Pact of the Blade, is there any mechanical reason that you can’t summon two weapons or ranged weapons?

Comment The Pact of the Blade Warlock feature seems to imply you can form any melee weapon you want, until you make a pact with a specific weapon, at which time you can only summon that weapon with the pact. Is that correct? Also, is there any mechanical reason that you can’t summon two weapons (for TWF) or ranged weapons? Wondering if this pact is limited for flavor reasons or mechanical ones. Thanks!That’s a correct reading of the pact.
I’d allow two weapons or a ranged weapon – it’s not a big balancing factor.from discussion AMA: Mike Mearls, Co-Designer of D&D 5, Head of D&D R&D.

2 thoughts on “Pact of the Blade, is there any mechanical reason that you can’t summon two weapons or ranged weapons?

  1. Axel says:

    I would actually say given the existence of the Eldritch Smite Invocation there is a very real balance reason not to allow Ranged weapons with Pact of the Blade now. If Paladins can’t ranged smite neither should Warlocks.

    • D. Walker says:

      @Axel

      Except Mearls has stated that he allows Paladins to smite with ranged at his own table, stating he sees no balance issues there either, so… I mean… really there’s no reason to disallow either.

      That said, personally, his answers frustrate me to no end.

      “I’d allow it”? No! No, you wouldn’t! Because if that were true, you would have ALREADY allowed it when you wrote the rules! But you didn’t! So clearly you would NOT allow it! Because you already DIDN’T allow it!

      It’s just baffling. Why would you create a rule with restrictions on how something can be used if you don’t think those restrictions are necessary from a game balance point of view? The sole and utter point of writing mechanical rules for your roleplaying system is to create game balance!

      That would be like creating the Fighter class as lacking magic, and then saying you’d allow Fighters to have free access to Spellcasting if you really want it.

      If it actually isn’t unbalanced for a Fighter to have spellcasting in the first place, then why would you write them as not being able to use magic in the first place?

      It just doesn’t make a lick of sense, and it makes it feel like the rules aren’t fully thought out and never get proper consideration of their full implications.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.