• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

31 Flavors of Warlock

Exen Trik

First Post
The warlock is clearly something that has generated a lot of discussion and concern about 4e, and rightly so. But if possible, I'd like to step back from the controversial aspects, and focus on the possible varieties of warlock we might see, and how they might work.

So far we know of three different kinds of pacts: Infernal, Shadowy and Feral. The first is certainly about pacts with devils, and possibly demons? The second is an obvious reference to the plane of shadow, but what kind of pact that is and with who is unclear. The third is likely related to fey, but I don't know why fey would be interested in pacts, or especially souls.


Here's my take on them:

Infernal: Probably a bit more to this than just being evil and collecting souls. Demons have agendas, and it's the warlocks place to further them. This may involve actions taken against other demons as much as anything else.

Shadowy: A reaper of the living? A destroyer of the undead? A bane of those who would be immortal? A commander of undead tasked with returning souls to the mortal realm? Lot's of ways to go with this.

Feral: Agent of the Seelie or Unseelie courts, sworn to defend/weaken the barriers between the Feywild and mortal realms. Or some other purpose perhaps, one which even the warlock may be ignorant of.


We will certainly see new kinds of pacts later on, be it by WotC, third parties, or individuals. Here's some quick ideas on a few possiblities:

Elemental: A subject of the elemental lords who acts against the demonic beings that plague the both elemental lands as well as the mortal realm. Or a conscript of a mighty Djinn, who has his own inscrutable interests in the lands of man.

Celestial: It's a departure from the dark and sinister angle of warlocks, but the servant of an archon can be every bit as capable and ruthless as their darker counterparts (and especially to them).

Mechanus: DOMO ARIGATO, MR ROBOTO... err sorry. Actually I'm not sure why they would form these pacts, subcontracting for Inevitables, perhaps?

Far Realms:
I have no idea what I would expect of a warlock that entered a pact with Cthulu, but that's the kind of thing I'm probably better off not understanding. I do expect tentacles to be involved somehow, though.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Crashy75

First Post
Exen Trik said:
...
Elemental: A subject of the elemental lords who acts against the demonic beings that plague the both elemental lands as well as the mortal realm. Or a conscript of a mighty Djinn, who has his own inscrutable interests in the lands of man...
This I would really like to see. Reminds me a little of a Palladium Warlock which makes me feel tingly. Not as tingly as a d20 Wolfen or Diabolist but close. I really like the far realm idea as well. *got "the thing that should not be" stuck in my head* I wonder how mechanically tied the pacts will be to the class. An interesting idea might be an Ur priest-type pact; not really a pact at all but I still like the idea.
 

ptolemy18

First Post
I only have one hope.... I hope they end up calling it "Shadow" instead of "Shadowy." "Shadowy" sounds like part of the name of a Yugioh monster. (And I don't say that as a snide, casual insult... I've read every volume of Yugioh, god help me...)
 

Irda Ranger

First Post
Exen Trik said:
Elemental: A subject of the elemental lords who acts against the demonic beings that plague the both elemental lands as well as the mortal realm. Or a conscript of a mighty Djinn, who has his own inscrutable interests in the lands of man.
Ah-RAAAAAAY-bee-an Niii-iiii--iiiiights, like Ah-RAAAAAAY-bee-an daaa-aaa-aaays; more often than not, are hotter than hot, in a lot of good ways ...

Why hello there, and welcome to Agribah, City of Myyyysssss-teries. Would you like to hear the tale of the Lamp, and the Sha'ir that was bound to it?


Exen Trik said:
Celestial: It's a departure from the dark and sinister angle of warlocks, but the servant of an archon can be every bit as capable and ruthless as their darker counterparts (and especially to them).
Isn't a servant of the archon called a 'cleric'? I'm just not seeing Celestials/Angels doing deals, making pacts, Boon of Souls, etc.


Exen Trik said:
Far Realms: [/B]I have no idea what I would expect of a warlock that entered a pact with Cthulu, but that's the kind of thing I'm probably better off not understanding. I do expect tentacles to be involved somehow, though.
Definitely a cool idea ... for NPC's. Anyone even capable of understanding the goals and motives of Cthulu is probably already irredeemably insane.
 

Exen Trik

First Post
Crashy75 said:
An interesting idea might be an Ur priest-type pact; not really a pact at all but I still like the idea.
Actually, I think it's exactly like a pact, only the 'patron' isn't willing or aware of their part in it.

Irda Ranger said:
Isn't a servant of the archon called a 'cleric'? I'm just not seeing Celestials/Angels doing deals, making pacts, Boon of Souls, etc.
It would be a different kind of deal of course, he wouldn't represent a god or have to appeal to it for power, he's just charged with serving that lesser divine beings interests. It's the same kind of difference between forming a pact with a demon or being a cleric or paladin of Asmodeus. And in this case "Boon of Souls" would apply to destroying fiendish beings or somesuch, assuming the BoS applies to anything but a fiendish pact anyways.

EDIT: I think part of the problem is the word 'pact' itself, and it's connotations. Dealing with celestials would be called an oath, with fey it could be called a binding, etc.

Anyways, the point of this thread isn't so see what the warlock will or won't be by the rules, just speculation on what direction people will take it. And trust me, a dozen celestial warlocks will pop up in a manner of weeks after 4e is released.
 
Last edited:

Andor

First Post
Crashy75 said:
This I would really like to see. Reminds me a little of a Palladium Warlock which makes me feel tingly. Not as tingly as a d20 Wolfen or Diabolist but close. I really like the far realm idea as well. *got "the thing that should not be" stuck in my head* I wonder how mechanically tied the pacts will be to the class. An interesting idea might be an Ur priest-type pact; not really a pact at all but I still like the idea.

Ahh... The Palladium Diabolist. Now there was a genuinely original magic using class. One of my all time favorite classes to play too.
 

Belorin

Explorer
Exen Trik said:
The warlock is clearly something that has generated a lot of discussion and concern about 4e, and rightly so. But if possible, I'd like to step back from the controversial aspects, and focus on the possible varieties of warlock we might see, and how they might work.

So far we know of three different kinds of pacts: Infernal, Shadowy and Feral. The first is certainly about pacts with devils, and possibly demons? The second is an obvious reference to the plane of shadow, but what kind of pact that is and with who is unclear. The third is likely related to fey, but I don't know why fey would be interested in pacts, or especially souls.

I had a similar thought, kind of.
Should a Warlock who made a pact with an Infernal have the exact same powers as one with a Feral patron? Would the Feral Warlock have Eldritch Blast or the ability to send someone to Hell for one round?
Just a thought.

Bel
 

Aloïsius

First Post
There should be a difference between an infernal warlock and an abyssal one because demons are not devils.

So, we might have :
infernal
shadow
abyssal
elemental
feral
pseudonatural

Note that an astral version of the warlock (pact with entities of the mind) would be either called a psion or looks like a pseudonatural one :p
 

erf_beto

First Post
Exen Trik said:
I think part of the problem is the word 'pact' itself, and it's connotations. Dealing with celestials would be called an oath, with fey it could be called a binding, etc.
Agreed. It's just another bad name WotC gave us... :\
(Gosh, we do need to make a list of bad words and start a "4E Translator Guide"...)
 

Lurks-no-More

First Post
erf_beto said:
Agreed. It's just another bad name WotC gave us... :\
(Gosh, we do need to make a list of bad words and start a "4E Translator Guide"...)
What, exactly, is wrong with "pact"? I'm starting to think that people (not you, but people in general) are inventing outrage for outrage's sake.
 

Remove ads

Top