Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
can warlocks be good guys?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6547540" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Which is perfectly fine--except that you presented your opinion, originally, as the only way to interpret the text--and told others <em>they</em> had to "redefine things" in order to get their opinion. In other words, as with several conversations before this, you held up the books as supporting your perspective and making your perspective "right." Then...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>...you say things like this, once people cite the text and demonstrate that your argument either doesn't fit the text as-written, or is a personal interpretation of the text rather than its explicit meaning. Also, whether a post is short or long has nothing to do with whether it is inflammatory--and some of your posts, whether you think it or not, have been inflammatory.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, it is not so bad to have that--in fact, several people responded to your initial "it has to be evil, it's even more evil than assassins and necromancers!" post with, "Well sure, Infernal pacts are almost surely evil, and GOO pacts aren't necessarily much different, but surely the Fey pact doesn't have to be evil?" So you're retreating to the position others originally took in opposition to you, and acting as though it is a call to reasonableness against people who are being unreasonable.</p><p></p><p>That said, your last recommendation is very solid--and mirrors, perhaps ironically, the way that Paladins worked in 4e. Paladin was the only class (IIRC) that had any kind of "alignment restriction" in 4e: you had to start out with the same alignment as your god. You could change later on, and nothing would directly change (but you'd probably have your church after you for heresy if you changed dramatically). Warlock, whether 4e or 5e, seems to fit a similar mold. I could see someone arguing for being "within one step" of their patron's alignment--so a Lawful Neutral person could potentially make a pact with a Lawful Evil entity--but just straight-up matching to patron alignment makes perfect sense.</p><p></p><p>That said though--yeah, it would be pretty bad if one was gung-ho about playing a GOO or Infernal Warlock and couldn't because the DM essentially banned those classes. "I don't permit Evil PCs" + "GOO and Infernal pacts are only for Evil characters" = "GOO and Infernal pacts are banned at my table." It may not be explicitly said, but it's a deductive consequence of the previous two statements. There is no case where the first two statements are true and the third statement is false unless the DM makes a special exception (which would mean, more or less, violating either the first rule, allowing an evil PC, or the second rule, allowing a GOO/Infernal pact Warlock that wasn't evil.) Any situation which eliminates player enthusiasm about non-abusive, rules-as-intended play is something I consider "pretty bad."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 6547540, member: 6790260"] Which is perfectly fine--except that you presented your opinion, originally, as the only way to interpret the text--and told others [I]they[/I] had to "redefine things" in order to get their opinion. In other words, as with several conversations before this, you held up the books as supporting your perspective and making your perspective "right." Then... ...you say things like this, once people cite the text and demonstrate that your argument either doesn't fit the text as-written, or is a personal interpretation of the text rather than its explicit meaning. Also, whether a post is short or long has nothing to do with whether it is inflammatory--and some of your posts, whether you think it or not, have been inflammatory. No, it is not so bad to have that--in fact, several people responded to your initial "it has to be evil, it's even more evil than assassins and necromancers!" post with, "Well sure, Infernal pacts are almost surely evil, and GOO pacts aren't necessarily much different, but surely the Fey pact doesn't have to be evil?" So you're retreating to the position others originally took in opposition to you, and acting as though it is a call to reasonableness against people who are being unreasonable. That said, your last recommendation is very solid--and mirrors, perhaps ironically, the way that Paladins worked in 4e. Paladin was the only class (IIRC) that had any kind of "alignment restriction" in 4e: you had to start out with the same alignment as your god. You could change later on, and nothing would directly change (but you'd probably have your church after you for heresy if you changed dramatically). Warlock, whether 4e or 5e, seems to fit a similar mold. I could see someone arguing for being "within one step" of their patron's alignment--so a Lawful Neutral person could potentially make a pact with a Lawful Evil entity--but just straight-up matching to patron alignment makes perfect sense. That said though--yeah, it would be pretty bad if one was gung-ho about playing a GOO or Infernal Warlock and couldn't because the DM essentially banned those classes. "I don't permit Evil PCs" + "GOO and Infernal pacts are only for Evil characters" = "GOO and Infernal pacts are banned at my table." It may not be explicitly said, but it's a deductive consequence of the previous two statements. There is no case where the first two statements are true and the third statement is false unless the DM makes a special exception (which would mean, more or less, violating either the first rule, allowing an evil PC, or the second rule, allowing a GOO/Infernal pact Warlock that wasn't evil.) Any situation which eliminates player enthusiasm about non-abusive, rules-as-intended play is something I consider "pretty bad." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
can warlocks be good guys?
Top