Design & Development: The Warlock

[Imaro]

Refusing a demon's help and letting a bunch of kids burn because you're too proud to fall from grace?

Heck, now THAT is Evil.

How do you know the kids don't grow up to be the greatest mortal evil the world has seen? I just can't see evil planar beings like devils doing anything that doesn't (even if it's in a longer run than you can percieve) promote their agenda. You know they're evil, so ignorance isn't a viable excuse, even if you can't wrap your head around the totality( is this a word? Well it is now) of their plans.

 

[Rechan]

Wrong. 100% wrong. Characters gain xp, and thereby levels, by overcoming challenges. Traps are challenges. Puzzles are challenges. Role-playing awards are too. It's entirely possible to use non-lethal damage to overcome those goblins and get to the next level.

And you are certain that Mr. Warlock cannot get more powers from their class if they solve puzzles, beat traps, overcome RP encounters and don't kill their opponents?

Because if you are, I'd like to see your advanced copy of the PHB.

 

[Imaro]

Um, who says that shadow is evil? Shadow is just that: Darkness. There is no morality with regards to the absence or presence of light.

And how is it that darkness or fey are, by nature, ill-will upon humanity? Adventurers kill things. They often kill them for money. That's ill-will upon humanity, AND it furthers the goals of gods of slaughter, murder, and greed. OMG PCS = EVIL.

And if the world was totally engulfed in this non moral darkness would that be good or bad for human beings as a whole...I'm thinking famine, freezing to death, sheesh just the number of people who fall into ravines or off cliffs and are never found, etc. Some might survive but it wouldn't be considered a "good" or even "neutral" thing if you somehow helped this happen.

Again with the caveat of the points of light setting...what did the designers say happens when a gate opens? Powerful, dangerous things come out...dangerous being the key word, thus it is not a good thing for humanity as a whole.

 

[Zaruthustran]

edit: Zaruthustran You can have no conception of the can of worms you just opened. Might want to edit.

Tooo laaaaaaate!!!

For what it's worth, I withdraw any suggestion of what does and does not constitute a fall from grace.

And Imaro, choosing the Black color from Magic: the Gathering as your sig because you are, in fact, black? Totally awesome.

 

[Rechan]

And if the world was totally engulfed in this non moral darkness would that be good or bad for human beings as a whole...I'm thinking famine, freezing to death, sheesh just the number of people who fall into ravines or off cliffs and are never found, etc. Some might survive but it wouldn't be considered a "good" or even "neutral" thing if you somehow helped this happen.

Meanwhile, if the world was plunged into eternal light, it would be unable to cope with the heat, crops would burn, disease would be rampant. No one would be able to sleep because they can't get the light out of their eyes, and they would become delirious and die.

But I guess that part of Alaska that spends half a year in total darkness is TOTALLY evil. Avoid that place y'all; it's bad for humans.

You're applying morality to non-moral forces.

"WATER IS EVIL BECAUSE PEOPLE DROWN IN IT." "BUT PEOPLE NEED IT TO LIVE." "This is angsty because it is morally ambiguous! Where is my clear-cut heroic force of nature?"

Again with the caveat of the points of light setting...what did the designers say happens when a gate opens? Powerful, dangerous things come out...dangerous being the key word, thus it is not a good thing for humanity as a whole.

Blacksmiths are dangerous because they create weapons, which are dangerous. Having weapons isn't good for humanity. We all could just grow veggies and live in harmony if it wasn't for weapons.

KILL THE BLACKSMITH HE'S EVIL. He's got BLACK in his name, after all. Damn emo commoner.

 

[Paraxis]

Paraxis: What about my Roy-the-Warlock example, in which we postulate that someone's in this bind not of their own choice?

A concept like that is workable, but hard to roleplay. A character who's parents sell his soul before birth (let's assume they can), and grows to develope power from that is not Evil himself everything was out of his control. But to further develope those powers knowing the source might be a different matter. Back to the Elric example, if you forsake the power and take levels in other classes thats one thing, to keep taping into the power to try and do good is balancing act I think. One that could be cool to roleplay out.

Take Spawn for example, in the heat of the moment of death he reaches out and says he will do anything to go back so he can be with his wife. Selling soul = evil act...now he is not an evil person from that one action (let's ignore the whole he was a government assassin), but he is stuck. He can't change class for example in the comic, but he can try and control and limit the use of his power and for a good long time he does exactly that.

But all that said, I still think the overall tone of this class so far is very evil, no matter the alignment requirments.

So yes you can make a repetant or forsaken type good guy, or maybe the shadow and feral powers are going to be Good and have related powers. But from all the fluff we have so far the class is very Dark and mostly Evil.

Again, a favored soul/warlock class or just sorcerer would have been a better build then this warlock class it looks like we have been given.

The whole Evil thing about pride and letting some of the orphans die, well thats how life works. It's exactly the kind of tests that dieties in real world religions due all the time, the paladin doesn't have much faith in his god if he thinks he needs to have a demon bail him out of the situation.

EDIT**added this next part.

And you are certain that Mr. Warlock cannot get more powers from their class if they solve puzzles, beat traps, overcome RP encounters and don't kill their opponents?

Because if you are, I'd like to see your advanced copy of the PHB.

The problem isn't killing for XP, it's that they have a class ability that only works if they kill someone they have marked. So they get a power from taking life, a power not XP, someone else started comparing a fighter gaining XP from killing so he must be Evil. Well no the fighter isn't evil for getting XP, but a Warlock that targets a creature for death then gets some ability for slaying it is.

 

[Imaro]

Meanwhile, if the world was plunged into eternal light, it would be unable to cope with the heat, crops would burn, disease would be rampant. No one would be able to sleep because they can't get the light out of their eyes, and they would become delirious and die.

But I guess that part of Alaska that spends half a year in total darkness is TOTALLY evil. Avoid that place y'all; it's bad for humans.

You're applying morality to non-moral forces.

"WATER IS EVIL BECAUSE PEOPLE DROWN IN IT." "BUT PEOPLE NEED IT TO LIVE." "This is angsty because it is morally ambiguous! Where is my clear-cut heroic force of nature?"


Blacksmiths are dangerous because they create weapons, which are dangerous. Having weapons isn't good for humanity. We all could just grow veggies and live in harmony if it wasn't for weapons.

KILL THE BLACKSMITH HE'S EVIL. He's got BLACK in his name, after all. Damn emo commoner.

Nice...totally avoid the point with hyperbole. No water isn't evil, but the guy who keeps pouring more and more water into a damn until it bursts and floods a village killing hundreds is.


I'm curious where you're getting amoral fey from...do you have a 4e MM?

These beings are dangerous to humanity as a whole and thus can be considered evil. One could argue sociopaths aren't evil...just dangerous or men who do unlicensed medical experiments aren't evil...just dangerous. So tell me exactly when does something cross the line from dangerous to evil? Here's some help... a few definitions I found on the web...

morally bad or wrong; "evil purposes"; "an evil influence"; "evil deeds"
morally objectionable behavior
having the nature of vice
that which causes harm or destruction or misfortune; "the evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones"- Shakespeare
tending to cause great harm
the quality of being morally wrong in principle or practice; "attempts to explain the origin of evil in the world"
malefic: having or exerting a malignant influence; "malevolent stars"; "a malefic force

 

[TheSeer]

In a word, "no," I won't because there aren't any such statistics, other than the RPGA, which is the largest organized play group in the world. RPGA has a strict no evil characters policy, and evil actions get your character removed from play.

Now beyond that, take a look at what the core books say about alignment: characters in D&D are heroes, by and large.

Also in the core books: The option to have your character be Chaotic Evil. If the game were, as you say, pretty much designed to be only heroic, WHY have the choice to be evil in the core book? IMHO it's because the designers forsaw that not everyone plays the same, and wanted to have people have choices IF THEY WANTED. If you don't want, don't use. Just having a choice in the book hurts the people who don't use that choice in no way, shape, manner or form.

 

[Rechan]

Nice...totally avoid the point with hyperbole. No water isn't evil, but the guy who keeps pouring more and more water into a damn until it bursts and floods a village killing hundreds is.

And that isn't the case here. The ocean is full of water and yet people can live on it, around it, and if the world was an ocean, I'm sure humanity would thrive.

If your quota for "Bad for humanity" is "people will die", then nothing is good for humanity, including time.

I'm curious where you're getting amoral fey from...do you have a 4e MM?

Uh, folklore? Or do you think everything from pixies to Queen Mab drips evil and steps on puppies?

I just don't see WotC slapping 'Usually Evil' on most fey.

So tell me exactly when does something cross the line from dangerous to evil? Here's some help... a few definitions I found on the web...

I find it really funny that you keep using the word "evil" in the description OF evil. That doesn't help at all. And I disagree with a lot of those descriptions.

Lots of things are dangerous and could cross the gate. But a tiger roaming the land is dangerous to humans too, and tigers aren't inherently evil. I don't say the darkness amid the ponits of light is 'Points of Good amid EVIL' but 'Civilization and known versus unknown wild'. Africa in the 1800s-1920s was known as the Dark Continent, and it had a huge question mark on many maps. THIS is what I believe the points of Darkness is. "The unknown, where dangerous things dwell."

Asking me what goes from dangerous to evil depends on what context are we talking. The Real World? That would require me to accept that there are forces in the real world which are True Evil or that Evil even exists. In D&D? Evil is anything that you take the big rubber stamp that says EVIL and stamp it on something. In my campaign, Undead aren't EVIL. In yours, they are.

 

[Henry]

Wormwood, Twowolves -- let's please curb the arguing and take it to e-mail if you need to go any further.

I'm tempted to close the thread right now, because a LOT of people are getting pretty hot under the collar, and it's fast becoming an alignment debate, which no one ever seems to win -- but First I'm going to tell everyone to please calm down a be a bit more civil to one another. I'll have no choice but to close it completely if it doesn't change.