Just had a thought, but what if the warlock pacts are similar to 3.5 binder pacts? I just looked at the wording in the warlock DD article and it specifically says, "A class that acquired scary powers by negotiating , pacts with shadowy, infenral, or feral patrons?" The grammar seems a bit off but I'm no expert there anyway. However, I do wonder...
31 Flavors of Warlock
- Thread starter Exen Trik
- Start date
Gloombunny
First Post
The 3.5 warlock fluff was vague but actually concentrated more on inheritance than on pacts. Which was an angle I liked more in some ways, especially since it got expressed mechanically by things like DR/cold iron.Crashy75 said:
Irda Ranger
First Post
Oh, sure. There are only so many opportunities to be "GOOD (TM)", and thinking too hard about the moral consequences of drinking coffee or getting dressed in the morning doesn't help anyone.Wolfwood2 said:
But the big decisions; the one that shape your life and the lives of those around you, should be considered in the light of good and evil. Especially in a world with actual demons and devils that can be summoned. That's why I think it's hard for the (Infernal) Warlock to be 'good'; he's made a career decision (and recommits to it every time he levels up) to do business with the devil. That's one of those "big decisions" that sticks to a man.
Pleased to meet you, Ms. Rand.Wolfwood2 said:
But seriously, I think bargaining is usually neutral because it's easy for one party to take more than he really needs from a bargain, or for the two bargainers to "agree" to abuse a third party not part of the bargain. Bargaining is better than pillage or theft; but it's not inherently good either. It can be abused.
As a simple for instance, consider the following two examples:
1. Warlock: "Mr. Angel, if you pay me 500 gp, I will heal the sick. I don't actually need 500 gp, but that's what I want - and isn't that a small price to pay to care for the ill?"
2. Cleric: "Mr. Angel, if you pay me 500 gp, I will heal the sick. I'd do it for free if I could (because I'm a good person like that), but I need to pay for lab time and feed my family while I'm on this quest. Please support my research, would you?"
I would rate #1 as Neutral, and #2 as Good. Motives matter.
Gloombunny
First Post
I don't usually consider levels to be something that exists in-character. I mean, that's all well and good for Order of the Stick, but when I'm playing I prefer a less self-aware kind of game.Irda Ranger said:
Anyway, I dunno how WotC's vision of pacts is going to work, but I'm hoping it'll be possible to have a warlock who made a pact once and is now stuck with it regardless of her future decisions, rather than one who has to make pacts over and over to keep using her power.
I can't imagine they would have those same abilities, but equivalents are sure to come up. Rather than sending someone to hell, you shift them into the feywild where they get swarmed by dozens of brownies and pixies wielding tiny spears. Rather than a 'boon of souls' there exists some other reward for taking out a marked target.Belorin said:
Eldritch blast may just be be a universal power though, an essential part of what a warlock does that arises from the power of the pact rather than the patron itself.
Pact has those connotations because of the notion of a demonic pact, deals with angels and the like don't really come up in fantasy as much. Words have multiple connotations, and not everyone has the same ones to draw from.GreatLemur said:
When I said a fey pact could be called a binding, I was thinking of being mutually bound together, having exchanged vows and mixed blood in a fey circle under the full moons light. But being bound against one will is a very different concept. Having a pact involving a 'bound devil' works fine for the other kind of fiendish. But really, whatever the manner of deal the warlock has they can all just be 'pacts' but called whatever you like.
Indeed. The entire concept of what is considered a pact can easily be turned on its head, even with the same kind of patron. A fiendish pact may indeed be a willful deal of the warlock with a demon, or the pact could be inherited from his father, and it binds a powerful demon that was sealed away by an ancestor in ages past. Should the warlock abandon the power he was granted, the seal on the demon will weaken and break, killing him and freeing the demon onto the mortal world.Cadfan said:
Or a fallen archangel finds a way to reclaim his former form and power by inflicting his demonic curse unto a mortal. The warlock then uses that power to try to destroy the reascended - but not redeemed - angel, to prevent the fall of both heaven and earth.
Lot's of fun to be had with it.
Lurks-no-More said:
Ooooh! I like this idea! ... the Outrage Warlock! His mysterious powers are fueled by tapping into nigh unlimited outrage that permeates the so-called "RPG Blogosphere" nether-realm. Blasts of pure outrageous force! Outrageous curses! Outrageous twists of logic that confound the mortal mind! ...
I'm so there.
Irda Ranger
First Post
Worst. Warlock. EVER!Driddle said:
![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
Goobermunch
Explorer
I'm surprised no one has keyed off the feral warlock concept as a servant of nature.
When I hear the word feral, I think of wild animals. Isn't it possible that a feral warlock is a kind of Shaman, bound by an oath to a powerful nature spirit? The feywild has two components to its name, fey and wild. Why has the focus been exclusively on the fey side?
Just putting it out there.
--G
When I hear the word feral, I think of wild animals. Isn't it possible that a feral warlock is a kind of Shaman, bound by an oath to a powerful nature spirit? The feywild has two components to its name, fey and wild. Why has the focus been exclusively on the fey side?
Just putting it out there.
--G
