Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7458359" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Ok so in your game you simply had setting installed to stop warlock and paladin or cleric multiclassing but leave the rest fine - OK. Not an approach i would take but hey, a Gm can always pick and choiose which classes and combos are allowed in their game. You do not want rogues and gnomes to be the same character - just add the necessary setting and poof - that combo like any other is gone and you do not have to worry with it.paladins have ties to oaths and the divine is rife throughout their description as well so it leaves a lot open to the Gm to work into his campaign as they like it."otherwordly being" that specifically includes fiends, celestials, fey, shadow etc... i see that as wide open as to the types of creatures that can be involved and saw no reason to say the celestial that you patronize has to be an atheist or agnositc with no ties to a deity (for instance). Not that its bad for your campaign, i am sure that makes sense there.As for serving two masters, it happens all the time - even for religious types - who have their deity but also a lot of people (entities) between them. A church for instance has teirs of order and so on. The high priest may give the lower priest or acolyte an order and the junior go do it. that does not mean they junior is now no longer following or worshipping his deity, right? just that the sanctified church and its hierarchy is being applied.One would almost think with churches and with some of them being organized there might be deities of saw a lawful bent who liked heirarchy and order - somewhere in the cosmos - who like using intermediaries.But hey, again, not for every campaign.So, yeah, like i said, in my games a warlock and paladin or warlock and cleric or even warlock and druid are just as explainable as a warlocxk and fighter or a warlock and rogue and a warlock and sorcerer... just like the others it all has to fit into a character concept - but no one pair requires so much difference as to be exclusive if it makes sense.i actually found the idea of the paladin-warlock as a more "caster centered" warrior to make a lot of sense as a design - similar to the fighter-warlock in concept but with added zest.thats why they have 51 flavors... or maybe in your case 49?<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" /></blockquote>

Verification