like about the devil.
> 
> 1) the aura of intimidation - totally a fluff thing, but given crunchy backup.
> 2) the fact that they are forced to serve out of fear, and that you (usually) summon the same devil who will have a grudge. Small things but they should provide lots of fun.
> ...



Yep. I think the flavor is still pretty good. 

The fact that you summon your weapon and still have your implement in one hand seems a very odd way to handle things. Maybe it's just so you can't use a shield (ensuring a low Striker AC), still - odd.

I kinda miss the ability to curse my opponents.


----------



## Lord Ernie (Oct 29, 2010)

It looks interesting. It fixes some of the fiddlyness of the old warlock, but at the same time, being able to curse was very flavourful.

The summon looks awesome; not because it seems powerful, but it does look very cool .



yesnomu said:


> "Exploiting loopholes"? Hated by devils? Way to take the edginess out of the class.



Except this is pretty much the suggested flavour in the PHB: 


			
				PHB said:
			
		

> Long ago a forgotten race of devils created a secret path to power and taught it to the tieflings of old to weaken their fealty to Asmodeus. In his wrath, Asmodeus destroyed the scheming devils and struck their very names from the memory of all beings—but you dare to study their perilous secrets anyway.





yesnomu said:


> Where'd Dex come from? Why aren't Eladrin natural Fey pact'ers?



I agree with this part. I'd prefer it if Warlocks had Int somewhere in their stats, but then again, they gain their power from making deals with extraordinary beings, not from training or study. I dunno.



yesnomu said:


> A single-target Sorcerer (damage-wise)? They know that sorcs need to AoE to keep up, right?



The sorcerer's biggest problem damage-wise starts at higher levels (mid paragon onwards), and exists mainly because of two things:

Their high-level power selection stinks, and their PP's mostly suck.
They use implements to deal damage, and weapons just have better support.

The Hexblade doesn't suffer from problem number 1. Problem number 2 remains to be seen. 

Overall, I'm skeptical, but interested.


----------



## Bongo (Oct 29, 2010)

yesnomu said:


> Where'd Dex come from? Why aren't Eladrin natural Fey pact'ers?





I'm guessing the infernal pact will be statted for Tieflings and fey pact will be statted for Drow.


----------



## Oulak (Oct 29, 2010)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> I kinda miss the ability to curse my opponents.




I think that's kinda part of the point with the new essentials design - fewer things to keep track of mid-combat. No marks, no striker features (i.e. curse, quarry, shrouds, etc.). I see merit in this design.


----------



## Peraion Graufalke (Oct 29, 2010)

Obryn said:


> They still use Rods, so we can now expect a Rod Expertise feat.




Rod Expertise has been confirmed in the recent podcast.


The hexblade looks nice. I'm guessing that the star pact will have Int as a secondary.


----------



## thewok (Oct 29, 2010)

fuzzlewump said:


> I don't like the Infernal at-will. Necrotic damage has to be one of the worst damage types to deal; very few things are vulnerable (are any?) and tons of things are resistant (any undead.) If it was fire and necrotic then we can talk. Also, the rider seems kind of bland. Would have preferred something more thematic to hell and stuff. The general concepts, though, I like.






fuzzlewump said:


> Eldritch bolt is ranged and Soul Eater is melee. Not exactly interchangeable. I'd use them both in different situations.
> 
> [MENTION=11821]Obryn[/MENTION] Yeah, eldritch bolt is completely bland.






yesnomu said:


> Why is Eldritch "Bolt" not a free power like Magic Missile? Especially galling since you'll want to be Human for another at-will, but Hexblades need a good secondary stat...




It might be that Eldritch Bolt is indeed like Magic Missile, and that hexblades get it "free."

The level 1 features for the hexblade are:
Eldritch bolt 
Pact Reward 
Pact Boon 
Pact Weapon 
Daily power

The Pact Reward for the Infernal pact is the damage bonus.  The Weapon entry includes the weapon description, the at-will and the encounter power.  Daily powers are self-explanatory.  That leaves the Pact Boon, which is not mentioned other than to say that "You gain a power associated with your pact."

Now, it could be that there are one or two choices per pact to take for the pact boon, but I'm not going to hold my breath for that.  Still, it does seem like the hexblade will be getting 3 at-will powers.  And, I'm hoping that the Pact Boon will do fire damage.

Or maybe they'll just write up new Pact Boons for each pact that aren't dependent on killing Cursed enemies.


----------



## blalien (Oct 29, 2010)

First the binder and now the hexblade?  The warlock is absorbing all the classes nobody cares about.


----------



## Jhaelen (Oct 29, 2010)

blalien said:


> First the binder and now the hexblade?  The warlock is absorbing all the classes nobody cares about.



Speak for yourself 

I think warlock is one of the most intriguing and flexible classes. Currently I'm in love with the Sorcerer-King pact from the Dark Sun setting.


----------



## Zaran (Oct 29, 2010)

Did they really have to give Warlocks a pet?  I thought they were trying to distance themselves from WoW.

Again, I say this alot.  I'm glad they simplified the primary stats but will they do the same thing with the original class?


----------



## Ryujin (Oct 29, 2010)

Elric of Melnibone has finally landed.


----------



## Klaus (Oct 29, 2010)

Lovelovelove!

This class is the reverse of "use weapon as implement"! I love that they create weapons out of nothing, and infernal summoning + armor + weapon means we have a very good "blackguard" class. Kudos all around!

Also, this class has more in common with the Soulknife than the Hexblade, it seems.


----------



## Mengu (Oct 29, 2010)

Not a fan.

No dual implement spellcaster unless they pick up arcane implement proficiency or swordmage multiclass to be able to use their heavy blade as an implement.

Despite being a weapon user, they are denied weapon enchantments, and have to stick with rod/wand enchantments.

Their striker damage feature only applies to warlock and warlock PP powers, so no dipping into other classes, no bonus to racial powers or PP's.

No Curse, no Prime Shot, no Shadow Walk, almost all existing warlock feats are of no use to the hexblade.

I would much rather play a regular warlock, and make my own hexblade with Eldritch Strike, and/or make pretend melee attacks with Shadowdance Armor.

The only somewhat interesting part of the class for me is the summoned critter, but even that is not enough of an attraction to play the hexblade. I'm rather disappointed with the preview. Will have to wait and see the full class write up and any new feats to pass final judgement.


----------



## Ryujin (Oct 29, 2010)

To counter that they also don't need to have both a magic weapon and a magic implement, in order to benefit from both ranged and melee attacks. Having the implement provides the weapon bonus.


----------



## Imaro (Oct 29, 2010)

Wow, I really like this, in fact I think this is a better gish than the swordmage.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 29, 2010)

So this is like the 2nd Arcane class (well technically it's a subclass) that gets heavy armour prof.  

I'll say that the Hexblade much like the Sentinel is an interesting variation on an existing class, rather than a redo of one.  Both variations of the Warlock have their advantages over each other.  

What I like about this sub-class is you clearly have an archetype like a Hell-Knight or a Fey Champion.  Which leads me to guess that the Fey Pact Hexblade probably uses something like a rapier.  And makes me curious what the Star Pact Hexblade in the upcoming article will be like.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Oct 29, 2010)

Imaro said:


> Wow, I really like this, in fact I think this is a better gish than the swordmage.



I don't think the Swordmage was ever intended to be a Gish.  It was always the warrior who makes his sword magic and does spells with it.


----------



## Imaro (Oct 29, 2010)

Kobold Avenger said:


> I don't think the Swordmage was ever intended to be a Gish. It was always the warrior who makes his sword magic and does spells with it.




Oh, I agree... mechanically the Swordmage plays like a wuxia warrior... but it waskinda billed as a gish before it came out.


----------



## Neuroglyph (Oct 29, 2010)

I'm with Mengu, but for different reasons.  I think the class has potential, and might even be fun to play, but it should not be called a Hexblade for A LOT of reasons.  

In fact, there was too much to sum up here, so I ended up blogging about it - *The Hexblade Rebooted*.

I really would have preferred this Warlock build would be called anything but a Hexblade, because it bears no resemblance to the former class, at all.  Sigh.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Oct 29, 2010)

Kobold Avenger said:


> What I like about this sub-class is you clearly have an archetype like a Hell-Knight or a Fey Champion.  Which leads me to guess that the Fey Pact Hexblade probably uses something like a rapier.  And makes me curious what the Star Pact Hexblade in the upcoming article will be like.




No need to guess, they confirmed in the Podcast the Fey Pact Hexblade gets a rapier.


----------



## Almacov (Oct 29, 2010)

blalien said:


> First the binder and now the hexblade?  The warlock is absorbing all the classes nobody cares about.




The Binder was probably the class I had the most fun playing in 3.5. Right now though, I'm trying to figure out good ways to make a Vestige pact for Hexblades, and it presents challenges...

As for the 3.5 Hexblade, I had a few concepts I _wanted_ to try with it, and I liked the flavour, it was just never mechanically up to snuff.

Come to think of it, it feels a little odd that the Hexblade is the Warlock that _doesn't_ curse foes...
I can't say they're new bland striker damage thrills me.

Still, in general I like what I see.

Hmm... there's another thing though. I was pretty sure this subclass would be Arcane _and Shadow_, given that Shadow powers are _called_ Hexes. (And I seem to remember the preview text for Heroes of Shadow implying that Hexblades drew power from the Shadowfell.) As it is, this is kindof confusing. I find it likely there will at least be some kind of Shadow-y pact in Heroes of Shadow though.


----------



## Marshall (Oct 30, 2010)

Who else has noted that this class is a mechanical failure? CHA+CON = No AC. Chainmail doesnt help this much.

Secondly, Why the heck would you take a 4e ranged striker/controller and make it into the FIFTH(5th) Essentials MELEE striker? This is the same design space the Slayer currently occupies. Steps all over the toes of the Executioner and is nothing more than a theif or hunter with a fancy sword.

Really? Whats the point here?


----------



## Almacov (Oct 30, 2010)

Marshall said:


> Who else has noted that this class is a mechanical failure? CHA+CON = No AC. Chainmail doesnt help this much.




No more so than the Bard... This doesn't seem like abnormal or abominable game design to me.

I certainly don't see how a slight AC "deficit" would instantly mark the class as a mechanical _failure_ even if it did exist.

As for it being a melee-focused striker... I don't see the big problem with that.
Even looking at another melee-focused striker as a problem though, the Hexblade _isn't_ unwaveringly melee focused. One of its two at wills HAS to be ranged, it summons pets at higher level to do its dirty work at a distance, and it looks like it can probably choose from any previous Warlock daily power.


----------



## bargle0 (Oct 30, 2010)

Almacov said:


> No more so than the Bard... This doesn't seem like abnormal or abominable game design to me.




Bards get light shields, at least.


----------



## Almacov (Oct 30, 2010)

bargle0 said:


> Bards get light shields, at least.




Ah, I suppose so!

Well, it should be interesting to see how the full Hexblade fairs in play, anyway.
We should know soon enough.


----------



## mkill (Oct 30, 2010)

We haven't seen the whole writeup yet, so as always it's too early to jump to conclusions yet.

However, from what we've seen so far, the class seems to be a straightforward melee damage dealer similar to the slayer. What I'm wondering is that strikers need two more abilities besides damage dealing to be viable.

1. Survivability - Chain and lowish hp isn't stellar. I assume there is a fat temp-hp generating ability for Infernal and an evasion ability for Fey somewhere in the class features we haven't seen yet, otherwise the class has the same damage output as the slayer but dies faster. 

2. Target selection - The slayer is very good at charging stuff, and he can switch to a bow easily, so he can get to his target if he wants to. I'm not sure what the Hexblade will do, maybe he'll get all teleporty at higher levels.


----------



## Xris Robin (Oct 30, 2010)

As to target selection, at the very least, he has a ranged at-will.  Also, he can use dailies from the regular warlock, which are ranged.


----------



## The Little Raven (Oct 30, 2010)

Mengu said:


> No dual implement spellcaster unless they pick up arcane implement proficiency or swordmage multiclass to be able to use their heavy blade as an implement.




This only works if the weapliment counts as a magic implement. As it draws on the implement's enhancement bonus and properties, I would say it does not count, especially since it says that the weapon cannot be enchanted.


----------



## thewok (Oct 30, 2010)

The Little Raven said:


> This only works if the weapliment counts as a magic implement. As it draws on the implement's enhancement bonus and properties, I would say it does not count, especially since it says that the weapon cannot be enchanted.




I would rule the same (and posted this reasoning on the CharOp forum in the thread there).  I would even go so far as to say that the Pact Weapon is not an actual item, but a class feature and thus not eligible for DIS.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Oct 30, 2010)

Although it appears many don't like it, I LOVE it. In terms of class association with classics of literature it has the clearest association with Elric that I've seen in any RPG outside the eponymous one, and is all the better for it.

I love the way they have characterised the class, giving more detail about the way in which someone becomes a warlock, and in a way which drips both RP potential and campaign building potential.

I love the way that they appear to have ditched fiddly curses (I've said before that marks/curses/quarrys etc was one of the complications to melee that I felt they had got really wrong, as it hampered and confused melee badly. Others love it, but it really helped drive me away from 4e).

I don't mind them largely losing encounter powers (perhaps just having some generic ones based on their pact?) and I like the existence of daily powers to keep with the essentials vibe that daily powers are magic spellcasting.

All in all it is one more reason to purchase the next book, dang it!

Cheers


----------



## BobTheNob (Oct 30, 2010)

Marshall said:


> Who else has noted that this class is a mechanical failure? CHA+CON = No AC. Chainmail doesnt help this much.



Yes...but Con as a class stat is king.

If your DM doesnt allow an extended rest after every encounter (and I sure as hell dont!) then the number of healing surges you have is a vital consideration.

Ask our parties rogue. Shes great, hits like a canon...rips enemies off the battle field, and invariably runs out of healing surges cause she aint got squat, and is always in the thick of things


----------



## Reigan (Oct 30, 2010)

A non-essentials version please.


----------



## mkill (Oct 30, 2010)

Reigan said:


> A non-essentials version please.



You can easily make a "non-essential" version by allowing the player to switch out the Encounter powers tied to the pact blade for Warlock encounter powers of the same level.


----------



## Klaus (Oct 30, 2010)

The infernal hexblade seems to be a *very* durable character! It uses Constitution for hit points, healing surges and extra damage. Using Heavy Blade Expertise to shore up a lower attack bonus, it might pay off for a infernal hexblade to put the highest stat on Constitution. A half-elf will rock this class!

It looks like the fey hexblade will have better AC and Reflex, but the infernal will be much sturdier.


----------



## Klaus (Oct 30, 2010)

One thing that occurred to me.

What if the Hexblade were to pick up a Pact Blade, or take Arcane Implement Proficiency to use Swordmage implements, and generated his Pact Weapon on the other hand? Would he qualify for the Two-Weapon feats (since he's wielding two blades)?


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 30, 2010)

Klaus said:


> One thing that occurred to me.
> 
> What if the Hexblade were to pick up a Pact Blade, or take Arcane Implement Proficiency to use Swordmage implements, and generated his Pact Weapon on the other hand? Would he qualify for the Two-Weapon feats (since he's wielding two blades)?



 Not only would he be able to do that, but he would also be able to do DIS.


----------



## thewok (Oct 30, 2010)

I wouldn't allow Dual Implement Spellcasting.  The pact weapon is a class feature that creates a non-enchantable weapon that shares the abilities of the implement that summoned it.  It literally is nothing without the implement.  I would say that, while you could take AIP (Heavy Blade), that it would not apply to the pact weapon, which does not exist outside your hand.

There's also the matter of treasure resources being spent for other classes that use DIS.  That would not be the case here.

The hexblade is basically an arcane version of the slayer.  But, while the slayer uses two-handed weapons, the hexblade uses one-handers due to the fact that the other hand must hold the implement.


----------



## Klaus (Oct 30, 2010)

CasvalRemDeikun said:


> Not only would he be able to do that, but he would also be able to do DIS.



That isn't a given, since the Pact Weapon draws on the enchantment of the offhand implement. But it *could* open some decent capabilities. Once the eMulticlass rules are known, a fey hexblade could multiclass into Ranger for some Dex-based two-weapon attacks.


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 30, 2010)

Klaus said:


> That isn't a given, since the Pact Weapon draws on the enchantment of the offhand implement. But it *could* open some decent capabilities. Once the eMulticlass rules are known, a fey hexblade could multiclass into Ranger for some Dex-based two-weapon attacks.



 I don't see how it would be a problem.  Will have to wait and see though.


----------



## thewok (Oct 30, 2010)

This class may finally codify the line between implement and weapon keywords.  We know that you don't get proficiency bonuses to implement attacks.  But, the hexblade introduces a new thing in that it has powers that include both the weapon and the implement keywords.

I think we'll probably get a ruling at some point that basically says the following:

When using a weapon as an implement, it does not count as a weapon.

For example, when using Soul Eater, the hexblade would use a rod (or wand) to satisfy the Implement keyword, while using the Blade of Annihilation to satisfy the Weapon keyword.

But, if the hexblade has AIP (heavy blades), then he'd have, say, a scimitar as an implement, and the blade of annihilation as a weapon.  The blade is being used as a weapon and not an implement, so it does not count for dual implement spellcasting.  The scimitar is being used as an implement and so does not count as a weapon for two weapon fighting or defense.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Oct 30, 2010)

Zaran said:


> Did they really have to give Warlocks a pet? I thought they were trying to distance themselves from WoW.
> 
> Again, I say this alot. I'm glad they simplified the primary stats but will they do the same thing with the original class?




They've not changed the powers for clerics, paladins, ranger or warlocks yet, it's unlikely they will mass errata them to be A shaped instead of V shaped (although, they will probably wait until the class compendium if they choose to do so). With those classes at least, they have a ton of splat material between the X Power books, dragon magazine, and in the case of warlocks, tons of extra packs (They have 6 packs, 2 purely Charisma, 2 purely Con and 2 mixed. Of the last two they've put out enough star pact stuff to allow it to go either way, although they should make a charisma based at-will, and the dragon-sorc pact gives the player the option to build either way).

I highly doubt they will massively errata the old content to bring it in line with new design ideals, and instead merely provide new options instead.


----------



## The Little Raven (Oct 30, 2010)

CasvalRemDeikun said:


> I don't see how it would be a problem.  Will have to wait and see though.




DIS requires two magic implements, and the created pact blade is not a magic implement. AIP might make it an implement, but it doesn't make it a magic implement, especially in light of the explicit statement that the pact blade cannot be enchanted (and thus, cannot be made into a magic weapon or implement).


----------



## CasvalRemDeikun (Oct 30, 2010)

The Little Raven said:


> DIS requires two magic implements, and the created pact blade is not a magic implement. AIP might make it an implement, but it doesn't make it a magic implement, especially in light of the explicit statement that the pact blade cannot be enchanted (and thus, cannot be made into a magic weapon or implement).



 That is a good argument.  Though a Pact Blade item would still qualify for TWF, I would think.


----------



## The Little Raven (Oct 31, 2010)

CasvalRemDeikun said:


> That is a good argument.  Though a Pact Blade item would still qualify for TWF, I would think.




I would rule that it does, since it's a weapon that has the property that it acts as a warlock implement, which to me would suggest it counts at both at the same time.


----------



## thewok (Oct 31, 2010)

The Little Raven said:


> I would rule that it does, since it's a weapon that has the property that it acts as a warlock implement, which to me would suggest it counts at both at the same time.



An interesting thing came up in the WotC CharOp forum.  It was pointed out that the Blade of Annihilation is not a weapon at all, as it is labelled a Warlock _item_.  It is an item that has certain properties like damage dice, proficiency bonus, etc. that _can be used as_ a weapon.

Going along with this, the hexblade would not need heavy blade expertise or weapon focus, but would use the expertise and focus related to the implement used to summon the pact weapon.

The text in question is:

"*You can make weapon attacks with your pact weapon*, using its proficiency bonus and the appropriate damage die. Your pact weapon shares your implement’s enhancement bonus, critical hit effect, properties, and powers. The weapon cannot be enchanted."

Why point out that you can make weapon attacks with the pact weapon if it already is a weapon?  It is worded as if it is giving special persmission to do such a thing.


----------



## Ryujin (Oct 31, 2010)

Given the way that people try to weasel the wording and intent of various items, they're likely just going for some specificity in the description.


----------



## TerraDave (Nov 1, 2010)

Ryujin said:


> Elric of Melnibone has finally landed.




Its Elric with a light sabre!



Zaran said:


> Did they really have to give Warlocks a pet?  I thought they were trying to distance themselves from WoW.




See above. 


Looks fun to play.


----------



## Ryujin (Nov 1, 2010)

TerraDave said:


> Its Elric with a light sabre!




Not necessarily. Remember how Stormbringer could fly around on its own and would occasionally leave ol' Elric hanging. Sounds remarkably like a summoned physical weapon. I guess you could skin it any way that you like though


----------



## TerraDave (Nov 1, 2010)

But there are all those pictures with it in a scabbard, or at least Elric having a scabbard!


----------



## Ryujin (Nov 1, 2010)

TerraDave said:


> But there are all those pictures with it in a scabbard, or at least Elric having a scabbard!




It says that you manifest your Pact Weapon in a minor action. It doesn't say anything about it disappearing. I guess that means you can keep it around and put it in a scabbard


----------



## Scribble (Nov 1, 2010)

Ryujin said:


> It says that you manifest your Pact Weapon in a minor action. It doesn't say anything about it disappearing. I guess that means you can keep it around and put it in a scabbard




It says it persists until you let it go:  "Your pact weapon persists until you no longer hold either it or the implement, or until you dismiss it as a free action."

I think though that something like Elric's sword would be an artifact. Possibly with a storyline like maybe it was the first pact blade, that gained the ability to manifest without a warlock, and gained sentience- and maybe make it usable by Warlocks as a pact blade.


----------



## Ryujin (Nov 1, 2010)

Scribble said:


> It says it persists until you let it go:  "Your pact weapon persists until you no longer hold either it or the implement, or until you dismiss it as a free action."
> 
> I think though that something like Elric's sword would be an artifact. Possibly with a storyline like maybe it was the first pact blade, that gained the ability to manifest without a warlock, and gained sentience- and maybe make it usable by Warlocks as a pact blade.




I missed the "until you are no longer holding it" but if it's the "original", then the lesser Pact Blades could be members of the swarm of black swords, that I vaguely remember in one of the later stories. 

Or, as I said earlier, it could be flavoured any way that you like. I see no reason why the sword MUST be banished when you're done with it. Minor action to summon or minor action to draw, it seems immaterial to me. Stormbringer flew into Elric's hand, on occasion, which is very summony (or swordmageish) to me.


----------



## Scribble (Nov 1, 2010)

Ryujin said:


> I missed the "until you are no longer holding it" but if it's the "original", then the lesser Pact Blades could be members of the swarm of black swords, that I vaguely remember in one of the later stories.
> 
> Or, as I said earlier, it could be flavoured any way that you like. I see no reason why the sword MUST be banished when you're done with it. Minor action to summon or minor action to draw, it seems immaterial to me. Stormbringer flew into Elric's hand, on occasion, which is very summony (or swordmageish) to me.




Yeah I don't have any real problem with re-flavoring stuff...

The only issue I have with making it a physical blade is that you then leave yourself open to questions like:

What if it gets broken/lost/stolen  can a new one be made?

Not a huge isue, but still something to be on the lookout for,since the rules as written don't really take that into account. 


Might be neat to say the pact blade is a part physical part arcane... Like he uses a normal physical blade and imparts all the summoned stuff into it. So it could be any sword, but in the hands of a hexblade it becomes the pact blade.


----------



## Ryujin (Nov 1, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Yeah I don't have any real problem with re-flavoring stuff...
> 
> The only issue I have with making it a physical blade is that you then leave yourself open to questions like:
> 
> ...




Broken? Can't be. It's a manifestation of an extra-dimensional and ancient power. It's a personal artifact; neither material, nor wholly magical. It's not really there, or rather just a part of it is. It would take a major god to dent it.

Lost or stolen? Wave your hand and by the will of the sword, it finds its way back to you through the planes. A minor trick, for such otherworldly power.

If you need to make a new one then either the godling/demon it's part of is dead, or you are.


----------



## Klaus (Nov 1, 2010)

TerraDave said:


> But there are all those pictures with it in a scabbard, or at least Elric having a scabbard!



Dude.

The scabbard *is* the implement!


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 2, 2010)

Ryujin said:


> Broken? Can't be. It's a manifestation of an extra-dimensional and ancient power. It's a personal artifact; neither material, nor wholly magical. It's not really there, or rather just a part of it is. It would take a major god to dent it.




And there lies the problem. If you give a player an indestructible weapon you'll soon find them using it to prop up collapsing wall traps and 101 other kinds of cheese you hadn't intended.

The law of cool and the law of unintended consequences crash into themselves at times like this!

The advantage of the way that it has been written is that it isn't leaving open loopholes like this ( although scribbles last suggestion is a flavourful one)

Cheers


----------



## Ryujin (Nov 2, 2010)

Plane Sailing said:


> And there lies the problem. If you give a player an indestructible weapon you'll soon find them using it to prop up collapsing wall traps and 101 other kinds of cheese you hadn't intended.
> 
> The law of cool and the law of unintended consequences crash into themselves at times like this!
> 
> ...




It's at those times when the Law of Cool and the Law of Unintended Consequences collide, that I invoke the Law of Wrath from Above. Misuse the boon of a great power and it gets taken away, until you've learnt your lesson. You don't want to tee off Stormbringer, Eater of Souls.


----------



## Arivendel (Nov 3, 2010)

Simple thats not a sword+Scabbard but rather a Rod, a rod that breaks into rod+hilt and from the hilt the pactblade takes form.


----------



## bargle0 (Nov 3, 2010)

Plane Sailing said:


> And there lies the problem. If you give a player an indestructible weapon you'll soon find them using it to prop up collapsing wall traps and 101 other kinds of cheese you hadn't intended.
> 
> The law of cool and the law of unintended consequences crash into themselves at times like this!
> 
> ...




The pact weapon goes away if the wielder ever lets go of the blade or the implement.  I don't think it's a big problem.

That might make for an interesting plot hook.  You're exploring a dungeon and come across a dust and cobweb encrusted construct holding a door barred with it's pact blade.


----------



## bargle0 (Nov 3, 2010)

Ryujin said:


> It's at those times when the Law of Cool and the Law of Unintended Consequences collide, that I invoke the Law of Wrath from Above. Misuse the boon of a great power and it gets taken away, until you've learnt your lesson. You don't want to tee off Stormbringer, Eater of Souls.




True.  What will your devil/fey noble/far-realm outsider think of you using their gift to you as a mere _tool_?


----------



## Ryujin (Nov 3, 2010)

bargle0 said:


> True.  What will your devil/fey noble/far-realm outsider think of you using their gift to you as a mere _tool_?




I seem to remember Stormbringer going into a sulk, on more than one occasion


----------

