Wizards hate warlocks

[Ichneumon]

Wizards hate, or are leery of, warlocks because whenever one shows up, there might be some very nasty entity - devil, fae lord, sorcerer king, star spawn - sniffing around nearby. Even if good-aligned, warlocks seek out trouble and bring trouble with them.

At least, that's what the wizards will tell you. The warlocks will say that they can handle their perilous patrons, and that truly valuable knowledge is worth a bit of danger to obtain.

Any DM can declare that wizards and warlocks are best of chums or regard each other neutrally, end of story. But I find it more rewarding to think of potential tensions between them, and modify my campaign world accordingly.

 

[vagabundo]

No problem with wizards, in general, being taught to hate/fear warlocks. It makes sense and is a nice source of conflict.And the sorcerer is the first one, in any edition, that I don't hate fluff-wise. So thumbs up.,

One problem I do have with the packet is the bounty hunter background. I think it goes to far in telling me about my campaign. Backgrounds in general need to have a bit better phrasing or a more hands off approach. I don't want to have to have bounty hunter legal everywhere they go.

 

[Texicles]

I'm cool with all of this. Truth be told, I'm more inclined to associate wizardry with innate ability and sorcery with study, but I can accept other, widely accepted and historical tropes, so meh. I can take or leave the Sorcerer's "second soul" thing, there's flimsier stuff out there, and it makes for a bit of a unique schtick.

I'm actually pretty fond of the Warlock's direction, but would like to see it get a little "darker." In my understanding of the warlock trope, the warlock barters elements of his being (like his soul or pieces thereof) or potentially that of others he controls in return for power. There's no requisite for infirmity, just a desire for ill-gotten magical gains. I think that there's an implicit "race to the bottom" with the warlock, where he's continually trying to get more power from some pretty nasty sources in the hope that, ultimately, he'll be powerful enough to get out of "debt" before it's too late.

The Wizard's mistrust or flat-out hate is fine. Fluff-wise it makes sense, RP-wise it has possibilities, and if none of that is sufficiently compelling, or you have players who can't play well with others, don't use them.

I'm torn on whether it should have been explicitly stated though. On the one hand, I respect the don't-tell-me-my-business-devil-woman stance in wanting to define your own campaign world, but on the other, with Wizard being the default caster archetype, everything is ultimately best understood by its relationship to that norm.

 

[FireLance]

To a warlock, the universe is essentially flawed, broken, stitched together into something resembling a coherent whole; they draw their power from their ability to see the gaps in reality and exploit them, a task that constantly drives them to the edge of madness. Wizards hate warlocks because THEIR arcane power comes from the exact opposite side of the equation: they try to see the world as logical and complete, and build their magic on universal laws. That warlocks can't even hold their power without descending into madness or depending on some supernatural patron as a bastion against the abyss is yet more evidence to wizards that warlocks are sadly mistaken.

So ... wizards like precise, well-defined, predictable spell effects, while the warlock is the rules lawyer who puts together broken combinations founded on imprecise terminology and fast-talking the DM?

I can see why there would be issues.

 

[Grimmjow]

At least, according to the newest Legends and Lore article:

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Sorcerers and Warlocks)

Anyone else bothered by this generalization? It reminds me of campaigns where elves hate dwarves. Good players know that rivalries in the party make for good roleplaying, but newer or less mature players will see this and may head straight into some unwanted (by most) pvp.

On the other hand, maybe this is just fine? Perhaps not all player classes and races have to get along with each other and it's time to start encouraging conflict and see where it goes?

Obviously, this is in regard to the descriptions of classes and races in the core rules, YMMV in specific campaigns.

i wouldnt let that get to you. You know how easy it is to change flavor text. if you think that wizards shouldn't hate warlocks then dont have them do that. Besides is said wizards not all wizards.
Its just like sayings fighters use an ax. Not every single fighter does, but there are those out there.

 

[Grimmjow]

No problem with wizards, in general, being taught to hate/fear warlocks. It makes sense and is a nice source of conflict.And the sorcerer is the first one, in any edition, that I don't hate fluff-wise. So thumbs up.,

One problem I do have with the packet is the bounty hunter background. I think it goes to far in telling me about my campaign. Backgrounds in general need to have a bit better phrasing or a more hands off approach. I don't want to have to have bounty hunter legal everywhere they go.

Bounty hunters know the legal way to be a bounty hunter. If a city (or nation) outlaws bounty hunting, then there is no legal or safe way for a bounty hunter to be able to do his job. He may still be a bounty hunter, and he may still hunt those bounties but they dont have to be legal ones.

 

[Xris Robin]

Personally, I really like the fluff. Sorcerer stuff... I'm not sure I would have worded it "second soul", but I like the idea. Being related to a dragon, for example, isn't just an excuse for free magic. I'm part dragon, and I have to struggle with that all the time. Part of me isn't human (or whatever race), and that part of me is always trying to express itself in some way. My body is half-convinced it has scales and claws, while my mind is convinced I'm better than you and should hoard gold. It's an effort of will to control myself at all times.

I also love how the warlock has little tips on what I trade away for power, and the cost of forbidden knowledge. Although high level warlocks are going to be a mess if you don't decide to not take certain quirks.

 

[slobo777]

Generalisations about classes in the fluff makes classes more real in the game world. Players will ask on an NPC, is he/she a "Wizard", are they a "Paladin"? I could personally do with them being less real, and more just about how PCs are built.

As for "Wizards hate Sorcerers", cultural differences in the game world are IMO better attached to descriptions of in-game cultures, and not to what heroes from those cultures do for a living.

 

[Gargoyle]

Actually, it make sense when you factor in the common/uncommon/rare thing.

Wizards: Common. The most typical form of arcane study. Wizardly magic is fairly predictable, limited by what is known, and tightly regulated.

Sorcerers: Uncommon. Magic in the raw-form, dangerous and unpredictable few can master it.

Warlock: Rare. Secrets man was not meant to know, forbidden and locked away along with the rituals to contact alien and strange beings...

I hadn't thought of it in these terms, and I must admit, I like this take on it. I do feel like wizards should be the default arcane spellcaster, and having players of sorcerers and warlocks pay a "social" price for running a strange or outright rare type of caster appeals to me. Not saying they need to be less powerful in combat, but having some challenges in interactions makes sense in this context.

 

[mlund]

The creepiest thing about the Warlock is that you never know what price his or her patron may exact next. When you've come so far already, who's to say it'll be easy to "just say no," when Exzaract the Tormentor offers you the next step on the path to power in exchange for one tiny little theft of something that "won't be missed" or even the murder of someone that "won't be mourned."

It's kind of like hanging out with the Cleric of a capricious or malicious deity - people generally avoid it for their sanity and health.

- Marty Lund