Pact of the Blade

[Galithar]

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.

So martials below level 5 don't exist? Or they can't dual wield? Does it actually makes logical (not game balance) sense to you that you can't make a bonus action attack in that situation?

[KyleG]

So we have established that
a) Pact of the blade - no original weapon required, can therefore manifest as any weapon from whip to battle axe.
b) Pact of the blade - if you take a magically enhanced sword (lets just say +1, with 2 poison damage) and perform the ritual you can make it vanish but from that point on it must manifest as a sword
c) the improved pact weapon does not apply to (b) as it grants a +1 to a manifested non-magical weapon eg. (a) which can now also include various ranged options.

So if we want weapon versatility you might be better NOT conducting rituals on magically enhanced swords but taking improved pact weapon to make manifest weapon magical at its core. And carry the Magically enhanced weapon as another weapon option. (or even dare i say using it for two weapon fighting (bonus action not the fighting style).

[JakOfAllTirades]

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

It's always been my understanding that "Rules As Intended" should serve to clarify "Rules As Written" when necessary, but Crawford seems to think that RAI should flatly contradict RAW whenever he's in the mood to crap on someone's fun.

[Galithar]

It's always been my understanding that "Rules As Intended" should serve to clarify "Rules As Written" when necessary, but Crawford seems to think that RAI should flatly contradict RAW whenever he's in the mood to crap on someone's fun.

It should, but unfortunately it often ends up being what Crawford thought that day. Which I believe is the reason his tweets are no longer considered official WotC rulings. But that's a whole nother bag o' worms we shouldn't get into, especially not here derailing a thread :P

[Bloodcloud]

Wait, is crawford saying having, say, a magic longsword pact weapon does not grant profiency in other longsword or that you don’t even have profiency in that magic longsword that is your pact weapon? Because former I agree, second one is the most ridiculous Sage advice opinion i have ever read. This is beyond comprehension and make non hexblade blade boon an utter waste.

[Galithar]

Wait, is crawford saying having, say, a magic longsword pact weapon does not grant profiency in other longsword or that you don’t even have profiency in that magic longsword that is your pact weapon? Because former I agree, second one is the most ridiculous Sage advice opinion i have ever read. This is beyond comprehension and make non hexblade blade boon an utter waste.

The second is what he was saying. That if you make a physical magic weapon into your pact weapon you won't have proficiency with it, but if you summoned a same type weapon you would.

[bid]

if you didn't have extra attack.

So martials below level 5 don't exist?

I'm sorry but I'm not interested in nitpicking whinings.

Lay off the coffee please.

[Tanarii]

So martials below level 5 don't exist? Or they can't dual wield? Does it actually makes logical (not game balance) sense to you that you can't make a bonus action attack in that situation?

Martials below level 5 can "dual wield". They just attack with each weapon every other round if they aren't both light weapons.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Wait, is crawford saying having, say, a magic longsword pact weapon does not grant profiency in other longsword or that you don’t even have profiency in that magic longsword that is your pact weapon? Because former I agree, second one is the most ridiculous Sage advice opinion i have ever read. This is beyond comprehension and make non hexblade blade boon an utter waste.

The second is what he was saying. That if you make a physical magic weapon into your pact weapon you won't have proficiency with it, but if you summoned a same type weapon you would.

This ruling is notably absent from the latest version of the PHB errata, so I consider it to be "unofficial advice" only. I also consider it to be flat wrong.

[Tanarii]

"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.

This ruling is notably absent from the latest version of the PHB errata, so I consider it to be "unofficial advice" only. I also consider it to be flat wrong.

Yeah ...not sure how someone can read it as an independent clause. Its pretty clear the free proficiency only applies to weapons created out of nothing, and that magic weapons must be whatever the warlock is proficient with themself.

[NaughtyTiger]

Yeah ...not sure how someone can read it as an independent clause. Its pretty clear the free proficiency only applies to weapons created out of nothing, and that magic weapons must be whatever the warlock is proficient with themself.

Not clear at all.

The preceeding paragraph says: summon a pact weapon, grants proficiency, you can change each time.
The magic weapon becoming pact weapon paragraph: specifies that you can't change the weapon when you summon it.

It specifically negates one ability from the general pact weapon feature. It does not mention wiping out the proficiency ability.

Tanarii, does the magic weapon pact weapon disappear if you move 5ft from it like the normal pact weapon?

[Tanarii]

Tanarii, does the magic weapon pact weapon disappear if you move 5ft from it like the normal pact weapon?

Yes. Because that sentence says "your pact weapon", not "it". The latter refers to the weapon that takes any form per the prior sentence. The former refers to the pact weapon in general.

Otoh thanks for helping me see where the ambiguity comes from. I can see someone thinking "it" refers to "the pact weapon" in general, not the thing that takes any form per the previous sentence.

[Chronos]

If you find a +1 trident or something, you can make that your pact weapon.

You can dismiss or re-create your pact weapon whenever you want.

When you re-create your pact weapon, you can make it whatever kind of melee weapon you want.

What in the rules (RAW, not RAT) does it say that you can't bond with a +1 trident, dismiss it, and then re-create it as a +1 longsword?

[RSP]

So we have established that
b) Pact of the blade - if you take a magically enhanced sword (lets just say +1, with 2 poison damage) and perform the ritual you can make it vanish but from that point on it must manifest as a sword
c) the improved pact weapon does not apply to (b) as it grants a +1 to a manifested non-magical weapon eg. (a) which can now also include various ranged options.

IPW doesnt just grant a +1 to non-magic weapons. If you have a magic weapon without a +1, say like Sword of Wounding, it would gain the +1. The wording:

“In addition, the weapon gains a +1 bonus to its attack and damage rolls, unless it is a magic weapon that already has a bonus to those rolls.”

So the only excluded weapons are magic weapons that already have a +1 or better.

[Galithar]

If you find a +1 trident or something, you can make that your pact weapon.

You can dismiss or re-create your pact weapon whenever you want.

When you re-create your pact weapon, you can make it whatever kind of melee weapon you want.

What in the rules (RAW, not RAT) does it say that you can't bond with a +1 trident, dismiss it, and then re-create it as a +1 longsword?

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.

Emphasis mine.
This part "it appears whenever you create your pact weapon" means that EVERY time you create your pact weapon this weapon appears. It doesn't say that when you create your pact weapon you may choose to make this weapon appear. It just appears every time.

[Tanarii]

What in the rules (RAW, not RAT) does it say that you can't bond with a +1 trident, dismiss it, and then re-create it as a +1 longsword?

"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."

"It" in this case refers to the magic weapon you shunted into an extra dimensional space. You get the specific magica weapon back, that includes the form of the weapon.

[RSP]

Emphasis mine.
This part "it appears whenever you create your pact weapon" means that EVERY time you create your pact weapon this weapon appears. It doesn't say that when you create your pact weapon you may choose to make this weapon appear. It just appears every time.

The ritual turns the magic weapon into the pact weapon. In doing so, the magic weapon gains the benefits of being the pact weapon. Not some of the benefits, but it becomes the pact weapon.

Is your position that the benefits of the pact weapon don’t apply to the weapon that becomes your pact weapon? That seems to go against the language of “you can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon.” Transform being a very specific word that means “make a thorough or dramatic change in the form, appearance, or character of” (Per Google’s dictionary).

This word being used would very much seem to me that the RAW let’s you change the magic weapon as per the abilities of the pact weapon.

[Galithar]

The ritual turns the magic weapon into the pact weapon. In doing so, the magic weapon gains the benefits of being the pact weapon. Not some of the benefits, but it becomes the pact weapon.

Is your position that the benefits of the pact weapon don’t apply to the weapon that becomes your pact weapon? That seems to go against the language of “you can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon.” Transform being a very specific word that means “make a thorough or dramatic change in the form, appearance, or character of” (Per Google’s dictionary).

This word being used would very much seem to me that the RAW let’s you change the magic weapon as per the abilities of the pact weapon.

I never said anything against that. I actually said exactly that. You make it your pact weapon, preventing yourself from summoning whatever you want because your pact weapon now has a definite form. You MADE the magic weapon your pact weapon. It now appears every time you summon it.

You can't change what that weapon is though. It is still a magic weapon and the description of creating a pact weapon from a magic weapon holds no rider that allowed you to transform that weapon. Otherwise creating a pact weapon from a longbow (without IPW) would mean you have to summon it as a form that is acceptable for a standard pact weapon, which is obviously a misreading if the ability.

[KyleG]

The text is actually rather interesting.
Pact of the Blade
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. You are proficient with it while you wield it. This weapon counts as magical for the purpose of overcoming resistance and immunity to non-magical attacks and damage. Your pact weapon disappears if it is more than 5 feet away from you for 1 minute or more. It also disappears if you use this feature again, if you dismiss the weapon (no action required), or if you die.
You can transform one magic weapon into your pact weaponby 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 extra-dimensional space, and it appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter. You can't affect an artifact or a sentient weapon in this way. The weapon ceases being your pact weapon if you die, if you perform the 1-hour ritual on a different weapon, or if you use a 1-hour ritual to break your bond to it. The weapon appears at your feet if it is in the extra-dimensional space when the bond breaks.
Written this way it seems you are transforming the magical weapon INTO your pact weapon which itself you can choose the form of (first paragraph). If it had been written "You can transform your pact weapon into the magic weapon" then i would say that the pact weapon can therefore only be the shape of the magical weapon.

[Chronos]

Yeah, that specific weapon is your pact weapon. Whenever you create your pact weapon, that's the one that you get, so if that specific weapon had a +1, or did extra fire damage, or whatever, you still get the +1 or the extra fire damage. In addition, whenever you create your pact weapon, you can change what kind of weapon it is, so you're changing the kind of weapon of that specific magic weapon that is your pact weapon. So it was a trident before, and now it's the same weapon, but now that weapon is a longsword. How did that happen? Magic, obviously.

[RSP]

You can't change what that weapon is though. It is still a magic weapon and the description of creating a pact weapon from a magic weapon holds no rider that allowed you to transform that weapon.

The fact that it transforms into the pact weapon is what allows it.

In your opinion does the word “transform” mean its static and doesn’t change? Or does it transforming mean what was a magic weapon is now changed or altered in some significant way?

Per the definition of transform, it has to be the latter.

So what was a +1 longsword transforms into your pact weapon. What benefits does a pact weapon have? We know that from the first paragraph of the ability’s description.

[NaughtyTiger]

In your opinion does the word “transform” mean its static and doesn’t change? Or does it transforming mean what was a magic weapon is now changed or altered in some significant way?

Per the definition of transform, it has to be the latter.

it doesn't HAVE to be the latter, that requires me at accept that becoming a pact weapon (gaining summoning, auto-proficiency) isn't enough of a change.

given "it appears when you create your pact weapon thereafter", the Oathbow appears when i create my pact weapon thereafter. this is a specific that overrules the general "pact weapon is whatever you want".

I summon my Oathbow as a club sounds odd. moreover, does it use longbow base damage (1d8) or club base damage (1d4)?

[Keravath]

The start of the pact weapon rule says that you create it and that is disappears when it is more than 5’ From you for more than a minute when you dismiss it.

When you perform the ritual binding a specific weapon as your pact weapon it is NOT created and dismissed .. instead you shunt it to an extra dimensional space. In addition, if you die the bound weapon appears beside you while the created weapon does not.

All of the additional descriptions of extra dimensional spaces would not be required if the bound pact weapon could be created in whatever firm the warlock wanted.

The question then becomes what features of being a pact weapon extend to a bound weapon. It can’t be created and dismissed, it can only be stored in an extra dimensional space. This would indicate that the form would not change. However, other than that, since the bound weapon is your pact weapon then you should be considered proficient with that specific weapon (not the class of weapons).

Anyway, that’s how I would read it but given the ways folks like to split sentences up and assign the meaning of pronouns, there are likely other interpretations.

[RSP]

it doesn't HAVE to be the latter, that requires me at accept that becoming a pact weapon (gaining summoning, auto-proficiency) isn't enough of a change.

given "it appears when you create your pact weapon thereafter", the Oathbow appears when i create my pact weapon thereafter. this is a specific that overrules the general "pact weapon is whatever you want".

I summon my Oathbow as a club sounds odd. moreover, does it use longbow base damage (1d8) or club base damage (1d4)?

So then what is transforming during the ritual if nothing about the Oathbow actual changes?

[NaughtyTiger]

So then what is transforming during the ritual if nothing about the Oathbow actual changes?

as i said, gains summoning, gains auto-proficiency, gains 'can't be stolen', gains +1 if you have IPW.

not saying your interpretation is wrong, and I am curious about it in practice. i will allow this for a while and see how folks feel about it.

[RSP]

as i said, gains summoning, gains auto-proficiency, gains 'can't be stolen', gains +1 if you have IPW.

not saying your interpretation is wrong, and I am curious about it in practice. i will allow this for a while and see how folks feel about it.

So what about the sword is transforming? It being able to be summoned is an ability of the Warlock, not the sword. The proficiency is also an ability of the Warlock.

The RAW, however, states the weapon transforms into the pact weapon. How is the weapon transforming if not physically changing?

[JackPhoenix]

So what about the sword is transforming? It being able to be summoned is an ability of the Warlock, not the sword. The proficiency is also an ability of the Warlock.

If it's the warlock's ability, why isn't he proficient with any other weapon of the same type and why can't he summon any other weapon?

The RAW, however, states the weapon transforms into the pact weapon. How is the weapon transforming if not physically changing?

It magically changes from normal magical weapon into pact weapon. Nobody said the transformation is physical.

[KyleG]

So what about the sword is transforming? It being able to be summoned is an ability of the Warlock, not the sword. The proficiency is also an ability of the Warlock.

The RAW, however, states the weapon transforms into the pact weapon. How is the weapon transforming if not physically changing?

I want the literal raw to be true BUT, I can see the argument that the weapon is transforming by becoming this summonable thing, its nature is changing.
That being said Im now thinking that the weapon changes into the pact weapon but with its properties. So an oathbows text states ranged attack so wouldn't apply if you used the pact weapon as a sword. But summon it as a bow and its good to go.

On the other hand the sun blades text doesn't preclude ranged weapons so its +2 attack and damage rolls could be applied to the pact weapon summoned as a crossbow. I wouldn't think its high properties would apply.

How does one submit such questions to sage advice?

[NaughtyTiger]

So what about the sword is transforming? It being able to be summoned is an ability of the Warlock, not the sword. The proficiency is also an ability of the Warlock.

The RAW, however, states the weapon transforms into the pact weapon. How is the weapon transforming if not physically changing?

If a fighter has a long sword of flame, can he hide it in a pocket dimension and resummon it? no, not an ability of a fighter.
If a blade pact warlock picks up a long sword of flame, can she hide it in a pocket dimension and resummon it? no, not an ability of a warlock

can a blade pact warlock summon a short sword out of thin air? yes, it is an ability of a warlock
can a blade pact warlock summon a short sword of wounding out of thin air? no, not an ability of a warlock.
can a blade pact warlock bond with a spear of wounding after a 1 hour ritual, then summon it from a pocket dimension? yes, it is an ability of a warlock

is a blade pact warlock proficient with the whip it summoned out of thin air? yes, it is an ability of a warlock
is a blade pact warlock proficient with the whip of warning it just stole from an enemy? no, not an ability of a warlock.
is a blade pact warlock proficient with a whip of warning after a 1 hour ritual? yes, it is an ability of a warlock

we agree that a warlock is neither automatically proficient with any magic weapon nor can she summon any magic weapon from a pocket dimension (even if she possesses that weapon).
after it is transformed into her pact weapon, the warlock do can those 2 things.

now where we disagree:
can a blade pact warlock bond with a spear of wounding after a 1 hour ritual, then summon it as a dagger of wounding?
I contend, no, because the bonded magic weapon appears when "you create your pact weapon thereafter"

your turn, how is adding the ability to summon and be proficient with a specific magic weapon is NOT a transformation?
how is a dagger with the properties of an Oathbow is still an Oathbow?

[RSP]

If it's the warlock's ability, why isn't he proficient with any other weapon of the same type and why can't he summon any other weapon?

It is the ability of the Warlock, hence why they have the abilities without the weapon, and regardless of which weapon they bond.

But, sure, if you want to play that game and go with “it’s the sword’s ability”, well then how come the sword can’t summon or dismiss on its own? How come other characters don’t gain proficiency when they hold it?

Because it’s the ability of the Warlock, as shown in the PHB, under the class “Warlock;” as opposed to under the class “Weapon.”

It magically changes from normal magical weapon into pact weapon. Nobody said the transformation is physical.

So what is transforming about the weapon? Is it an emotional transformation? And as we know it transformed into the pact weapon, why doesn’t it get the abilities of being a pact weapon?