Pact of the Blade

[KyleG]

Can someone please clarify something:
1. I can make any weapon i want with my pact of the blade from a whip to a great axe, and it can differ each time i summon it?
2. Assuming the above if i get a longsword +2 and perform the ritual, do i thereafter have to summon a longsword to get the +2 (or other magical effects?) the next time i summon?

3.And given that dismissing your weapon doesn't require an action is there any mechanical reason i shouldn't ask my dm to have the summoning of the weapon also not take an action?

[Galithar]

Can someone please clarify something:
1. I can make any weapon i want with my pact of the blade from a whip to a great axe, and it can differ each time i summon it?
2. Assuming the above if i get a longsword +1 and perform the ritual, do i thereafter have to summon a longsword to get the +1 (or other magical effects?) the next time i summon?

And given that dismissing your weapon doesn't require an action is there any mechanical reason i shouldn't ask my dm to have the summoning of the weapon also not take an action?

If you preform the ritual on an actual item instead of summoning one I don't believe it can be dismissed our changed. That weapons becomes your pact Weapon and must be carried around like the physical Weapon it is. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

As for summoning as a free action I would present your DM with the Eldritch Knights weapon bond to ask for it to be a bonus action instead to balance it with a similar class feature if you find the action to restricting. I personally have waived it as a free action for my hexblade though and it breaks nothing.

[Misterwhisper]

Can someone please clarify something:
1. I can make any weapon i want with my pact of the blade from a whip to a great axe, and it can differ each time i summon it?
2. Assuming the above if i get a longsword +1 and perform the ritual, do i thereafter have to summon a longsword to get the +1 (or other magical effects?) the next time i summon?

And given that dismissing your weapon doesn't require an action is there any mechanical reason i shouldn't ask my dm to have the summoning of the weapon also not take an action?

1. You can make your summoned weapon any melee weapon. So no crossbow or anything without other invocations.

2. Yes. If you bond with a longsword +1 you may summon that sword as your pact weapon and it will keep the plus 1, however any other weapon you form is just magical not a plus 1.

Asking the dm to let you summon the weapon for less than an action is a straight power boost.

However there is no reason you can’t just summon it and keep it on you like a normal weapon. Just carry it when you can and summon it if you have to.

[bid]

2. Assuming the above if i get a longsword +1 and perform the ritual, do i thereafter have to summon a longsword to get the +1 (or other magical effects?) the next time i summon?

"You can then dismiss the weapon, shunting it into an extradimensional space, and it appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter."

I don't think you have a choice anymore.

[Galithar]

"You can then dismiss the weapon, shunting it into an extradimensional space, and it appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter."

I don't think you have a choice anymore.

Ah that's the line I was forgetting. So you don't have to carry it around like I mistakenly thought, but you're stuck with it from then on.

[KyleG]

So it becomes a choice of magical effect or weapon versatility at that point...bummer.

Asking the dm to let you summon the weapon for less than an action is a straight power boost.
.

What is the power boost? Isnt it just the flavour of summoning vs drawing?

[Galithar]

So it becomes a choice of magical effect or weapon versatility at that point...bummer.



What is the power boost? Isnt it just the flavour of summoning vs drawing?

Which you can mitigate by just saying you have it summoned at all times and just draw it as normal. Hence why I let my Warlock player do it for free. It's not a power boost. If anything it removed the Nerf of having to use an action to get your weapon ready when everyone else draws it as a free action.

[Tanarii]

And given that dismissing your weapon doesn't require an action is there any mechanical reason i shouldn't ask my dm to have the summoning of the weapon also not take an action?

Yeah, the mechanical reason is it says it takes an action. That's the limitation for the benefit you gain: a weapon that is always available, but doesn't even have to exist somewhere else until you summon it (unlike the EK's weapon).

[Vogie]

In the Godsfall real play podcast, the Warlock can summon the weapon and attack in the same action. I believe their DM justified that since they were creating it in their hand, they could make an attack motion as they're summoning it, so the sword or whatever would appear potentially hitting the target, or the whip would appear already wrapped around something.

As a DM myself, I'd also allow summoning & attack to be a single action (not allowing an extra attack if the weapon was not summoned at the beginning of the turn).

[MThurston]

You will need improved Pact Weapon to make anything you want.

Otherwise it's a none ranged weapon.

[JackPhoenix]

You will need improved Pact Weapon to make anything you want.

Otherwise it's a none ranged weapon.

And it's still not hand crossbow, dart or net even with IPW.

You can designate a magical ranged weapon even without the feat, though.

[Crgaston]

So it becomes a choice of magical effect or weapon versatility at that point...bummer.



What is the power boost? Isnt it just the flavour of summoning vs drawing?

The Improved Pact Weapon invocation gives any weapon you summon a +1 to hit and damage. So you can keep your versatility and still get the advantages of having a magic weapon, at least until the more interesting options start dropping.

[Mandragola]

Which you can mitigate by just saying you have it summoned at all times and just draw it as normal. Hence why I let my Warlock player do it for free. It's not a power boost. If anything it removed the Nerf of having to use an action to get your weapon ready when everyone else draws it as a free action.

Except that there's no reason a warlock can't have their already-summoned weapon on them in a scabbard like everyone else and draw it as normal.

Letting a warlock create their weapon for free gives them advantages in situations where they've had to go without weapons for some reason. If they can suddenly produce a greatsword and start chopping people up immediately then it's a huge buff.

[Keravath]

1) You can summon your pact weapon in any melee weapon you want. The weapon is considered magical. You have proficiency with it.

2) If you bind a weapon as your pact weapon then it becomes your pact weapon. Whenever you summon your pact weapon you get the one you have bound. The bound weapon can be ANY weapon. It can be melee or ranged. Once it is bound, you are proficient with it.

3) The Impoved Pact Weapon invocation makes your pact weapon a +1. (It is already magical) The weapon can be used as the spell casting focus for your warlock spells. The weapon can also take the form of a long or short bow or a light or heavy crossbow. Note that hand crossbows and slings are still excluded as possible summoned pact weapons since they are not melee and are not covered by the ones listed in improved pact weapon.

4) The pact weapon can be dismissed at any time (whether it is a summoned weapon or a bound weapon). It takes an action for a warlock to summon their pact weapon (whether it is summoned or bound). Most warlocks just walk around with their preferred form of their pact weapon sheathed so it can be drawn like any other weapon. If a DM wishes to change the rules and allow a warlock to summon their pact weapon as a bonus action of free object interaction then that is up to them but the pact weapon rules indicate it should take an action.

[Keravath]

Except that there's no reason a warlock can't have their already-summoned weapon on them in a scabbard like everyone else and draw it as normal.

Letting a warlock create their weapon for free gives them advantages in situations where they've had to go without weapons for some reason. If they can suddenly produce a greatsword and start chopping people up immediately then it's a huge buff.

To be honest, a warlock can likely just summon up the weapon before the combat starts so it isn't really what I would call a "huge" buff. It does let the warlock with the correct invocations decide between melee and ranged at the start of a combat. However, most warlocks also have agonizing blast which is generally a better ranged option than a weapon unless the character has been built around using ranged weapons (e.g. sharpshooter) in which case they will already likely have the bow/crossbow summoned since that is what they want to use anyway.

[JackPhoenix]

Once it is bound, you are proficient with it.

Nope. You aren't getting proficiency with the bound weapon, only with the choose-a-form option.

[Bloodcloud]

Personally, I'd give the med armor and shield proficiency from hexblade into blade pact, and allow you to summon the whole gear with that action. And use cha with the weapon. Hexblade becomes coven pact and keep the curse.

But that is definitely homebrew.

[Kadzar]

To be honest, a warlock can likely just summon up the weapon before the combat starts so it isn't really what I would call a "huge" buff. It does let the warlock with the correct invocations decide between melee and ranged at the start of a combat. However, most warlocks also have agonizing blast which is generally a better ranged option than a weapon unless the character has been built around using ranged weapons (e.g. sharpshooter) in which case they will already likely have the bow/crossbow summoned since that is what they want to use anyway.

I think it would probably be okay to make it so that the warlock only needs an action to change the form of the weapon, and can summon it as either a free action or a bonus actions.

[Bloodcloud]

Nope. You aren't getting proficiency with the bound weapon, only with the choose-a-form option.

False.

"You can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon"

Ergo, the bound weapon is your pact weapon. You are proficient with your pact weapon. Blade pact would be stupendously useless if you didn't get profiency with your pact weapon when you bind a magic weapon.

[KyleG]

Except that there's no reason a warlock can't have their already-summoned weapon on them in a scabbard like everyone else and draw it as normal.

Letting a warlock create their weapon for free gives them advantages in situations where they've had to go without weapons for some reason. If they can suddenly produce a greatsword and start chopping people up immediately then it's a huge buff.

That I hadnt considered. Certainly would be an advantage on those situations.

[JackPhoenix]

False.

"You can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon"

Ergo, the bound weapon is your pact weapon. You are proficient with your pact weapon. Blade pact would be stupendously useless if you didn't get profiency with your pact weapon when you bind a magic weapon.

"You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it. You are proficient with it while you wield it."

If you bond with a magic weapon, you can't choose the form the weapon will take, and you aren't gaining proficiency.

[Arathryth]

"You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it. You are proficient with it while you wield it."

If you bond with a magic weapon, you can't choose the form the weapon will take, and you aren't gaining proficiency.

Those are seperate sentences and not predicated on each other. It clearly states that you are proficient with your pact weapon while wielding it. If you bind a magic weapon, it becomes your pact weapon, and you get the same benefit as creating a generic weapon.

"You can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon by performing a special ritual while you hold the weapon. You perform the ritual over the course of 1 hour, which can be done during a short rest. You can then dismiss the weapon, shunting it into an extradimensional space, and it appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter."

You also omitted the first sentence of the description you quoted above. Presumably to warp the description to fit your opinion, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

"You can use your action to create a pact weapon in your empty hand. You can choose the form that this melee weapon takes each time you create it (see*chapter 5*for weapon options). You are proficient with it while you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage."

[NaughtyTiger]

You also omitted the first sentence of the description you quoted above. Presumably to warp the description to fit your opinion, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

by saying presumably he edited the statement a certain way, you really aren't giving him the benefit of the doubt. and that is unnecessary.


otherwise, i agree with the rest of your interpretation

[Arathryth]

by saying presumably he edited the statement a certain way, you really aren't giving him the benefit of the doubt. and that is unnecessary.


otherwise, i agree with the rest of your interpretation

Maybe poor choice of words on my part. I meant that it CAN be interpreted as being intentionally misleading. But I'll chalk it up to a mis-reading of the text, until proven otherwise.

[bid]

But I'll chalk it up to a mis-reading of the text, until proven otherwise.

Poor wording until you click the sage advice link. Then it becomes crystal clear why the rest was omitted. So yeah, you really jumped the gun here.

EDIT: woah, the site had a brainfart on the quote origin. ><

[Galithar]

Poor wording until you click the sage advice link. Then it becomes crystal clear why the rest was omitted. So yeah, you really jumped the gun here.

EDIT: woah, the site had a brainfart on the quote origin. ><

Sage Advice via Crawford Tweet is useless. Especially since in his tweet he says basically 'yes that's what's written, but I'm telling you what we intended' which means if you want RAW answer then you get proficiency. You are proficient with your pact Weapon while you wield it. Period. That is the written rule of the ability.
What your pact Weapon is at the time is irrelevant. If it's your pact Weapon you are proficient with it while you wield it. Oddly enough if you set it down you're suddenly not proficient anymore :P

[JackPhoenix]

Sage Advice via Crawford Tweet is useless. Especially since in his tweet he says basically 'yes that's what's written, but I'm telling you what we intended' which means if you want RAW answer then you get proficiency. You are proficient with your pact Weapon while you wield it. Period. That is the written rule of the ability.
What your pact Weapon is at the time is irrelevant. If it's your pact Weapon you are proficient with it while you wield it. Oddly enough if you set it down you're suddenly not proficient anymore :P

You know what's weirder? If you have two longswords, you're proficient only with the one that serves as your pact weapon.

[Misterwhisper]

You know what's weirder? If you have two longswords, you're proficient only with the one that serves as your pact weapon.

Still not as odd as the person holding a rapier in one hand and a shot sword in the other stabbing with the rapier and the. Looking at their short sword and just going, “ummm sorry can’t figure out how to stab with this thing when I attack with the other pointy thing.”

Or for years people with a quarterstaff laughing at people with spears going, “No, idiot, THIS is a polearm.”

[JackPhoenix]

Still not as odd as the person holding a rapier in one hand and a shot sword in the other stabbing with the rapier and the. Looking at their short sword and just going, “ummm sorry can’t figure out how to stab with this thing when I attack with the other pointy thing.”

Or for years people with a quarterstaff laughing at people with spears going, “No, idiot, THIS is a polearm.”

It's not that weird... just because they are both used for thrusting doesn't mean short sword is used in the same way rapier is... much shorter reach makes difference, as does the different point of balance and the presence (or absence) of handguard. Now, if you know how to use one type of sword, you should have some general idea how to use most other types of swords, as while there are differences, many things are universal, but that's besides the point.

I still say that QS should've been in the first benefit of PAM but not the other, and vice versa for spear.

[bid]

Still not as odd as the person holding a rapier in one hand and a shot sword in the other stabbing with the rapier and the. Looking at their short sword and just going, “ummm sorry can’t figure out how to stab with this thing when I attack with the other pointy thing.”

Well, you can.
There's no rule that both attacks from attack action have to be from the same hand/weapon. Since you wouldn't ask yourself that if you didn't have extra attack.