D&D 5E can warlocks be good guys?

[pemerton]

that history just "exists" the same way Kevin Costner's talent "exists". The history is there, but it's largely irrelevant to the game at hand unless it's mentioned by the DM. And even then, it just exists in the words of the DM, not on its own merit.

I'm not really sure how this makes PC backstory from the PC's "present". That only exists, too, in the words of the players of the game.

 

[Sunseeker]

Sure, but that history just "exists" the same way Kevin Costner's talent "exists". The history is there, but it's largely irrelevant to the game at hand unless it's mentioned by the DM. And even then, it just exists in the words of the DM, not on its own merit.

I'm not sure what sort of D&D experiences you've had, but most of my GMs have worked in some part of my character's history to the game in order to provide motivation for quests and such.

 

[BigVanVader]

I'm not sure what sort of D&D experiences you've had, but most of my GMs have worked in some part of my character's history to the game in order to provide motivation for quests and such.

Right, but that's what I'm saying. The history only exists through the DM's reality, and not by itself.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Actually, the Dresden Files example may be mine-able for more than just the Warlock concepts.

Michael Carpenter, a secondary DF character, is clearly a Paladin, as are the other Knights of the Cross. Harry (and possibly others) is quite aware of the magical effect Carpenter can have simply by speaking a prayer. AFAIK, he doesn't really "know magic," but the strength of his morality, referenced and demonstrated many times, is great enough to let him see and do things no mere mortal can. One of the others (Sanya, who wields the Sword of Hope) is an atheist--but the strength of his conviction, his earnest desire to overcome the evil he committed earlier in his life, makes his actions powerful. It may be that divine agency is involved to some degree--after all, the sword has a nail of the True Cross in it, and was given to Sanya by an archangel, and Sanya happens to be descended from "royalty" (Saladin, specifically).

Contrast both of these with Harry: someone both trained in magic, and enabled to access certain kinds of forces for various reasons, e.g. Hellfire and Soulfire and his Winter Court dealings. His powers have little to nothing to do with a purity of purpose or devotion to a cause. Instead, they relate to duties he is magically bound to perform, lingering influences of powerful entities he's interacted with, or knowledge of/access to a power which enhances the magic he can already do, specifically so he can perform a requested task.

We might then say that there is a sort of spell spectrum or space, rather than a really strict line between the two--though again I am cautious about fuzzing the boundaries. Wizards represent pure "magic-by-knowledge." Paladins represent pure "magic-by-devotion." Clerics are high on the devotion, but still have a significant "study" component. Warlocks don't have "devotion" per se, but there is a sense of attachment to otherworldly beings; they do, however, specifically seek out lost tomes and forbidden knowledge (the whole Dr. Faustus thing), so they're high on the "knowledge" scale but for reasons different than Wizards. Sorcerers "know" in a purely intuitive sense, though there are small traces of 'devotion' for at least some kinds (Storm and Cosmic, for instance).

From there, I would then say that the majority of gods, or at least a majority of those that are neither Chaotic nor Evil (so LG, NG, LN, and TN), select/prefer people who are high on the "devotion" scale and thus are not especially interested in "creating" Warlock, Sorcerer, or Wizard helpers. Bahamut is an especially bad example, IMO, because he's LG and therefore likely (IMO) to oppose granting power to someone just because it would be "effective" or "practical" or the like. He seems like a very Optimus Prime-y kind of guy--you do things the "right" way.

A different god--let's say Kord, for instance--might be totally okay with letting slip One Weird Celestial Trick etc. He'd probably think Wizards are a little too stogy for his tastes, but I could (maybe) even buy a Sorcerous bloodline coming from the STRENGTH OF THE STRENGTH GOD, RAWR.

Druid (and Shaman and a few other things) poses a somewhat thornier problem because it's more edition-dependent. Bards are also kinda hard to place on this scale, though I'd put them pretty much solely in the "magic-by-knowledge" axis. They might be 'devoted to song,' but it's not really a "purity" thing per se, rather a commitment to enhancing one's talents.

 

[Sunseeker]

Right, but that's what I'm saying. The history only exists through the DM's reality, and not by itself.

In-game? Sure. But that's your usual "this only flies in game if the DM lets it". That doesn't mean that you, as the creator of the character, have to accept that answer outside the table.

 

[Shasarak]

Is there any reason why you can not just make a pact with Pelor if you want to be a "good" Warlock?

 

[Mephista]

Is there any reason why you can not just make a pact with Pelor if you want to be a "good" Warlock?

Sure. At the moment, there's no such thing as a Celestial patron. Pelor isn't a Fiend, a Great Old One, or one of the a Fey. Warlock spells are traditionally very dark, and include using a lot of necrotic damage, something that Pelor frowns on.

 

[Shasarak]

Sure. At the moment, there's no such thing as a Celestial patron. Pelor isn't a Fiend, a Great Old One, or one of the a Fey. Warlock spells are traditionally very dark, and include using a lot of necrotic damage, something that Pelor frowns on.

So could we replace Necrotic damage with Radiant damage?

 

[GSHamster]

From there, I would then say that the majority of gods, or at least a majority of those that are neither Chaotic nor Evil (so LG, NG, LN, and TN), select/prefer people who are high on the "devotion" scale and thus are not especially interested in "creating" Warlock, Sorcerer, or Wizard helpers. Bahamut is an especially bad example, IMO, because he's LG and therefore likely (IMO) to oppose granting power to someone just because it would be "effective" or "practical" or the like. He seems like a very Optimus Prime-y kind of guy--you do things the "right" way.

A different god--let's say Kord, for instance--might be totally okay with letting slip One Weird Celestial Trick etc. He'd probably think Wizards are a little too stogy for his tastes, but I could (maybe) even buy a Sorcerous bloodline coming from the STRENGTH OF THE STRENGTH GOD, RAWR.

[sblock]Very true. Even in the Dresden Files, Harry essentially receives his celestial power through Uriel, who is presented as a sort of angelic spymaster. An angel who works in the shadows, and thus is the type who is more likely to form pacts with powerful assets instead of focusing on devoted characters.[/sblock]

 

[Mephista]

So could we replace Necrotic damage with Radiant damage?

You can use extensive house rules to do whatever you want. However, necrotic damage is just one aspect of the warlock that's traditionally opposed to celestial creatures.

A Celestial Patron, for a warlock, is akin to a paladin becoming an Oathbreaker. Or, perhaps, a Death Domain cleric. Its the exact opposite of what the default class embodies. Its doable, but highly questionable and hard to get right. Especially without ruining the whole "forbidden lore," dabbler in dark magic, and iconoclast aspects of the warlock. Its the class for the whole "witch" archetype. Pelor and his angels as a patron risk making warlocks... mainstream. As if its just something you can casually engage in.