D&D 5E can warlocks be good guys?

[Mallus]

The purpose would be to make up for the shortcut in this case.

What shortcut are you talking about?

 

[SirAntoine]

What shortcut are you talking about?

Without needing to study to learn magic like a wizard.

 

[SirAntoine]

I've been wondering that if a warlock has made a pact with a patron, be it a demon, devil, old one or a fey, can he be a good guy? I mean you sold your soul just for power, doesnt that inhibit good alignment?

What do you guys think?

Naturally. But the rules are prejudiced against using alignment restrictions because of popular demand. If alignment restrictions were in the PHB, I think they would have said the warlock needs to be evil if they serve a dark power. Maybe a neutral character could make a similar pact, but a good character would never knowingly do so. If the patron is good-aligned or neutral, though, then the question is different. Does the act of pursuing power like that count as an evil act? I could see you saying that, but the distinction would be hard for most people to see. It could be a question of doing something unnatural, or being disrespectful to established channels of learning and authority. If the pact is suicidal, of course that would be evil, too.

 

[Ahrimon]

Without needing to study to learn magic like a wizard.

That's definitely the classical interpretation of a Warlock, but during this thread it's something that I've been thinking about. Does a warlock really just get power for signing on the dotted line or do they still have to work for it like everyone else. I've started thinking about warlocks as closer to sorcerers. They have an (gifted) innate power that still has to be developed. It's not just sign here and start throwing your eldritch blasts but more of a sign here and here and I'll download the instruction manual into you.

The more I think about it the more I like this interpretation because it allows everyone to fall under the same training rules and it's not just getting something for free (depending on your warlock/sorcerer backstory).

The more I look at 5e the more I love it's open ended fluff and how each table can customize the game to their preferences.

 

[Charles Wright]

Sorcerers don't need to study, either.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Without needing to study to learn magic like a wizard.

Warlocks don't just magically start at level 20. There are no shortcuts or freebies. They have to work to master their powers just like everyone else. It even describes the relationship between a warlock and its patron as usually being like master and apprentice. Their patron isn't merely loaning them power, it's teaching them. Warlocks learn, study, and grow in power just as sorcerers and wizards do, they just employ different methods and learn different magical secrets. Here are a few relevant quotes from the warlock class description:

"Warlocks are seekers of the knowledge that lies hidden in the fabric of the multiverse."
"Drawing on the ancient knowledge of beings such as fey nobles, demons, devils, hags, and alien entities of the Far Realm, warlocks piece together arcane secrets to bolster their own power."
"More often, though, the arrangement is similar to that between a master and an apprentice. The warlock learns and grows in power, at the cost of occasional services performed on the patron's behalf."
"Warlocks are driven by an insatiable need for knowledge and power, which compels them into their pacts and shapes their lives."
"Once a pact is made, a warlock's thirst for knowledge and power can't be slaked with mere study and research."
"In your study of occult lore, you have unearthed eldritch invocations, fragments of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability."

Warlocks aren't that different from many wizards, who often serve as apprentices under a master wizard. They just learn very different types of magic and have very strange and exotic masters. The way I see it, warlocks exist in a thematic space somewhere between sorcerers and wizards. They have been infused with a spark of their patron's magic, giving them an innate ability to wield power through the force of their personalities, which is similar to sorcerers. But instead of being born with that gift, it's bestowed to them. And while they don't have the studious and methodical nature of bookish wizards, they still have a thirst for knowledge and a desire to unlock the secrets of existence.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Without needing to study to learn magic like a wizard.

But what, exactly, is "cut short"?

It's not like Warlock abilities are any more powerful than Wizard ones. If anything, their generic spellcasting abilities are inferior! They never get a second 6th or 7th level spell, and unless they rest more than twice a day, they never get more than ~12 slots to spend. Admittedly, all of those slots are 5th level slots, whereas the best a Wizard can hope for is ~5 slots of 5th level per day, but the Wizard also gets 12 slots of lower level and knows roughly three times as many total spells; that is, the Wizard learns 6+2*level while the Warlock learns 1+level until level 8, then one every other level thereafter.

In prior editions, the Warlock would probably have been given some kind of actual mechanical advantage over the Wizard, to actually represent how it takes the "quick path to power" or whatever--in which case, the designers of those editions would also have applied the alignment limitations you speak of, to balance out the increased power. The problem is, the Warlock is really no better than the Wizard, except in certain narrow contexts (e.g. the Blade Pact is a much better melee fighter than a straight-up Wizard would be). So, from a design perspective rather than a fiction perspective, there is no reason to apply an alignment restriction--there is no power difference.

The same argument applies to the Paladin. In Ye Olden Dayse, the Paladin was pretty much a Fighter with extra "toys" who did not become a landed noble at high levels. The extra powers were straight-up above and beyond what a normal Fighter could do. Thus, it makes sense that you would give an alignment restriction--their increased powers "come from" a devotion to a higher calling. But the 5e Paladin isn't just a Fighter with more toys. The two classes are now made to be roughly on par with one another. Whether you call it "balanced with each other," "at parity," whatever, they're meant to be at approximately the same power level. That means the restrictions no longer make sense from a design perspective.

From the fiction side, there's long been a debate about alignment descriptions and whether it is sensible to have an X that is not Chaotic Fashionable or whatever P). Concepts like the Blackguard in 5e, particularly given the Oath of Vengeance, may make just as much sense with a fallen Paladin as they would with one that is not fallen, but just Evil to begin with. An Oath of the Ancients Paladin is probably going to be Good, but the mentioned tenets of the oath could work regardless of how a person feels about social norms. (For example, I could see one fighting to protect graffiti art, as long as it was actually beautiful, laws and social norms be damned.)

So...yeah. In prior editions, there were often reasons which justified the inclusion of alignment restrictions. A lot of those reasons no longer apply in 5e, so there's no longer much point to the restriction unless one is aiming for specific flavor. And "specific flavor" stuff has been, in general, left to the DM in 5e.

 

[green_destiny]

In relation on the topic on what kind of "power" did the Warlock get, if they have limited spell slots...

Warlocks really have a limited spell casting slot but the that trade off was to "compensate" and have access to:

* Pacts (Tome (chance to master all rituals across classes), Blade (melee caster) and Chain (access to above average familiars - that can turn invisible, scare enemies, can speak, perception bonus etc.))

* Invocations - many of invocations abilities are spells in other classes but for a Warlock they are cast AT-WILL and they can swap unlearn and learn new invocations per level. They do provide good combos to other spells too.

* Eldritch Blast - probably one of the the greatest offensive cantrip and it scales well through levels (additional beams).

* Warlock Spell Slots - refreshes every short rest. Sure they're not guaranteed but if they get to have short rests then it raises their combat/utility efficiency.

PS. Warlocks do have access to Level 6-9 spells too.

In relation to can Warlocks be good guys?

Well for my character being a warlock is a curse on their lineage. They had a great Cleric ancestor that tricked a arch devil to know its 'true' name. In exchange for not spreading its true name, the arch devil gave favors to the Cleric and they had an agreement that every first born of every 7th generation of the Cleric will have access to the arch devil's power. The Arch-devil agrees to this in the hope that he can tempt his descendants to be his follower. To make sure that Arch-devil will keep his promise, it's true name is passed too to every 'cursed' Warlock in their lineage.

In a defining event, my character unlocked his 'power'. So basically my warlock is not evil by choice (fights evil too as he sees fit), but the arch-devil can coerce him to do evil deeds.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

In relation on the topic on what kind of "power" did the Warlock get, if they have limited spell slots...

Warlocks really have a limited spell casting slot but the that trade off was to "compensate" and have access to:

I wasn't meaning to suggest that Warlocks get nothing at all. Just that if we look purely at their spellcasting abilities, Warlocks are pretty much straight-up inferior. You are also neglecting the various school benefits of being a Wizard, if we're going to start tabulating everything a class gets, plus Arcane Recovery which is also short-rest based (albeit only once per day). The fact that Warlocks get the extra stuff makes up for their severely reduced breadth and flexibility. They're the "3e Fighters" of the 5e caster world, locked into specific options. (Fortunately they are not as weak as 3e Fighters were!)

PS. Warlocks do have access to Level 6-9 spells too.

I didn't mean to suggest they didn't, hence why I mentioned that Warlocks never get a second 6th or 7th level slot. They still get Mystic Arcana, which means that at the very very highest levels (spell levels 8 and 9) they have identical power (but, again, not breadth) to a Wizard. For spell levels 6 and 7, the Wizard has twice as many spell slots, and probably twice as many spells known. For spell levels 5 an below, the Warlock has higher potency and potentially higher volume (with at least 4 rests per day), but lower versatility and breadth.

In a defining event, my character unlocked his 'power'. So basically my warlock is not evil by choice (fights evil too as he sees fit), but the arch-devil can coerce him to do evil deeds.

And this is pretty much exactly what I meant when I mentioned the "over-arching quest to throw off the pact." A great RP opportunity, and one that allows a struggle between good person, bad powers.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

1.) Now I want to offer my players a genuine "shortcut" warlock: you can start at level 10 if you'll only "eat this kitten!"

2.) You could have a non-evil patron who wasn't even aware of you, and yet still be evil for accepting the power. E.g. every time you cast a warlock spell, you have a 1% chance of summoning Yog-Sothil-Serpent-of-Worlds-End into your reality, doing 1d100 damage to everyone in a 1d100000 mile radius (mostly civilians) before he pulls back out. You could accidentally destroy the world in your quest for gold...