D&D (2024) Warlocks Should Have Pacts As Part of Gameplay

[Scribe]

I agree. Make that part of it too. I just want a deal with the devil to be a two-way street.

Absolutely.

Oh you have signed a deal with a Fiend? You have somehow bargained with a being outside of time and space?

This should have consequence.

Yeah stuff that is great, but what I’m talking about making deals using ritual magic, having to research Names and design rituals of invocation, and being able to have different buffs depending on what ritual you do/what you summon up to bargain with. The assumption is that you are trading the power gleaned from defeating foes, but you could get weird with it if that’s your jam.

Yes. This is the kind of thing that evokes 'Warlock'. Something that the 5e lock does very little of for me mechanically.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

There are plenty of patrons who aren't evil though, and who your patron is is a player choice. No one's forcing them to get their power from Hell, for example.

Yes, but if the mechanics require the character to focus on something other than the adventure the DM has planned (even for narrative reasons), or a mechanic nerfs the PC for an entire adventuring day if you roll poorly, I'm not down with that.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Not encourage exactly, but at least hinting at it.

Eh as long as it’s optional and/or written such that you can put whatever sauce you want on it.

That’s the thing with official D&D . It has to be open, and so it can’t lean as hard into concepts as 3pp stuff can. Because you and I both want to play a warlock, and I don’t view the warlock as actually having all that much to do with the patron, while the “deal with the devil” having consequences in game is something you want from the class. They have to thread the needle.

Absolutely.

Oh you have signed a deal with a Fiend? You have somehow bargained with a being outside of time and space?

This should have consequence.

Okay but like, no warlock I’ve played has dealt with fiends. The Fey Tomelock I played was the student of an archfey, the Hexblade I played was an Odinic figure who sacrificed herself to herself in a place of power, my 4e Hexblade was a knight of The White Well, and the Goliath I never got to play used the Star Pact and was basically just dealing with having the attention of otherworldly beings with such alien minds.

None of them need the rules of the game trying to force them into being played the way you want to play a warlock.

Yes. This is the kind of thing that evokes 'Warlock'. Something that the 5e lock does very little of for me mechanically.

On this I agree. The warlock should be able to use a place of power or the blood of a powerful slain enemy to call a power and treat with it. Possibly gaining a small side quest, possibly trading one syllable of a long True Name for a boon or for information they need, there’s all kinds of small deals a warlock could be making.

 

[Scribe]

Okay but like, no warlock I’ve played has dealt with fiends. The Fey Tomelock I played was the student of an archfey, the Hexblade I played was an Odinic figure who sacrificed herself to herself in a place of power, my 4e Hexblade was a knight of The White Well, and the Goliath I never got to play used the Star Pact and was basically just dealing with having the attention of otherworldly beings with such alien minds.

None of them need the rules of the game trying to force them into being played the way you want to play a warlock.

No, but I didnt call out a Fey lock or Hexblade.

As it is, I trust you know what I mean regardless. I want a bit of edge to some (not all!) of the choices, and Wizards has been very forceful in sanding them all off and putting bumpers on the corners.

On this I agree. The warlock should be able to use a place of power or the blood of a powerful slain enemy to call a power and treat with it. Possibly gaining a small side quest, possibly trading one syllable of a long True Name for a boon or for information they need, there’s all kinds of small deals a warlock could be making.

Yeah, I would love that to be baked into the class more. I'm not going to get what I want on either front, but hopefully if I put these things out into the interweb, someone will come along and eventually get the work done somewhere.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, but I didnt call out a Fey lock or Hexblade.

As it is, I trust you know what I mean regardless. I want a bit of edge to some (not all!) of the choices, and Wizards has been very forceful in sanding them all off and putting bumpers on the corners.



Yeah, I would love that to be baked into the class more. I'm not going to get what I want on either front, but hopefully if I put these things out into the interweb, someone will come along and eventually get the work done somewhere.

Agreed. I don't expect or want WotC to try their hand on any of that.

 

[Veltharis ap Rylix]

I want a bit of edge to some (not all!) of the choices, and Wizards has been very forceful in sanding them all off and putting bumpers on the corners.

Of course they are - as any Great Old One warlock will tell you, sharp angles are how you get Hounds of Tindalos...

 

[Undrave]

I kind of feel like they need to do something and then they get power in exchange.

Like getting a spell slot back when you kill something under hex.
Or Fey might let you use misty step every time you cast an Enchantment.

Stuff that would (mildly) encourage you to burn down a orphanage and steal babies.

In 4e, killing an enemy under your curse would grant you some benefit, like temp HP or a teleport.