Elemental pacts for warlocks? And "pacts" = bad dynamics?

[Silverblade The Ench]

1) Prior to, and early in 4th ed release, I started threads about the limited number of warlock pacts, and them being slanted heavily to evil.
This always bugged me. I find it far too limiting and far too much about appealing to folk who want to play "maligned outsider PCs", if you know what I mean?
Definately need a lot more pacts, and not all of them "evil".
Playing the anti-hero is fine, but it doesn't have to define a whole class!

"assassin" is a profession by the way, folks, not a "class", in case you wish to bring that point in
Doesn't matter how they kill, murder for profit and thus being a non-good anti-hero is fine, but it's not about a specific class.

In real life, we don't have wizards, or damn, would assassinations have been even more weird!
"JFK killed by the grassy gnoll!"

2) Talk about Dark Sun for 4th ed made me think about warlocks for that setting.

3) "Pacts" make no damn sense to me, a lot of the time, as in "contracts".
Yeah, right so, if a devil can give this power, why can't HE use it, too, eh? That kind of thing.

it makes sense if say, some ancient entity shares some power, expecting something back, or teaches an ancient form of maigc.
Or if it's a link to so some strange power.
But a "pact" always defines it as a "contract", ya know?
It makes no sense if it's an in-born ability, or a power gives it to a character just to go cause mayhem and enjoy the results, if it's granted by a benign power for good causes, etc etc.

"Pact" as a generic name of their powers is cool, rather than having to be some contractual thing.
Lawyers...infernal pacts...*mutters darkly*

4) Linking warlock powers to specific powers, creatures, themes or whatever is cool.
They aren't clerics, they aren't book-bound wizards etc.
It's a raw, eldritch, dangerous power usually linked to some mighty force or being.
But dangerous doesn't have to mean "evil".
Fey pact makes perfectly good sense. Evil pacts make sense, but why not more neutral and good ones?

Linking D&D warlocks to "evil" is wrong, IMHO.
We finally broke the silly "paladins HAVE to be Lawful Good" cliche', can't we break the warlock one too? Or is that too subversive, eh?


5) From Dark Sun, I'd really like to see "Elemental" pacts for warlocks.
I hope either PHB3 or Arcane Power II have elemental pacts for warlocks.
This would help with my Dark Sun games and warlocks over all.

Warlocks as champions of, or imbued with elemental forces, or thieves of such power etc, are all good fun, IMHO

So fire, earth, air, water (and other) elemental pacts would be a good idea.

 

[Felon]

Silverblade, that is one rambling, disjointed, typo-riddled post. Go back and edit it so it's not so coherency-challenged.

There is no evil alignment restriction for warlocks. Warlocks in the PHB have access to fey, star, and infernal pacts. The fey pact easily provides room for good-aligned warlocks. The star is basically set up as "beyond good and evil", and could be taken in either direction; you can be the guy blasting with light or darkness. Even someone in a pact with infernal powers need not be evil. Take a cue from the TV show "Reaper"; how about a character who has powers as a result of a pact made by his parents? How about a child raised in a demonic cult who runs away?

The term "pact" is pretty open-ended, as is the term "contract". They can be implicit or explicit, a vague oral agreement or a highly-explicit set of documented obligations, an ongoing relationship of give-and-take or a one-time lump-sum exchange. So rejoice--it can indeed be an ancient entity sharing power or teaching an ancient form of magic or a connection a mysterious source of power. All that stuff you said.

So, basically it seems to me you have rushed into a set of preconceptions the same way into making that post. The PHB doesn't compel warlocks to be evil.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

Typos are a result of illness and like yourself, occasional disgreements betwixt the hyper-dimensions of fingers and keyboards!

My peculiar writing style is due to a prefference for non-boring, non-lawyereze conversation

I know warlocks don't "have" to be evil, but the entire ethos of the class is very heavily slanted to "evil" at least by suggestion.

"Dark Pact" "Infernal pact"...don't see many "Cute Fluffy Bunny pacts" do ya?

"Star pact" was mostly neutral-ish, now it's seemingly linked with the Far Realm...which should be a matter for individual DM interpretation.

So that's two, possibly 3 pacts definately linked, at least in naming and thematics, to evil. You can also check some of the power's names:
Diabolic Grasp; Dreadful Word, Vampiric Embrace, Witchfire, and that's just the 1st level PHB1 encounter attack power names!
(also reminds me of sleeping on the couch, too, oddly enough.... ).

See what I mean?
the class, like it or not, is rooted in a thematic that's mostly about dark and evil stuff.

"Pact" implies a bargain. fair enough foir a term for a game mechanic: you have to name their style "something", after all, "Pact" is as good a name as any.
But with all the rest, it sets a tone that warlocks are still too much like their 3rd ed version.

Anyway, the class does have far too few pacts. What say you, on elemental pacts?

 

[Felon]

I don't think a pact can get any more "fluffy bunny" than making deals with fairies. Sure, there's an overall flavor of playing with dangerous magicks. But a theme isn't a hard restriction.

As to elemental pacts, the chief selling point for any new class tree is how it offers a new approach to using the class's powers. I know how playing a fey warlock's powerset plays differently from an infernal warlock's. Sell the elemental pact on what it has to offer.

There are too few powers considering that they are divided between Con and Cha, forcing a warlock to write off a large number of options. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing a bit more to offer the Con-based warlock. We've had plenty of bias towards the Charisma builds.

 

[Lord Xtheth]

Yes, I would love to see more options!
More options for EVERYTHING!

4 New subsets for Warlock would be great (Without getting into the metaphysical sence of elements) But what about the rest of the classes?

Maybe this would be a good start point for the Quintessential Warlock?

 

[Nivenus]

I disagree. This is a bit unusual for me as I, for one, liked the idea of opening paladins up. However, I still like alignment restrictions (such as the new restriction that paladins must be the exact alignment of their deity), because I think they add flavor.

For some classes, who are supposed to versatile a lack of restrictions makes sense. Wizards or rogues for instance. Other classes make sense to have restrictions with options - like the divine classes, who can be of any alignment but are required to share the alignment or a close variant of their deity's. However, I think in some cases, alignment is an essential part of the class's fluff.

Warlocks are a good example. The whole point of the warlock is an arcanist who chooses the quick and dirty path to power over the safer but more arduous methods used by wizards/swordmages (and bards to some limited extent) or through inborn talent like sorcerers. If you remove this element, warlocks are essentially wizards or sorcerers with different slightly different mechanics.

I can see the appeal of the latter idea, but I think that, really, when it gets down to it, the name "warlock" has negative connotations. I think it's useful to keep those connotations. True, paladin generally has good connotations but it also is a synonym for knight. Warlock simply means "oathbreaker" (which is sort of ironic, given that warlocks are tied to Faustian tradition).

That said, I'm not against good warlocks. In my games I use the old 3.5 alignment requirements - chaotic or evil - not necessarily both. So a chaotic good warlock is, in my mind, wholly viable. As an alternative alignment restriction, I can also see variants depending on the pact. Perhaps an infernal warlock, for instance, couldn't really make a pact if they were chaotic (since devils are so reputably lawful) while a fey pact might be more open to good alignments (since, while dangerous, fey are not usually evil).

However, I am wholly against the idea of "celestial" pacts, wherein a warlock gains power through some angel or somesuch. That, to me, treads on the territory of divine power and, more to the point, goes against the entire feel of the warlock. When it comes down to it, I can't really see a lawful good entity promoting the quick and dirty path to power, really.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

Felon
maybe it's cause I'm a Scot, but the "faerie folk" are often not cute n' cuddly to my way of thinking!
Seen "Hellboy 2" ? hehe!

I'm not sure on how to "sell" the elemental pacts.
just some thoughts:

Can't make them ONLY one type of damage or that causes obvious weaknesses.
So, their "at will power" would need ot be of a fixed elemental type, but, also do a specific effect based on it's type?

I'd say things like oh a fire pact warlock, some of his powers are "magma" and thus do physical damage (getting slammed in the face with molten rock's gonna bash you, actually), with ongoing fire damage, and restrain you (cooling on you)

Others do slashing damage (hot obsidian, vicitm is blinded or slowed)
I know 4th ed isn't bothered by type of physical damage (slash pierce bludgeon) but just for thematic style.

Steam can create concealment (got that idea from Dungeon Delve, which I just got today) and also push, blindess and fire damage.

Water could do cold or acid damage. you can imagine it doing a lot of slide and push effects..throwing lethal icicles...making ice spikes leap up from the floor etc.

Curse of the Elemental Snake: creates a ghostly snake-like form to surround the victim, seemingly made of chosen element.
while in effect (save ends), anytime the victim moves or attacks, but only once per round, the snake strikes, Con vs Ref.
damage depends on level of power of course, but, it has an additonal effect based on the element:
FIre = extra damage
Earth = victim slowed until end of their round
Air = slide 1 square
Water = -2 attack this round from acid causing pain.
(just end of the vicitm's round to save extra tracking and because the curse is a reaction to the victim's act...if the vicitm does not move or attack, they are not harmed)

Curse of Elemental Blade-Blocking
the victim's weapon, when they attack, fires off gouts of acid, steam, fire or sharp crystals into the user. They take damage and get a penalty to hit.

Curse of the Unforgiving Archon.
An archon appears, and attacks the victim. It's attacks can only hurt the victim and it ignores everyone else.

Jaunt of Unkind Elements
the victim is hurled through the elemental chaos, he winks out of existance for 1 round, on the following round, he appears in a random square of the DM's chosing within 5 squares of his start point.
The victim suffers four types of attacks during the jaunt, hitting against one of each of his Defences: acid, fire, cold, electricity.

pact Boon, either a resist something else based on each element?
Sound fun?

Nivenus,
I don't see why warlocks have to be a "quick and dirty path to power", at all.
Why is having a link to the forces of the Feywild, for example, "quick and dirty"?
Strange, dangerous, perhaps, but why does it have to be quick and dirty?
Fine if a DM wants that, but I just don't see it, I'd rather it's a more unusual, mysterious raw form of magic
Folk think it's dangerous (which it may well be), and that's why folk consider it "evil" or "quick and dirty".

See what I mean? taking alignment out of classes is a good idea....being "good" or "evil" is more about roles (as professions etc) or actions, than D&D classes.

A warlock having an infernal power source is fine, as is an elemental, or celestial, or mysterious, or ancient, or dreaded, or even philosophical source.
For example:

Johanes is a warlock from the city of Seven Swords.
The city is a peculiar place where for millenia, they have raised folk to be the defenders and supporters of their empire, be it on the battlefield or in more mundane ways, such as engineers or bakers. Everyone regards it as their utmost duty to work for the Empire's good.
Somehow, this devotion has crystallized into strange zitgeist, an actiual barely conscious force of immense power, that few folk know exists.
Rare people, seemingly chosen randomly perhaps by force of will or ordeal, but always folk of honour who support the EMpire, are imbued with some part of this zitgeist's power. It yearns and pushes, wanting them to destory the EMpire's foes, and gives them strange powers to do so.

Johanes is a warlock who is Lawful Good. He works in the city rooting out traitors and miscreants. He doesn't relaly understand the force he has, but the city's elders respect his peculiar abilities and see it as arcane proof of their city's devotion to the empire.

Now, why can't that be a legit warlock, hm?