Design & Development: The Warlock

Mark me down for not likeing the forced dark flavor of the class. It doesn't bother me that there are Dark options and I would actually like to see talent treess (oe whatever 4e is going to call them) for really Dark aspects of a PC - but lets get some Light ones as well. Let the player decide which path they are going to go down.

It's a flavor thing that can be easily changed - at least right now. Even having the Warlock send a bad guy to hell can be flavor changed to something else. But if this flavor is built in from the beginning - and it is forced on us from the beginning, I'm wondering how long before there is an ability where it's harder to file off the serial numbers and make it not be Dark.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

And judging by the pure rocksauce that is the Tiefling Warlock sketch, I'd guess that the primary design influence for 4e may be "3e with the volume turned up".

Which is ****in' metal in my book.
 


Wormwood said:
4e may be "3e with the volume turned up".

But this edition goes to eleven?

I really don't know why people keep harping on about the dark flavour etc, this new article states right there that you can go the feral route, so what's the problem?

I'm gearing up for my killmoulis warlock!
 

mhacdebhandia said:
That's a pretty shallow, whiny complaint you have there.

It's not shallow at all. D&D in pieces appears to be moving to a "toying with fiends" ia A-OK mindset. I find it quite distasteful. So do a considerable minority of D&D players. I have no problem with the option being there, I'd just prefer a less uberevil warlock option. I think the feral warlock may be it for me though.
 
Last edited:


Well first let me say that this is the first Dragon article I found an interesting read, and enjoyed it.

As far as the flavor goes I gotta chime in with the "options" crowd. Right now I don't think the evil flavor of the warlock should be a forced thing, and as far as the tons of roleplaying possibilities...how would it be any different if the Warlock could choose to make pacts with evil or good. I for one find evil characters disruptive to a game, unless everyone is on the same page...and making a character who does evil to attain his powers just doesn't sit right with me.

I'm wondering from a roleplaying perspective, how exactly does this work. If you have an evil being as your patron, who also supplies your powers, I would assume the being wants something in return? Now you can go the whole Elric/Arioch direction...but even Elric (on more than one occasion) gets slapped down by Arioch for not going with the plan, and eventually the albino turns on him by forsaking chaos. I can't see a player being happy if a DM uses this type of heavy handed technique to enforce the player's price for his powers. Or a player who is willing to relenquish his/her power as they become a hero.

Second thing I'm wondering is why is being the slave of a demon/devil/fay cool or heroic enough to be a primary class? Maybe I don't get the whole "metal" thing (I like hip-hop...not gangsta rap, real hip-hop). Even in other games with this type of vibe...Warhammer, Stormbringer, etc. there is a very real price to pay for this type of power (corruption, mutations, demons turning on you, etc.). Now we don't know enough about the mechanics yet, but if WotC makes this a character with no reprecussions for his/her power I will be sorely dissapointed. It's this, real mechanical drawbacks and risks, that make this type of character interesting. The problems I can see arising with this type of mechanic would be... it will disadvantage the player vs. other spellcasters and would certainly cause strife in anything but an evil PC game.

Elric is an interesting character because he attains Stormbringer and summons Arioch for an understandable motive...love. He is more interesting because he slowly realizes what he's done and unleashed as the world and his personal life suffer the effects of having tilted the world towards chaos. He is a hero because he tries to deny and fight against these forces and in the end is destroyed by them in trying to fix what he has wrought. This is what makes him a hero instead of a villain.

My biggest worry is that the warlock will just be a spellslinger who is evil with no reprecussions or context of what he/she has done for power.
 


If I may?

These concerns can easily seem odd, misplaced, or even shallow to those for whom the difference between imaginary murder & theft and imaginary apostasy appear to be, well, shallow and odd. Both are, in many ways of looking at, morality-neutral; some might even consider imaginary violent crimes to be somewhat worse than imaginary thought crimes, but I digress. Assigning real, personal moral value to one imaginary action, but not another - and it IS important to note that the purchase of a 4e PHB won't put your name on the Satanic Church's mailing list or anything - can seem to come out of deep left field.

I'm not really trying for a discussion - is there like a Cage Match forum or something for these - just trying to chime in from the "huh?" side with a bit of potential reasoning.
 


Remove ads

Top