Can a Warlock in pact with The Fiend be good?

[Arani]

I don't have experience in playing warlocks. But I wanted to make one for BG3, and a 100% good one besides. But the pact with the Fiend is by far the most appealing option of the three available. Except for the fact that The Fiend is as evil as can get. If it were PnP I could think of any number of reasons and random little stories for how it's possible for a Warlock of all things to be good, even when in pact with The Fiend. But sometimes, lore comes first.

So how is it in practice in PnP? More importantly, how will it be for BG3? Is there some kind of a lore reason for why no matter what you do, The Fiend will always corrupt you, your actions, your friends?

Otherwise I could simply say my character had a different past, a traumatic event, was coerced or forced into the pact to protect someone close to her, with no intentions of actually supporting anything evil. In RP terms this would also work since I plan to take The Dark Urge and only 2 levels of Warlock, rest going on Sorc. So the Warlock skills would sort of become like a previous career choice, while the sorceries would represent a new path forward.

[Foolswalkin]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by Arani:

This is what I would have thought too. But it really does turn out that officially this isn't the case at all. The pact grants you access to power, and that access once given cannot be revoked. So mechanically speaking it's precisely the same as permanently infusing you with magic or knowledge, and now that you have it, it's a part of you. Unless someone literally comes in and through magical means robs you of it (the closest per-rule equivalent I can think of is something like level drain), there is no way to take that power away. All they can do is deal with the consequences, as I said.

Now this is roleplaying we're talking about, so official rules be damned every single time the players and/or the DM make a good case for it. House rules is where it's at. But officially it says what it says.

Well, the Pact of the Tome says that if your grimoire is stolen or destroyed, you can commune with your patron to have them give you a replacement.

Obviously, that's going to be quite difficult to do, if your patron is dead, or has decided to revoke the contract. And respecing into a different pact boon isn't going to make any sense, as you would need a patron to grant you the boon in the first place.

Unless tome replacement or whatever is also part of the original pact. In the real world, you don’t have to like someone in order to have an ongoing legal obligation to them.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by Foolswalkin:

Unless tome replacement or whatever is also part of the original pact. In the real world, you don’t have to like someone in order to have an ongoing legal obligation to them.

I'm talking about in situations where the patron is dead, or the pact is nullified due to a breach in contract.

Your patron can't replace your book, if they aren't alive to do so. And if the pact has been nullified, then they are under no legal obligations to replace lost or stolen property.

[Rivazar]

I am afraid warlock can be disappointing if they didn’t develop any contact and dialogues with your contractor

[CloudKira]

For you PCs soul and afterlife definitely not.

But from a gameplay and roleplay perspective its pretty good. Especially if you make the pact with a hot demoness. ^^

Just don't do it at home IRL.

[Arani]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by Foolswalkin:

Unless tome replacement or whatever is also part of the original pact. In the real world, you don’t have to like someone in order to have an ongoing legal obligation to them.

I'm talking about in situations where the patron is dead, or the pact is nullified due to a breach in contract.

Your patron can't replace your book, if they aren't alive to do so. And if the pact has been nullified, then they are under no legal obligations to replace lost or stolen property.

You're jumping through so many ifs and buts here that we're long past the point of the basic core rule experience.

Like was already said, eventually it comes down to the roleplaying and story. So yeah, sure, anything at all can happen. If you want to go down this route, a Paladin or a Cleric can also lose their powers if their deity gets killed, is distracted by some divine cause, or is demoted by Ao. A Bard can lose most of their abilities if something that cannot be fixed by magical means steals their voice. A Wizard can lose their magic if some cataclysmic otherwordly event destroys the weave, or just places some weird geas or curse on them. But none of those hardly have anything to do with your typical campaign.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by Arani:

You're jumping through so many ifs and buts here that we're long past the point of the basic core rule experience.

So many? I stated precisely 2 of them.

1 - If the patron is killed; which is entirely possible as warlock patrons are usually not true deities. In fact, Cambions are only a CR 5 in the monster manual.

2 - If one or both parties have breached the terms of their contract, thus rendering it void.

Both of these are entirely possible situations that can occur. Especially in the case of some warlocks realizing how badly they screwed up, and attempting to free themselves of the pact's obligations. Such as with what Wyll is currently attempting to do.

[ihatevnecks]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by Arani:

You're jumping through so many ifs and buts here that we're long past the point of the basic core rule experience.

So many? I stated precisely 2 of them.

1 - If the patron is killed; which is entirely possible as warlock patrons are usually not true deities. In fact, Cambions are only a CR 5 in the monster manual.

2 - If one or both parties have breached the terms of their contract, thus rendering it void.

Both of these are entirely possible situations that can occur. Especially in the case of some warlocks realizing how badly they screwed up, and attempting to free themselves of the pact's obligations. Such as with what Wyll is currently attempting to do.

The point being made is that it's still completely outside the scope of how the warlock's actually written in game. They didn't intentionally create a class who can lose everything on a DM's whim as part of the basic class rules.

If you want to play things that way, then go for it. But then it's on YOU to convince the warlock player that they're supposed to have fun suddenly losing their class benefits because you decided to kill their CR5 unicorn patron off-screen.

Further commentary on this topic from Mike Mearls, short video worth a watch.
https://youtu.be/iiS5mkIff_8

[Zangetsu]

Fiend warlocks have a powerful nova in hex and scorching ray starting at lvl 3. At lvl 5 they get access to fireball. I think you can cast 2 leveled spells in BG3 as a bonus and an action, you cant in ttrpgs. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Lvl 1 you get temp HP per kill which is nice, and lvl 6 you get a d10 helper on a skill check per short rest. Fiend warlock is one of the better warlock subclasses. It doesnt hold a candle to hexblade but thats not in the game.

[MeatGolem]

OG Paladin had that problem all the time. Now they just get replacements.

[MrDammit]

IMO making a deal like that with a fiend is evil. No gray area there. Only way it flies is if he's unaware, forced or changed his mind after the fact. And even then he's a cursed, walking tragedy. I would be highly suspicious of ANY warlock to be honest but it seems a good warlock would be upfront and deal with angels and good beings.
Will be interesting to see his story play out..
Edit: The party is formed out of necessity and not from any camaraderie or friendship. I don't see these characters getting along for any other reason then survival..

[[Heretic]Rivga]

Originally posted by MrDammit:

IMO making a deal like that with a fiend is evil. No gray area there. Only way it flies is if he's unaware, forced or changed his mind after the fact. And even then he's a cursed, walking tragedy. I would be highly suspicious of ANY warlock to be honest but it seems a good warlock would be upfront and deal with angels and good beings.
Will be interesting to see his story play out..
Edit: The party is formed out of necessity and not from any camaraderie or friendship. I don't see these characters getting along for any other reason then survival..

There is a ton of literature, films etc whre a good person for the right reasons have made a deal.
And these make the best stories, a bad person doing bad thing - meh boring but a good person going in that direction huge scope for an interesting story.

Themes like the character was tricked, or in order to protect someone they love, like a child they took on a deal with a fiend. I mean what parent would not sacrifice themselves for their child?
You may not have known that the person you had a deal with was a fiend.

There is a series of books with a Character called Elric, born as the Emperor of a evil empire who makes deals with Chaos gods as a birth right and then bonds with a evil sword through necessity rather than let his emperor fall into the hands of someone who would abuse the power.
He is fundamentally a good person but he was born into evil and is trying to escape. Much more interesting than only Baddies makes deals with fiends.

[Foolswalkin]

Originally posted by HereticRivga:

There is a series of books with a Character called Elric, born as the Emperor of a evil empire who makes deals with Chaos gods as a birth right and then bonds with a evil sword through necessity rather than let his emperor fall into the hands of someone who would abuse the power.
He is fundamentally a good person but he was born into evil and is trying to escape. Much more interesting than only Baddies makes deals with fiends.

Pretty sure that one has a happy ending, yeah?

[[Heretic]Rivga]

Originally posted by Foolswalkin:

Originally posted by HereticRivga:

There is a series of books with a Character called Elric, born as the Emperor of a evil empire who makes deals with Chaos gods as a birth right and then bonds with a evil sword through necessity rather than let his emperor fall into the hands of someone who would abuse the power.
He is fundamentally a good person but he was born into evil and is trying to escape. Much more interesting than only Baddies makes deals with fiends.

Pretty sure that one has a happy ending, yeah?

Well it does for games workshop and the Witcher author who basically lifted half the ideas from this series of books to make huge amounts of money.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by ihatevnecks:

The point being made is that it's still completely outside the scope of how the warlock's actually written in game. They didn't intentionally create a class who can lose everything on a DM's whim as part of the basic class rules.

If you want to play things that way, then go for it. But then it's on YOU to convince the warlock player that they're supposed to have fun suddenly losing their class benefits because you decided to kill their CR5 unicorn patron off-screen.

Further commentary on this topic from Mike Mearls, short video worth a watch.
https://youtu.be/iiS5mkIff_8

I never implied they get killed off screen, and any DM who pulled a stunt like that would be an a-hole for it. But yes, I would support there being consequences for a warlock who either loses or betrays their patron.

It sounds like the rules as written are meant to discourage role playing, rather than encouraging it.

-----------

"oh, you received your powers from a devil. Now these physical manifestations of iron fisted tyranny and evil are going to let you go on a righteous crusade against the forces of darkness and turn the land into a thriving paradise for all." -

that's NOT going to happen, because conning mortals into selling their souls is a lot easier when they feel like their situation can't get any worse.

[ihatevnecks]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

I never implied they get killed of screen, and any DM who pulled a stunt like that would be an a-hole for it. But yes, I would support there being consequences for a warlock who either loses or betrays their patron.

It sounds like the rules as written are meant to discourage role playing, rather than encouraging it.

-----------

"oh, you received your powers from a devil. Now these physical manifestations of iron fisted tyranny and evil are going to let you go on a righteous crusade against the forces of darkness and turn the land into a thriving paradise for all." -

that's NOT going to happen, because conning mortals into selling their souls is a lot easier when they feel like their situation can't get any worse.

There's zero requirement for any selling of the soul in this bargain.

It's a pact made, that has already been fulfilled, over something as simple as doing a single favor for the fiend. In exchange they provide some power (or more specifically: they UNLOCK that power, it's once again why you're a CHA-caster), and then move on with their lives. You're not their personal agent, and even if you work against them, they're not going to care because you're going to die in a handful of years anyway.

In the context of Forgotten Realms warlock, maybe you weren't born with magic (like a sorcerer), and you didn't want to work for it via study (a wizard), so you made a deal with an entity of some kind. In exchange for them opening up your access to the Weave, you did a favor for them. There are none takebacks on that; the power was 'granted,' the favor made, that's it.

You can decide to play it however you want at your table. The rules are there to support, among other things, a baseline of fair play - and having one class that can just suddenly lose access to everything because of circumstances entirely outside their control tends to make for bad play. That's why it's WotC's responsibility to write rules, not write roleplay.