D&D (2024) The new warlock (Packet 7)

[Scribe]

The main issue with that is.....its the exact same thing as the cleric. Technically the cleric doesn't have power either, it comes from what their god is willing to give them.

I know, its a personal issue to me, and I think Wizards does a poor job of differentiating between how the relationship between a Cleric and God, is different from a Warlock and Patron.

I'd argue that there is still a difference, but I accept its on shaky ground.

 

[Minigiant]

So, I am on board with Int being 'Science Magic' aka Artificer/Wizard, no problem. Bard/Sorc as 'personal' magic? Again, sure. Druid/Cleric Wisdom, understanding the divine, in God/Nature? Got it.

Warlocks dont have any say. They are not the source of power. They are not understanding something better, or learning. Its a bargain. Its a deal. Its literally 'borrowed power'.

The caster stat is irrelevant, because they are not the source, they are the conduit, pass through, being given.

I've been lobbying for Cha or Con since 4e

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So thematically whatever you do to the warlock stat wise should be done with the cleric as well.

The funny thing is I was just thinking "Y'know, Clerics probably never should have come off of WIS". Like CHA thematically make more sense, and INT could also work, but like WIS? Really? It just doesn't work with the pantheonic nature of D&D deities. When Clerics were just Clerics of all gods I guess it worked. However it seems wild and silly that a Cleric of say any of the Dead Three, all three of whom are Jackass-level clowns of gods (which one is Bam Margera and which Johnny Knoxville though?) should use WIS as their score. If you had the slightest bit of wisdom or common sense you wouldn't be worshipping any of those gods! Or Cyric for that matter! Or even some of the "good ones"!

I honestly think D&D, 7E or whatever we call it, they need to consider making it so most classes have a choice of primary attribute, because then you could do so much more with each class. Clerics would genuinely be better if you faith ascetic WIS Clerics, evangelical/charismatic "Praise Torm!"-type CHA Clerics, and thoughtful, bookish, Augustine-style INT Clerics and so on.

 

[Scribe]

The funny thing is I was just thinking "Y'know, Clerics probably never should have come off of WIS". Like CHA thematically make more sense, and INT could also work, but like WIS? Really? It just doesn't work with the pantheonic nature of D&D deities. When Clerics were just Clerics of all gods I guess it worked. However it seems wild and silly that a Cleric of say any of the Dead Three, all three of whom are Jackass-level clowns of gods (which one is Bam Margera and which Johnny Knoxville though?) should use WIS as their score. If you had the slightest bit of wisdom or common sense you wouldn't be worshipping any of those gods! Or Cyric for that matter! Or even some of the "good ones"!

I honestly think D&D, 7E or whatever we call it, they need to consider making it so most classes have a choice of primary attribute, because then you could do so much more with each class. Clerics would genuinely be better if you faith ascetic WIS Clerics, evangelical/charismatic "Praise Torm!"-type CHA Clerics, and thoughtful, bookish, Augustine-style INT Clerics and so on.

PF1 at least has various ways to flip caster stats, or skill check stats. I'm sure it can lead to some degenerate builds, but I struggle to care about 5e balance to that degree.

 

[Kurotowa]

The main issue with that is.....its the exact same thing as the cleric. Technically the cleric doesn't have power either, it comes from what their god is willing to give them.

There isn't technically any difference between a cleric and a warlock power wise, other than the patrons of warlocks are seen as "fringe elements" whereas the gods are "the mainstream".

I would say the difference is that the Warlock's pact is transactional and the Cleric's relationship is not. At least, I don't think it should be. I know that some people see it otherwise, that they think the D&D gods are just big extraplanar magic people who will give you a taste of their magic if you agree to worship them. It's a debate I recently had with my brother.

But the way I see it, the D&D gods are qualitatively different from the sort of entities that offer Warlock pacts, not just quantitively. The divine domains they represent are an important layer of reality, and by following the examples and commandments of the gods some people can also tap into the power of those domains. By becoming enlightened into the truth of Light or War you can touch the edge of the divine.

Warlock pacts are what you do when the "gods" are powerful space aliens who are willing to share a few of their secrets in exchange for fealty. It's the same sort of gods you get in the MCU. And while I love the flavor of the Warlock class, I explicitly don't want those trades to be equated with devotion to a divine power. I feel it cheapens both of them.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I know that some people see it otherwise, that they think the D&D gods are just big extraplanar magic people who will give you a taste of their magic if you agree to worship them.

To be fair this view is directly encouraged by a huge swathe of D&D materials, including most FR writing on the gods. Even the stuff that tries to spin against that view often ends up just compounding that view.

So you can't act like this is some sort of renegade from people being "difficult" or something.

 

[Kurotowa]

To be fair this view is directly encouraged by a huge swathe of D&D materials, including most FR writing on the gods. Even the stuff that tries to spin against that view often ends up just compounding that view.

So you can't act like this is some sort of renegade from people being "difficult" or something.

I know. It's just one of the items on my "Reasons I Don't Like the Forgotten Realms" list. But that's my take.

Also, please don't assign me words in quote marks that I didn't actually say. I never said or implied that people holding the opposing view were "difficult".

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I know. It's just one of the items on my "Reasons I Don't Like the Forgotten Realms" list. But that's my take.

Also, please don't assign me words in quote marks that I didn't actually say. I never said or implied that people holding the opposing view were "difficult".

Those are intended to be hate-quotes rather than you-quotes, sorry for any inclarity. English really needs a different symbol for direct quotes, paraphrases/glosses and hate-quotes.

Regardless of not liking the FR, it is the most popular setting, and that take is popular because D&D has made that take popular, and actively worked against the take you're offering, which was once more common. This is one of the major reasons Clerics are so rare, for better or worse.

At this point it's too late for your take I think. You'd need a completely different take on the gods, far more abstract and distant, and less squabbling and Greek. Something like Eberron would work better though it still leaves WIS highly questionable, honestly. That could have happened in 3E (but didn't) and sort of did happen in 4E, but people rejected elements of 4E's cosmology sufficiently that that part didn't stick.

5E is definitely not minded towards that kind of big lore change.

 

[Charlaquin]

I know, its a personal issue to me, and I think Wizards does a poor job of differentiating between how the relationship between a Cleric and God, is different from a Warlock and Patron.

I'd argue that there is still a difference, but I accept its on shaky ground.

Everyone has their pet explanation for the difference. Mine is that the relationship is basically reversed. A cleric devotes themself to a god with no expectation of reward, and the god grants favor in return for that piety anyway. A patron offers favor to a warlock with the expectation of service in return, which the Warlock must oblige if they wish to continue receiving that favor, though in many cases they do so unwittingly.

 

[Cadence]

Everyone has their pet explanation for the difference. Mine is that the relationship is basically reversed. A cleric devotes themself to a god with no expectation of reward, and the god grants favor in return for that piety. A patron offers favor to a warlock with the expectation of service in return, which the Warlock must oblige if they wish to continue receiving that favor, though in many cases they do so unwittingly.

I like that.

Should evil gods have mostly Warlocks?