Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 6594983" data-attributes="member: 17077">Unfortunately, there are still some DMs that want to punish members of certain classes simply because of their fluff. There was a time when paladins, for example, had alignment and behavioral restrictions because they were effectively fighters++, and those restrictions were meant to balance that extra power. I don't think that trying to balance mechanical power with role-playing requirements was ever a good idea, but regardless, it isn't even called for anymore. Clerics, paladins, warlocks, etc. are no more powerful than the other character classes. A warlock is no more powerful than a wizard. He just learned his magic in a different way. He earned those class levels just as much as any other character did. The DM shouldn't go out of his way to punish him just because his class's flavor text says he learned his magic from a patron instead of a book.Things like broken oaths or betrayed patrons should have consequences. I just think those consequences should be of a purely role-playing nature, just like the decisions that lead to them. Instead of taking away a warlock's powers if he betrays his patron, have his patron become his nemesis. Instead of taking away a cleric's spells if he falls from grace, have him be shunned by members of his former faith, or even hunted by them depending on the circumstances. IMO, that's much more fun and interesting than simply stripping the character of his powers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Falling Icicle, post: 6594983, member: 17077"] Unfortunately, there are still some DMs that want to punish members of certain classes simply because of their fluff. There was a time when paladins, for example, had alignment and behavioral restrictions because they were effectively fighters++, and those restrictions were meant to balance that extra power. I don't think that trying to balance mechanical power with role-playing requirements was ever a good idea, but regardless, it isn't even called for anymore. Clerics, paladins, warlocks, etc. are no more powerful than the other character classes. A warlock is no more powerful than a wizard. He just learned his magic in a different way. He earned those class levels just as much as any other character did. The DM shouldn't go out of his way to punish him just because his class's flavor text says he learned his magic from a patron instead of a book. Things like broken oaths or betrayed patrons should have consequences. I just think those consequences should be of a purely role-playing nature, just like the decisions that lead to them. Instead of taking away a warlock's powers if he betrays his patron, have his patron become his nemesis. Instead of taking away a cleric's spells if he falls from grace, have him be shunned by members of his former faith, or even hunted by them depending on the circumstances. IMO, that's much more fun and interesting than simply stripping the character of his powers. [/QUOTE]

Verification