Warlocks = evil?

[dmccoy1693]

If paladins are no longer require to be LG, then warlocks should equally no longer have the "any non-good" requirement.

 

[jtrowell]

I wonder if some feral warlocks could be made into a druid-like character.

Not the 3.5 druid that can wildshape/blast/heal, but part of this concept (probably with lots of curses and attack spells with a fey theme)

From what we know, the druid class in 4e will be mainly a shapeshifter with some attack spells.

Someone complained that he wouldn't be able to make a druid that was an old man cursing the ennemies of the forest. But maybe a feral warlock could take over the "casting" druid ? (at least for the more offensive part, I don't expect many healing or nurturing spells from a warlock)

Maybe a druid/warlock(feral) bi-classing could allow someone to make a character more like 3.5 druid (depending on how much he want to invest in attack or shapshifting powers) ?

 

[TheSeer]

Help me with this one:

Based on the info so far, Warlocks draw their power from evil sources. They cast stuff like Soul Ruin which sounds all sorts of evil magic.

How can this class be most any alignnment?

How can this class play nice-nice with a good-aligned character in the party?

To me, the infernal power sourcing sounds too limiting. I like the idea of a planar empowered spellcaster who could choose the infernal planes for power, but the Warlock appears to be the new assassin...aka, the PC class that never fit well with any party back in 1e.

Your thoughts?

You ever see the show Reaper? It's about a kid, who when he came of age found out that his parents had sold his soul to the devil and basically becomes the Devil's bounty hunter. Now he could have just embraced this and became evil, instead he does what the Devil wants him to do, but Is still a good person, still goes out of his way to help people even when it puts him in harm's way. He stands up to the Devil every chance he gets and even when tempted to do something evil instead follows his own code and remains good.

Kinda sounds like what you could do for a Warlock eh?

 

[Zurai]

If paladins are no longer require to be LG, then warlocks should equally no longer have the "any non-good" requirement.

That's just the thing. They do not have a non-good requirement. Warlocks must have either a Chaotic or an Evil alignment (or both), but they can be Lawful or Good too - just not at the same time. Chaotic Good is a perfectly valid 3E Warlock alignment, and even in 3E he can have a fey heritage rather than an infernal one.

 

[Bishmon]

It's actually pretty common for the "fey" source of power to be ignored in discussions about the warlock.

As I know I've pointed out many times in this sort of discussion before, the fey power source has been described by WotC as 'feral'. That doesn't really evoke images of the glittering pixie pulling pranks on the oafish half-orc. That's not to say WotC didn't mischaracterize the power sources and in fact you can have a rainbows-and-bunnies fey-powered warlock, but it's certainly far from given.

I could think of a few backstories that would work pretty well for a non-evil warlock. (this is a very simplified example, for the sake of time.)

It's not that it's impossible to come up with a non-evil warlock. There's certainly validity to the idea of a mostly good guy using evil or dark powers for mostly good means.

I just think that shouldn't be the only option for a non-dark warlock. If you want to play that warlock, great. It's a viable option. But why shouldn't I have the option of playing a warlock who gets his magical powers from celestials? Or possibly Bahamut, which would make even more sense considering his increased status in 4E?

The problem, in my opinion, isn't that you can't shoehorn a warlock into a good-aligned character, it's that you can seemingly only do it by shoehorning. I just think it's a mistake to exclude an obviously good power source from the warlock especially since it's being made core.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

How is "fey" a dark and/or evil power source?

Did you see Pan's Labyrinth?

Anyway, this can only be a good thing. I like a lot of creepy Neutral in my games. Not good, not evil, but definitely not harmless. It makes for interesting motivations for PCs and NPCs alike.

Also, we already had an epic thread on this topic. I encourage anyone who still cares to go dig it up and read all the arguments instead of reposting them here.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

1. D&D world was a lot more "black and white" in 3rd edition when alignment was still important than the real world (where most comic-books purportedly take place).

FIFY

Clerics and Paladins can chose to worship Bahamut or Tiamat, but where are the Angelic pacts?

They're called "clerics" and "paladins".

 

[WarlockLord]

Ahh...."stars and the darkness beyond them" sounds like Cthulhu & friends. Good.

Now, I can just multiclass wizard & warlock of Cthulhu...

 

[Logan_Bonner]

So one bit of flavor the warlock could have (and this was in the document at one point, though it's gone now) was drawing on pacts that had been handed down. For instance, a pact formed between devils and tieflings in the time of the ancient tiefling empire might still apply today, and the devils can't take that power back. So the descendants of the pact-makers can use these infernal powers however they want—and nothing angers the devils more than seeing their power used for good.

 

[Kintara]

Making a deal with Evil sources like Demons is cocky, but it doesn't have to be evil. It all depends on the circumstances of the deal. Maybe there are circumstances where Demons are forced into a pact/deal situation, and it's often the only weakness they might currently have. Maybe the demon has power over someone you love who is weaker of will than you, and the ONLY way to get the demon to relent is to convince/compel him (by divine law, or something) to take you instead.

As for Old Ones, well you could make a case that they are beyond good and evil, and even beyond motive, as we understand it. Good and Evil might stand together to stop one, but perhaps that's only because we can't possibly understand its impulses and patterns. Interfering with one may have consequences larger than any mortal or deity knows (just pick an incomprehensibly large tragedy of trans-multi-cosmic proportions? Got one?). Besides, maybe you don't choose to make a pact with them, maybe they MAKE the pact with you! Yes, I guess it's gothy, but it's still cool.

Coming up with reasons for why the pact happened and what the circumstances were are all standard adventurer background stuff.

Edit: And though they're probably embarrassed now, I would expect a good number of the warlocks with fey pacts to be the result of an elaborate trick.