D&D 5E (2024) Hexblade isn't coming, yet.

[Not a Decepticon]

And it’s literally true - the PC cannot know what the player has not chosen yet. But the PC can believe whatever the player wants them to. Including the nature of their patron. It may be true or it may be false, a lying patron makes for an interesting narrative.

And there is nothing to stop the player working something out with the DM, including a double cross, or encountering the being who will become the patron during the first couple of levels of the game.

again, just because you can fix it at your own table, doesn't mean the default state isn't bad.

 

[Maxperson]

At level 1, there's several possibilities. First, the player and DM can decide that the player makes a pact (with a Fiend, Fey, or whatever), right out of the gate at level 1. The fact that subclass abilities come online at level 3 make no difference. (and different choices of spell and invocation can make each Warlock feel different, even at level 1).

This is the way it has to be in my game. A pact is a contract and I work with the player to negotiate the details of that pact prior to the start of the game. In order for me to know how to bargain, I really need to know who the patron is.

I'm not against the player choosing to be ignorant of his patron until 3rd level, or even higher level depending, but the patron and subclass need to be set in stone at character creation.

 

[Remathilis]

Really? THIS is the way you see an idea that the world should be more than just decoration and the NPCs should be actual people with personalities and actions hsould have consequences, to let the players be immersed in the game? It looks to me like you are viewing relationship between GM and players as inherently hostile and you describe any game where you cannot just murder and steal everything and never face a slightest pushback as if it was railroaded to hell and back

Yeah, I see another Viking hat DM who thinks he can control a players character indirectly. You already pointed out a PC fighter who kills and steals will face terrestrial punishment, but that's not good enough for the warlock. Strip his powers, crush him for his insolence. Run him on a leash like a dog.

I'm Starting to actually wonder if anyone on this board actually likes players or are they a just a necessary evil because someone has to bear witness to the DMs greatness.

You don't have to reply. I won't see it.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The patron is 100% an NPC

Try reading what the text says, rather than what you think it says. It says nothing that requires the patron to be an NPC in the game, or indeed have one at all until some indeterminate, but implicitly high, level. Moreover, several of the subclasses suggest that the warlock may call upon multiple beings, not a single individual.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Yeah, I see another Viking hat DM who thinks he can control a players character indirectly. You already pointed out a PC fighter who kills and steals will face terrestrial punishment, but that's not good enough for the warlock. Strip his powers, crush him for his insolence. Run him on a leash like a dog.

I'm Starting to actually wonder if anyone on this board actually likes players or are they a just a necessary evil because someone has to bear witness to the DMs greatness.

You don't have to reply. I won't see it.

Sounds very much like the sort of toxic bullying entitled DMing that @EzekielRaiden has had such negative experiences with.

I run my games to entertain my players, not to make my players entertain me.

 

[SkidAce]

I am fully on board with the Warlock Patrons who are 100% golden retriever himbos/himbas and the Warlock Patrons who will dead set look into their Warlocks deep in the eyes and go YOUR MINE!! (And I don't mean in the lovey dovey way either).

When the Magical Sugar Daddy says jump, how high is the expected response( Free magic straight from the tap? Nope, not in this Economy).


Seriously, the 5E Warlock is probably my fave class and how open ended ya can make it when it comes to RPing.

In our campaign we kinda view warlocks as deal makers and secret learners. So once they make a pact for certain abilities/esoteric secrets, they always have them, Patron can not rescind. It makes warlock different from clerics and sorcerers.

Of course, piss off the patron ("Suck it Cosmodeus!") and they may not teach/expose/grant you any more stuff. Or really piss them off and they send their other warlock after you. (higher level and far more respect then you, you failure!)


edit:typoes

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Yeah, I see another Viking hat DM who thinks he can control a players character indirectly. You already pointed out a PC fighter who kills and steals will face terrestrial punishment, but that's not good enough for the warlock. Strip his powers, crush him for his insolence. Run him on a leash like a dog.

I'm Starting to actually wonder if anyone on this board actually likes players or are they a just a necessary evil because someone has to bear witness to the DMs greatness.

You don't have to reply. I won't see it.

Wow, a lot of very insulting assumptions about me and my dming style, without ever having played with me even. Complete reduction of my argument to most nonsensically extreme strawman because the nuance was too hard, I guess. And just leaving on "I AM BLOCKING YOU". I was expecting something better, ngl.

 

[Not a Decepticon]

Try reading what the text says, rather than what you think it says. It says nothing that requires the patron to be an NPC in the game, or indeed have one at all until some indeterminate, but implicitly high, level. Moreover, several of the subclasses suggest that the warlock may call upon multiple beings, not a single individual.

2014 or 2024 text? because 2024 is the one we have problem with. I in particular have a HUGE beef with the fact RAW I cannot introduce patron before level 10 when majority of campaigns end at level 7.

Sounds very much like the sort of toxic bullying entitled DMing that @EzekielRaiden has had such negative experiences with.

I run my games to entertain my players, not to make my players entertain me.

Well if you respond to a strawman that flattened my argument until it did not resemble what I have said at all, and in fact contradicts one of things i have, sure, you can make any wrong assumptions about me you want.

 

[Maxperson]

Try reading what the text says, rather than what you think it says. It says nothing that requires the patron to be an NPC in the game, or indeed have one at all until some indeterminate, but implicitly high, level. Moreover, several of the subclasses suggest that the warlock may call upon multiple beings, not a single individual.

Here's the thing. If it ain't a PC, it's an NPC. So all patrons, whether single or multiple, are NPCs. As a being that exists in my game, it's an NPC that I can call upon. The player can't create a being that isn't also an NPC.

 

[Maxperson]

Hexblade was never specifically your weapon. The DM isn't going to let you have Ebonbane, Stormbringer, the Sword of Kas or Blackrazor at level 3. You could have one of those weapons as your patron, but you don't get to possess them.

I think the idea is that the weapon is maybe a +0 magic weapon that has the power to impart warlock stuff after making the pact. Then as the PC levels up, the weapon grows in power. You can have it absorb other magic weapon properties like @Steampunkette did, or maybe have it grow like the 3e weapons of legacy that gained powers as the PC gained levels. The PC isn't starting with Stormbringer at level 3, but he's finishing with Stormbringer in his hands at level 20.