D&D (2024) D&D 2024 Player's Handbook Reviews

Chaosmancer · Oct 7, 2024

Corinnguard said:
The patron/warlock relationship is better off if the DM role-plays as the warlock's patron.

I'm not sure I would take that as a statement of fact. Especially with much more internal patrons, like GOO's or Sentient Items.

Micah Sweet · Oct 7, 2024

pemerton said:
I agree with @Imaro - where is the premise coming from that the patron is an opponent of the warlock?

Also, @Micah Sweet upthread mentions the feeling of reality of the fiction. So here's an actual play report from 1990 (the system was Rolemaster, but I don't think there's any reason why D&D couldn't play out the same way):

The paladin PC had killed someone in circumstances that, in the view of the PC as played by the player, amounted to wrongdoing. Therefore, the player (again playing his PC) had the paladin go out into the wilderness to pray for forgiveness.

I (as GM) therefore made a roll for a wilderness encounter, on the appropriate encounter chart. The resulting encounter was with a (relatively minor) demon. The demon appeared in the vicinity of the praying paladin, and started taunting him about his conduct and his faith. I had assumed that the player would have his PC fight the demon (my first thought was that the sound inference was demons are liars, and therefore the demon's denigration of the PC's faith and conduct must be a sign that the paladin in fact remains in good standing). But the player (as his character) interpreted the demon as a sort of tempter, trying to lure him into more unjustified violence. And so even when the demon started beating up on the paladin, the paladin (as played by his player) did not resist.

After a bit of un-resisted pounding of the paladin had taken place, I (as the demon) decided that it had become boring, and the demon left the bruised and bloodied paladin alone.

That scene, as it played out, felt vividly real. The way the paladin responded to the taunting by the demon - his rejection of it by way of his determination to avoid violence - was utterly unexpected (by me at least). The emotions were intense; the demon beating the paladin up was gruelling . At that point in time, it was the most powerful play of a religiously devoted character that I had ever seen in RPGing. It showed me that it was possible for FRPGing to be moving in a way that I hadn't experienced before.

If we look at how that moment of play worked, we can see that it was the player who initiated the scene - I (as my PC) go out into the wilderness to pray. It was the GM who framed the basic antagonism in the scene - As you are praying, a demon appears and says <stuff that constitutes the taunting of the paladin about his faith>. And it was the player who decided what that antagonism meant, in moral and thematic terms, by adopting a certain interpretation of it from the perspective of his PC.

This shows that it is quite possible for a religious character to experience the demands of their faith, to suffer for it, to do penance for their wrongs, to experience crisis, etc, without the GM having to take the part of the divinity and present those considerations to the player in some external, third party fashion. And so far from undermining realism, letting the player take the lead can be a foundation for vivid, compelling and realistic fiction.

As a result of this RPGing experience, and many others I've had since, I'm quite confident that similar considerations can apply in the play of a warlock PC, and that character's relationship to their patron and the patron's temptations, demands, etc.

That was a great example of player-directed play, but everything that happened in the world except the PCs own actions was still determined and run by you, so while I understand that a player's choices can lead to things in the world that the DM did not originally intend (which I've always understood), I'm not sure how this supports the idea of the player controlling their patron.

Micah Sweet · Oct 7, 2024

Chaosmancer said:
I'm not sure I would take that as a statement of fact. Especially with much more internal patrons, like GOO's or Sentient Items.

Both of those are external to the PC. Not sure what you're talking about.

Chaosmancer · Oct 7, 2024

Micah Sweet said:
Or maybe you should accept the consequences of your actions, and not play a PC beholden to a being whose beliefs you don't share if that's a problem for you as a player. There are non-evil (or at least non-pushy evil) patrons out there.

Maybe don't play a fiend warlock if you don't want to deal with a fiend?

So never try and play a character based on John Constantine, Ghost Rider, Robert Johnson, Harry Dresden, or any of the thousand thousands of other examples of this trope, because you are doomed to failure, sense you will be in a logically consistent world instead of the worlds of fantasy and myth that those characters were in that inspired you to play that character.

Chaosmancer · Oct 7, 2024

Micah Sweet said:
I've said this before: "the players" are not a homogenous block. They each have their own feelings and opinions, and some if might even (gasp!) agree with the DM, or at least be fine with their narrative. In my experience, that is usually the case, actually. Just because one player disagrees doesn't mean anyone else does, or wants to support getting into a conflict with the DM over it.

And by that exact same principle, they can also disagree with the DM. So.. your point does nothing except try and establish that player's may agree with the DM, which does not exclude, and in fact by its very nature includes, the idea that the players can disagree with the dM.

And if all the player's, or even a majority of them disagree with the DM... what ultimate authority of unilateral control of the fiction does the DM have left?

Chaosmancer · Oct 7, 2024

Micah Sweet said:
Both of those are external to the PC. Not sure what you're talking about.

This is also a good thing for @Corinnguard

Many GOO patrons express themselves to the player via dreams, madness, hallucinations. You can have the same sort of thing with a sentient magical item, whose voice is only in the character's head.

What is more capable of expressing and more fun for a player wanting to explore themes of madness and warped perception? The DM occassionally taking an aside to tell them that their character hears their dagger telling them to slaughter people, or the player with no input from the DM, describing their character stroking the blade and whispering to it, or arguing with it? If the other players do not know if the Dagger is truly sentient, it is much creepier in my experience, than if the DM lampshades it by acting the role of patron.

Crimson Longinus · Oct 7, 2024

pemerton said:
I agree with @Imaro - where is the premise coming from that the patron is an opponent of the warlock?

Like I said, they don't need to be, but the core archetype is that there is some tension there. It is about bargaining for power with some horrifying entity. It is not like the cleric, who presumably chose to worship a god because they agreed with their tenets.

pemerton said:
Also, @Micah Sweet upthread mentions the feeling of reality of the fiction. So here's an actual play report from 1990 (the system was Rolemaster, but I don't think there's any reason why D&D couldn't play out the same way):

The paladin PC had killed someone in circumstances that, in the view of the PC as played by the player, amounted to wrongdoing. Therefore, the player (again playing his PC) had the paladin go out into the wilderness to pray for forgiveness.

I (as GM) therefore made a roll for a wilderness encounter, on the appropriate encounter chart. The resulting encounter was with a (relatively minor) demon. The demon appeared in the vicinity of the praying paladin, and started taunting him about his conduct and his faith. I had assumed that the player would have his PC fight the demon (my first thought was that the sound inference was demons are liars, and therefore the demon's denigration of the PC's faith and conduct must be a sign that the paladin in fact remains in good standing). But the player (as his character) interpreted the demon as a sort of tempter, trying to lure him into more unjustified violence. And so even when the demon started beating up on the paladin, the paladin (as played by his player) did not resist.

After a bit of un-resisted pounding of the paladin had taken place, I (as the demon) decided that it had become boring, and the demon left the bruised and bloodied paladin alone.

That scene, as it played out, felt vividly real. The way the paladin responded to the taunting by the demon - his rejection of it by way of his determination to avoid violence - was utterly unexpected (by me at least). The emotions were intense; the demon beating the paladin up was gruelling . At that point in time, it was the most powerful play of a religiously devoted character that I had ever seen in RPGing. It showed me that it was possible for FRPGing to be moving in a way that I hadn't experienced before.

If we look at how that moment of play worked, we can see that it was the player who initiated the scene - I (as my PC) go out into the wilderness to pray. It was the GM who framed the basic antagonism in the scene - As you are praying, a demon appears and says <stuff that constitutes the taunting of the paladin about his faith>. And it was the player who decided what that antagonism meant, in moral and thematic terms, by adopting a certain interpretation of it from the perspective of his PC.

This shows that it is quite possible for a religious character to experience the demands of their faith, to suffer for it, to do penance for their wrongs, to experience crisis, etc, without the GM having to take the part of the divinity and present those considerations to the player in some external, third party fashion. And so far from undermining realism, letting the player take the lead can be a foundation for vivid, compelling and realistic fiction.

As a result of this RPGing experience, and many others I've had since, I'm quite confident that similar considerations can apply in the play of a warlock PC, and that character's relationship to their patron and the patron's temptations, demands, etc.

Yeah, that's a cool story, but I fail to see the relevance. You made up the demon, you played the demon. I imagine this would have been far less impactful had the player decided that the demon arrives and what the demon does.

Imaro · Oct 7, 2024

Crimson Longinus said:
Like I said, they don't need to be, but the core archetype is that there is some tension there. It is about bargaining for power with some horrifying entity. It is not like the cleric, who presumably chose to worship a god because they agreed with their tenets.

See this is part of the problem... that core archetype has expanded, evolved and even modernized beyond what you and others seem to feel is "The" core archetype.

Corinnguard · Oct 7, 2024

Chaosmancer said:
This is also a good thing for @Corinnguard

Many GOO patrons express themselves to the player via dreams, madness, hallucinations. You can have the same sort of thing with a sentient magical item, whose voice is only in the character's head.

What is more capable of expressing and more fun for a player wanting to explore themes of madness and warped perception? The DM occassionally taking an aside to tell them that their character hears their dagger telling them to slaughter people, or the player with no input from the DM, describing their character stroking the blade and whispering to it, or arguing with it? If the other players do not know if the Dagger is truly sentient, it is much creepier in my experience, than if the DM lampshades it by acting the role of patron.

You're assuming that I would take this approach if I decided to play a warlock character. If I was to do so, I would talk to my DM (who happens to be one of my best friends) about my idea to play one. We would then talk about what kind of warlock I wanted to role-play as and what kind of patron I wanted to make a pact with. It wouldn't be with a GOO or a weapon with a mind of its' own. I probably would go for a Celestial Patron or maybe even an Elemental one (maybe an Elemental Prince of Good?)

Once we hashed out what kind of warlock/patron relationship my character and his patron could have, I would let my DM role-play my patron and then let the fun ensue.

Micah Sweet · Oct 7, 2024

Chaosmancer said:
This is also a good thing for @Corinnguard

Many GOO patrons express themselves to the player via dreams, madness, hallucinations. You can have the same sort of thing with a sentient magical item, whose voice is only in the character's head.

What is more capable of expressing and more fun for a player wanting to explore themes of madness and warped perception? The DM occassionally taking an aside to tell them that their character hears their dagger telling them to slaughter people, or the player with no input from the DM, describing their character stroking the blade and whispering to it, or arguing with it? If the other players do not know if the Dagger is truly sentient, it is much creepier in my experience, than if the DM lampshades it by acting the role of patron.

By that argument there should be far fewer rules and far more amateur improv in RPGs, because if the player roleplays then it all just works out.

D&D (2024) D&D 2024 Player's Handbook Reviews

Chaosmancer

Legend

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast

Chaosmancer

Legend

Chaosmancer

Legend

Chaosmancer

Legend

Crimson Longinus

Legend

Imaro

Legend

Corinnguard

Hero

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast

Similar Threads

Related Articles