Warlock Pacts

[Aaron Patridge]

I haven't read every bit of feedback from the devs, so I'm hoping one (or more) of you have and can answer this question:

Can warlocks choose the otherworldly being with which they create a pact? I'm not into the traditional pact with a demon because it seems to lock my character into being foolish and power-hungry or to be enduring a crisis that necessitates a foolish action. Also, to be honest, I am bored by demons. They're almost always just innately evil in a way that isn't believable even in a fictional entity (like the Christian's devil though their myth at least has him cast out as a jealous head angel before he becomes just a silly bad-because-he's-bad character) or interesting and they're usually drawn to be grotesque but don't manage it because their weird bodies are built in a way that should make them shambling, slow, clumsy, and prone to infection due to openly bleeding or exposed tissue. They're alien beings from a different plane of existence, but then I want the rules of that plane to make sense for the beings in it and I want the rules of our plane of existence to still hold sway while we're in it. . . so IMHO demons suck.

However, getting to make a pact with an otherworldly fae or playing a character who makes a pact with an old god who feeds on his insanity (thus making him sane) in exchange for power (a real Tom Sawyer's white-washed fence bargain) would be great. I could go on and on and I'm not that picky, but I'd love for there to be some other option than a demon and hopefully one that is a lot different like the fae.

[Hobocop]

In the screenshots of the most recent community update, Great Old One is listed as one of the patrons.

Don't know about the fey patron yet, though.

[Anthr]

You also cannot expect everything to be in EA from the get-go, so we don't know yet. Also you can expect many mods later if someones favorite thing from D&D isn't there, which lets be honest that's pretty much a lot... So we shall see.

[Vel'Rathis]

Hoping Hexblade makes it in for main launch!

[⇧⇨⇩⇩⇩]

Originally posted by Vel'Rathis:

Hoping Hexblade makes it in for main launch!

Id wager on no since it isnt a phb subclass.

[lefty1117]

Yeah i was hoping for hexblade too, it's what im playing right now on tabletop

[Razorblade]

Great Old One and Fiend are the two pacts available during EA.

[Rance-sama]

Originally posted by Razorblade:

Great Old One and Fiend are the two pacts available during EA.

No Archfey waifu 😭

[Aaron Patridge]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

As for your interpretation of them from Christian mythology, you're confusing Demons and Devils for being the same thing. Don't worry, this is a very common mistake among new D&D player.

Lol. I love it when someone makes a condescending statement like "among new D&D players" while also constructing a strawman argument (I didn't "confuse demons and devils as being the same thing", I compared how they are both written to be fundamentally evil as part of their nature. That's like talking about how apples and oranges are both sweet because they share the common trait of being sweet; not saying they are the same thing).

Both Demons and Devils are inherently evil beings,

Exactly the point I made and the **only** point I made. In fact, you go on at length about how creatures on chaotic evil planes of existence are innately evil. . . which is again, the only point I made, so it was like reading a 2000 word essay in support of a very minor point in my post - but weirdly written as if the writer disagrees with me despite paragraph after paragraph supporting my position.

What I think you might disagree with is my opinion that creatures who are innately evil are boring and that they strain credulity. Personally, I like my villains to be relatable to the human condition. I like them to struggle with their evil acts in a variety of different ways based on the character. A young evil character might be seeking vengeance at any price due to being foolish. An old mercenary may have grown callously evil after years of moving from one war campaign to another and having given up on herself ever being worthy of a good life. A sorcerer might choose to monstrously torture and kill a loved one to gain the power necessary to save an entire town. A prideful man might be consumed by anger and regret to the point that he takes to drink and becomes an abusive fiend to everyone in his life. Evil rarely is embraced for a life time. For most, it is one or even a few bad choices that haunt the lives of the people who commit them.

Having said that, I get that in action/adventure writing, it is a lot easier to write enemies who are innately evil and hideous. The protagonist (or the players in games) can kill them with little consequence. . . and I'm fine with that. What I don't want to do though is have to think of my character as being foolish enough to make a deal with one of them. An otherworldly option that isn't evil would give a lot of room for character variation.

[Bilbo's Bath & Shire Gel]

Originally posted by bean:

Having said that, I get that in action/adventure writing, it is a lot easier to write enemies who are innately evil and hideous. The protagonist (or the players in games) can kill them with little consequence. . . and I'm fine with that. What I don't want to do though is have to think of my character as being foolish enough to make a deal with one of them. An otherworldly option that isn't evil would give a lot of room for character variation.

I mean, that might be the case for the Warlock you intend to make, sure.
As a character, he might not be that foolish.
Others like him may have a different situation in life that makes power from any source, evil or not, sound pretty tempting.
But it sounds like your particular Warlock wouldn't do that.
In which case, you probably won't make him in BG3 until full-release, as the only patrons available until then will be The Fiend and The Great Old One.

[RJM]

Warlocks can have a "patron" but be completely unaware of where their powers are drawn from. Likewise the patron can be completely unaware of the Warlock. It's not the sort of relationship where the one has to sign a contract in blood to gain access to power from the other (at least, it doesn't have to be that way unless you want it to).

[Hades]

Originally posted by Bilbo's Bath & Shire Gel:

Originally posted by bean:

Having said that, I get that in action/adventure writing, it is a lot easier to write enemies who are innately evil and hideous. The protagonist (or the players in games) can kill them with little consequence. . . and I'm fine with that. What I don't want to do though is have to think of my character as being foolish enough to make a deal with one of them. An otherworldly option that isn't evil would give a lot of room for character variation.

I mean, that might be the case for the Warlock you intend to make, sure.
As a character, he might not be that foolish.
Others like him may have a different situation in life that makes power from any source, evil or not, sound pretty tempting.
But it sounds like your particular Warlock wouldn't do that.
In which case, you probably won't make him in BG3 until full-release, as the only patrons available until then will be The Fiend and The Great Old One.

The Great Old One is not evil as he is alien to the ways of the inner plains / indifferent / mad so he may be an option ?

[Boink]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Just because you make a pact with a fiend does not automatically incline you towards committing acts of evil. From what I've read about Warlocks, you can very much receive your powers from an evil patron, while using those powers to fight against other threats of similar evil.

This has more to do with Hasbro & WotC milking the waifu Tiefling Warlock power-gamers than any sane in-game Lore or methodology.

Sorry: you make a pact with an Outsider LE or CE? Prepare for alignment change by the time you hit level 10, you maxed charisma not wisdom.

WotC has even noticed this and is trying out various Neutral ones that don't melt game balance like Hexblades: http://dnd5e.wikidot.com/warlock:genie

~

Practically speaking, no doubt you'll be able to make non-evil Warlocks with Fiend pacts, and the "evil" parts of the game will be totally bland and inoffensive and people will make rule 34 tieflings and post them on instagram.

Realistically speaking, ditching the alignment requirements / making them 'flavor' is incredibly bad design.

[Soft Lockpick]

Well, you should generally play patrons to type.

A fiend is likely signing that contract. OR if they do offer up that power without strings you know of they are doing so with the intent of corrupting you somehow.

A fey is also very likely signing that contract from what I know of their lore. Though it's slightly less sinister than the fiends it can be a trap all the same. Just a more pleasant one. It could also come in the form of a boon from a powerful entity though for some past or foreseen future acts.

An Old One is possibly not even going to notice you but have an impact on you all the same. Or maybe the game is using its power without being noticed or distorted yourself. Or maybe it's symbiotic in some way - crazy man has an entity feeding on his madness thus letting him act sanely and granting him access to some power. It could even be given freely for incomprehensible reasons and then randomly stuff goes down you are a pawn in that make no sense to you.

You get the idea.

I think it's best to keep an eye on the type of patron to determine how the pact might be made rather than thinking all possible kinds of pacts are available to all possible patrons.

Ultimately it's up to the DM but a good DM is going to aim at good flavor. If someone wanted to make a Warlock in my game they could pick the class, the entity, but we'd work on the pact together.

How you REACT to the pact, submit or resist, that is up to you the player. But the rules of the pact you don't get to state to the DM and any DM worth anything is not going to make it a cakewalk.

[HELLAFLUSH]

Unrelated to the main thread but just an idea - Make Mammon be your patron for your demonic pact.
Mam's been known to straight up sell powers to people, no strings attached, just pay up.

[Aaron Patridge]

Originally posted by RJM:

Warlocks can have a "patron" but be completely unaware of where their powers are drawn from. Likewise the patron can be completely unaware of the Warlock. It's not the sort of relationship where the one has to sign a contract in blood to gain access to power from the other (at least, it doesn't have to be that way unless you want it to).

Good point. I can think of other plot devices to allow you to play a warlock that has a pact with an evil being without necessitating that the warlock be evil in addition to that too. So I can either use one of these in my mind canon or play a different class. Also, it looks like they're offering some kind of old god as an option as someone pointed out early in the thread - which is great because I can avoid the whole problem.

However, I still just find demons boring and for the reasons I've already given. That's subjective and I don't expect other people to dislike them. I'm the same way about dinosaurs (though I enjoy fantasy dragons - especially smart ones). Pretty much every other popular enemy group is great for me, but I am so bored by demons and especially bored by pacts with demons. Obviously, YMMV.