Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9746726" data-attributes="member: 6790260">No, it isn't automatically what it means to me.But when I hear it being asked, I cannot deny, I fear the foot in the door. I have seen GMs (only two, but still) specifically and knowingly create situations where Paladins were doomed to fail in 3.x/PF1e. Where they had to choose between law and good and were thus guaranteed to fail no matter what. So this isn't some weird hypothetical for me. This is a thing I've seen happen. "Heeeeey, buddy, let's talk about your patron!" I know plenty of GMs out there genuinely do mean it solely to enrich the experience. But, especially if (unlike some of the replies I have gotten thus far) this is a kind of question only I as a warlock player get asked, not the Wizard or Fighter or Druid players, then yeah, that absolutely gets my Spidey senses tingling.And I'm well aware that ordinary players aren't dumb. They don't need to be told "oh by the way, the person you signed a pact with could screw you badly" is a possibility here. It's kind of a nearly universal trope at this point. So when the GM starts asking leading, probing questions, it's not hard to think "ah, I'm being singled out for harmful consequences simply because I felt like playing a Warlock and not a Bard" rather than "oh cool, this is a great roleplay opportunity that will exclusively result in more interesting stories".</blockquote>