Dark Speech & the Warlock

[frankthedm]

Is dark speech widely recognizable as such?

In my game Infernal and Abyssal languages are easily recognizable and widely believed as evil. In nostalgia to the 80’s Satanic Panic, they are not dissimilar to a record played backwards. Dark Speech is similar, though stronger, more reverberating and not dissimilar to the verbal components to higher level spells.

A normal listener might think upon hearing Infernal or Abyssal he is hearing “the Dark Speech”. But upon hearing the True Dark Speech, the mistake won’t be made again.

Is speaking a word of it an evil act?

In my game, hell yes. Though the Complete arcane writer did seem to indicate the bit in question was intended for flavor.

IMG in most cities, speaking in Infernal or Abyssal carries a death sentence.

 

[Quidam]

IMG in most cities, speaking in Infernal or Abyssal carries a death sentence.

Do you think the warlock class was balanced with such considerations in mind?

If a player in your game were interested in playing a warlock of a different flavor, would you accept a house ruled version of the class that was mechanically equivalent?

Do you think the invocation baleful utterance would be imbalanced were the flavor text removed, and likewise, woud you be open to a different flavor with mechanical equivalence?

I've wondered more than once what WotC was thinking with the flavor of the warlock. It makes it a devilishly hard class to play in a good-aligned party, which most are. Were they thinking they'd be used as NPCs primarily?

 

[javcs]

How is it "devilishly hard to play in a good-aligned party"?

You either need to be chaotic, in which case CG or CN are ok for a good party, or evil, in which case you're not part of the good-aligned party.
Did you miss the evil or chaotic alignment req?

 

[Bad Paper]

In light of the DR/cold iron, don't you mean demonically hard to play..?

 

[javcs]

Fey have DR/cold iron, too, y'know.
And they're chaotic.

 

[Quidam]

How is it "devilishly hard to play in a good-aligned party"?

While I'm quite aware that the alignment requirement is Evil or Chaotic. However, when your DM rules that every time your conspicuously one-trick pony does his trick, he's performing an evil act- well, problems arise.

Look at all the 'flavor' of a warlock. Does any of it scream "Chaotic Good"? No. Bats and Dark Speech and icky gooey evil.

I love the mechanics of the warlock and I'm quite happy to play Chaotic, but I chafe at being penalized mechanically for what might be misplaced flavor.

Either make the 'flavor' optional, or make the alignment requirement "Evil" and write it off as a player class for good.

 

[Corsair]

Fey have DR/cold iron, too, y'know.
And they're chaotic.

And you can describe your eldritch blast as being sparkly and shiny and pretty colors! And you can dress in pastels!

 

[frankthedm]

Do you think the warlock class was balanced with such considerations in mind?

The class was balanced in mind with the 3e presumptions of always reliable magic, magic items are purchasable in towns, acid conjurations get around SR, flight & teleportation is readily available at mid levels and that NPCs in town are as open minded and as accepting as they need be not to lynch or burn at the stake characters that they pseudo-historically should.

If a player in your game were interested in playing a warlock of a different flavor, would you accept a house ruled version of the class that was mechanically equivalent?

1. I do not use the warlock class because of the assumptions listed above.

2. I would not change the class. Its flavor and abilities fit each other perfectly. I very might allow a very hard-line Lawful { Lawful equivalent of exalted good] character to take the class by taking several oaths related to the powers they gain. Violating those oaths would entail the Chaos / Evil granted powers going haywire until the problem is corrected with lots of collateral damage being likely.

I've wondered more than once what WotC was thinking with the flavor of the warlock. It makes it a devilishly hard class to play in a good-aligned party, which most are. Were they thinking they'd be used as NPCs primarily?

Lots of people have this line of thinking with good reasoning. The warlock was designed to be the comic book wizard who battles with magical blasts and beseeches / commands the powers of darkness to accomplish ‘spells’. It fits that role quite well.

 

[javcs]

Flavor Text and Flavor Descriptions != Game Rules.

However, since, in the Baleful Utterance invocation description it says "Dark Speech (described in Book of Vile Darkness)", I would say, yes, it is an evil act.

As a DM, I would let a fey aligned warlock, as opposed to a demonic aligned warlock, alter their power's invocations such that mechanically they're still the same, but that flavor wise, they're not so evil/dark oriented but more nature/fey oriented. However, I would also let them leave it as it is, without penalizing them for the use of some of their powers, under the assumption, that they do good deeds as well, so they'd balance out at CN. If they didn't do good deeds, then, yes, I would start keeping track of the weight of their evil acts/uses of evil powers on their souls.

'Course, my chars tend to be more neutral aligned than not, and on alignment tests I come out as true neutral or chaotic neutral, so I may not have as objective an opinion as I might wish.

 

[Stalker0]

I would say the dark speech is pure flavor and just ignored for game mechanics. Out of all the invocations, this is the only one that an evil warlock can use but the CG one can't? I don't buy that.