Fluff, Rules, and the Cleric/Warlock Multiclass (WITH POLL!)

[CleverNickName]

Can you? Sure. It's a fantasy roleplaying game, anything's possible.

Should you? Probably not. That particular combination sounds really tedious and fiddly from a rules perspective, and really convoluted and contrived from a story perspective.

Will I? Absolutely not, I abhor multiclassing.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Yes.
There is nothing in the rules prohibiting it.
The fluff may prohibit some combinations of circumstance, patron, and deity. Some however work very well together and are most definitely possible. Far more than just the corner-cases from Steeldragon's diatribe.

Of course the option is contingent upon the DM allowing multiclassing, and not having game-specific rules or setting-specific fluff that would also otherwise prohibit the combination.

 

[ClaytonCross]

Short answer is "Yes you can multiclass, its not a problem", why?

1. Deities and Patrons are not the same thing. Deities are beings of supreme power and Patrons are usually lesser beings vying for more power or to support the goals for greater power or for a greater power. As long as those goals align you are not worshipping two deities so there is no conflict.

Example: If you were a Cleric of Ioun sent on a mission to the Shadow Fey to fight the undead armies of Vecna then ran across a general of the Raven Queen carrying a Hexblade and “Knighting” warlocks to hunt and kills the Vampire or Lich Generals of Vecna. The General and his HexBlade might be convinced to grant you power in service of the Raven Queen on the understanding that you vow to take special effort to destroy the Undead Vampire and Lich abominations where you can. This is not a vow of service to the Raven Queen, you are a Servent of Ioun, but while The Raven Queen and Ioun are not “allies” they are not enemies ether and their mutual hatred of Vecna against whom they are both sworn enemies means as long as you are attacking him you may gain support from both. You are not getting direct power from the Raven Queen as her cleric or Paladin but power from her servant the Hexblade that is an embodiment of the extinction of her will in physical form and as such you are granted power from this lesser “being” to further its goal to fulfill its mission to the Raven Queen.

2. Patrons who Serve or want the favor of Deities would willingly work together.

Example: Lest say you’re a Nature Cleric of Deity X and run across an Arch Fey. It would be in the interest of the Arch Fey to provide aid and perhaps even empower you as a warlock in order to push itself into the affairs of the Deity in a positive way. If you succeed in part for Arch Fey’s assistance it might elevate the Arch Fey in the eyes of the deity and be granted enough power to break from Arch Fey into a Demi Deity in service of your Deity.

3. “The Old One” patron is perhaps the only patron of Deity level power but is in fact so powerful that it creates warlocks by accident do to breaches in or siphoning of, its power. The result is that you can be a warlock with power to aid you a task supported by your Deity and have no obligations, attachment, or even awareness of your patron. In fact you may have achieved your pact by touching an item and absorbing it power without knowing its happened and be a warlock while thinking you are a part sorcerer from wild, storm, or shadow magic.

4. It is also understand able that you might want to undo a mistake or try to fight the corruption of a “dark power” as often warlocks are considered.

Example: Maybe during your youth, in order to break from your peasant servitude you made a deal with a fiend. As its demands of you become darker and more evil you realize you can obey and can’t cast the power aside. The Fiend now hunting you to enforce its pact or take it power back from your dead corpse, you turn to the Good/Neutral Deity of X swearing loyalty and servitude for protection and to suppress the power inside you from growing even more. The Deity accepts you as a Cleric or Paladin while allowing you to use your unique talents because as long as your mission is its mission then you holding on to power only aids your new Deity while diminishing your Warlock patron and preventing it from using the power it gave you to strengthen itself or make a new warlock.
(Think, Spawn form Image comics working with the Church to fight the Devil, while using the powers the Devil gave him to kill demons that hunt him and others, occasionally with the aid of angels and clergy. You are the outsider inside fighting the good fight.)

… Just a few options, I am sure there are plenty more but it’s a good start for ideas. If you make a secret deal with a fiend while following a good/neutral Deity... might cause you some issues though it doesn't stop if from happening ... as a GM I might make you replace some cleric levels with warlock levels and/or require a quest to regain your Deities favor to normalize or progress as a cleric.

 

[Mallus]

The first poll option is odd, because the 5e rules don’t prohibit it, beyond stating multiclassing is optional.

It just hit me Cleric/Warlock is a perfectly fine way to do Moorcock’s Elric in 5e. He’s a cleric of Arioch, but he also has warlock abilities from all the pacts his ancestors swore. Therefore, since Elric is the greatest fantasy character evar, any ruling that restricts your ability to create Elric is objectivity wrong.

(for certain values of ‘objective’)

Also, it’s completely rules-legal.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I had to vote Other because it is entirely situational.

It is completely rules-legal in any game that allows the optional multi-classing rules and is being played RAW.

Whether it is legal in the fluff is entirely up to the setting you are running. If I were to use a published setting that allowed it, and I wanted to run the setting as written, such as when running all those Adventurers League games set in the Realms, I, or any other DM that may not like it, would have to just deal with it and not be biased against a player for choosing that combo.

Now aside from that, if the combo does not violate any of my house rules for a home game, then it would be fine. After all, there are plenty of ways to roleplay this combo where it would fit the story and the world and the character, so long as the player is willing to roleplay it out.

 

[77IM]

So in your games, if a Cleric completely renounces their deity, you know, like, "I, Foolharidious, renounce Zeus as a good-for-nothing who can't get his fat behind off of Olympus, and probably doesn't even exist," then he still retains his powers? Even at, say, level 20? Even, you know, divine intervention?

Re-reading the cleric entry, I noticed two things.

1) Repeatedly, the fluff talks about the deity choosing the cleric, not the other way around. TwoSix said it well:

Just because you're done with your deity, doesn't mean your deity is done with you.

It's quite possible that when you tell Zeus to stuff it, Zeus knew all along that you were gonna say that, because, you know, he's a god and everything. There's a Divine Plan at work, and for whatever reason, giving you divine magic furthers Zeus's ethos. I mean, what if Zeus is the god of atheists?

Paladin of Souls by Lois McMaster Bujold is an excellent example of a "cleric" who doesn't seem particularly like her deity. (It's also just a really amazingly good novel. Please don't be put off by the word "paladin" in the title; it's a non-traditional fantasy setting so the title character is really not very paladinny at all.)



2) To prepare a new list of spells, you must spend time in prayer and meditation. To access Divine Intervention, you must call upon your deity. In the fluff text of the class, it mentions that "the ability to cast cleric spells relies on devotion and an intuitive sense of the deity's wishes."

Is your hypothetical PC still willing to do all those things (prayer, meditation, call upon your deity, etc.)? If so, then I'd say that your actions show your continued devotion, even if your flippant words towards Zeus do not. If your PC isn't willing do to those things, then they are deliberately forsaking the divine power that is granted unto them, and they won't be using those class features, either. So basically the words you say don't matter.

The tricky issue is "the ability to cast cleric spells relies on devotion" -- what if your other actions show lack of devotion? Like, what if Zeus is the god of law, and you start acting really chaotic? What if Zeus is the god of justice, and you begin slaughtering innocents? What if Zeus is the god of oaths, and you start breaking oaths left and right just to piss him off?

One could argue that these actions show insufficient devotion and cause clerical spellcasting to stop working. However, because the cleric also gets "an intuitive sense of the deity's wishes," the DM would have to tell the player that this is the consequence, BEFORE the player took those actions. After all, if the fluff text about devotion is being treated as rules, then the fluff text about intuitive sense should also be treated as rules.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Repeatedly, the fluff talks about the deity choosing the cleric, not the other way around.

Well, it's a two-way street. As you note, the cleric also has to show devotion to the deity; they could choose not to do that. Obviously devotion is not sufficient to be granted magical power, or else there'd be a lot more clerics. And of course struggles of faith and crises of doubt are acceptable, even desirable for adding some depth and texture to the character. But if a PC isn't generally loyal to their deity and striving to serve the divine purpose, I'd have a hard time calling them a cleric. For a true one-way "you have been chosen whether you like it or not" character, I'd look to the divine soul sorcerer instead, and for a cross-purposes "you deal with a higher power but towards your own ends" character, of course, the warlock.

 

[akr71]

I said yes. However, like all character multiclassing decisions, your DM should be involved. I see it as a great 'flawed character' opportunity - a pious cleric gets an offer of power to great to resist - that doesn't mean the cleric doesn't still have faith in his/her deity, but was offered something through other channels, at a price.

Having said that, a LG cleric deciding to go Fiend Pact seems a bit much, but if the player and DM can come to some kind of consensus, I think it could work.

 

[TwoSix]

If one wishes to purposely blur the lines between concepts, come up with corner-case after corner-case stories for any and all combinations of abilities, and/or outright ignore [or purposefully misinterpret] the fluff of a class to suit their purposes -as it seems more and more of the D&D/fantasy RPG-playing culture are willing to do- then there is no point in having classes at all and D&D is dead. It becomes some other game. Can be a fun game. Can be a great game. But eventually, it will not be D&D.

This, however hypothetical, combination does not exist in a vacuum. It is a part of a perspective (if not paradigm) shift in the fantasy RPG/D&D culture.

You're absolutely right, sir. The landscapers have done a wonderful job with the sod, and I will remove myself promptly so as not to cause unsightly divots.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*