TRPG General Chat

RevenantBacon

21:00

@Someone_Evil They're not identical, but they're incredibly similar. Especially the part where they just kind of give you spells. Really the difference boils down to worshipping a god being super impersonal, while forming a pact with a celestial is a lot more personal, especially when they can ring you from anywhere in the cosmos to ask for a sandwich.

Himitsu_no_Yami

@RevenantBacon you had me with "they can ring you from anywhere in the cosmos to ask for a sandwich."

Mark Wells

@RevenantBacon See, I want the warlock rules for how exactly your patron demands a sandwich, and what happens if you don't give it to them. That sounds like the fun part.

MikeQ

Depends on perspective. Worship can be very personal, and a pact could be an impersonal contract that doesn't actively require interaction

Mark Wells

I'd agree, I wouldn't think to call the pact "personal". The pact is transactional.

Himitsu_no_Yami

@MarkWells while there's no mechanical answer to either I think of it as you just kinda hear the god(des) in your head a la telepathy and if you refuse then boom you lose your power as you've violated the terms of your pact

MikeQ

21:04

Do the warlock class features actually specify that violating the pact causes loss of powers?

Himitsu_no_Yami

no

but it's what makes the most sense

MikeQ

Does the barbarian class specify that being calm or achieving peace of mind causes loss of rage features?

Mark Wells

If they did, we'd have the 3e paladin problem where this is only an issue if the DM decides to back you into a corner with it.

@MikeQ Having taken a minute to think about that, I think what's missing is a step in gameplay where you codify that interpretation somehow so that the other players can interact with it. Like, "write down three conditions of your pact, and three punishments that your patron can impose on you."

Powerdork

@Himitsu_no_Yami The warlock I was introduced to (in 3.5e) says, of pacts, that warlocks are "trading portions of their souls in exchange for supernatural power," or "born of a supernatural bloodline", benefiting from an ancestor's such pact. 4th edition says "Warlocks channel arcane might wrested from primeval entities."

> You could be a libram-toting scholar captivated by ominous lore, a foot-loose wanderer searching for elusive ultimate truths, **a devil-touched hunter using infernal spells to eliminate evil**, or even a black-clad mercenary who uses sinister trappings to discourage prying strangers and unwanted attention. On the other hand, you could be a true diabolist using your gifts to tyrannize the weak—some warlocks unfortunately are exactly that.
> **The pacts are complete. The rites have concluded.** The signs are drawn in blood, and the seals are broken. Your destiny beckons.

Mark Wells

As it is, it feels more like "let players interpret their character concepts how they want, because nobody cares".

MikeQ

21:13

@MarkWells I suppose a more accurate statement would be: Let the player define their character concept based on the actual game mechanics

Since the game mechanics are binding to all players (including DM), whereas concept is really up to the player

Mark Wells

Exactly! That's backward. The concept should be binding on all players. If my concept is that my warlock patron demands, say, blood sacrifice, then the DM should be told to impose consequences if the blood sacrifice is not offered.

(Or sandwiches, even.)

V2Blast

@KorvinStarmast Well, yeah. :)

MikeQ

@MarkWells Eh, maybe? Only if the group is okay with that sort of complication. I was thinking more like, if the player wants their warlock to be a cultist who worships their patron, I wouldn't refuse even though "worship" is usually a cleric thing.

Powerdork

Also, for folks who are saying that there ought to be a distinction between the way a cleric gets their power and the way a warlock gets their power: What about the paladin, as relates to the cleric?

Mark Wells

@MikeQ Again, I'd ask why they're not a cleric. :)

MikeQ

21:20

@MarkWells "Because eldritch blast"?

Mark Wells

I fear there's never going to be an answer to the question "Why don't clerics get eldritch blast?"

Himitsu_no_Yami

el·dritch
/ˈeldriCH/
adjective
weird and sinister or ghostly.
"an eldritch screech"

Does that sound like something from a god?

MikeQ

Most magic sounds like something from a god, depending on the definition of what gods do

Himitsu_no_Yami

> weird and sinister or ghostly.

Mark Wells

@Himitsu_no_Yami Right, see, that's an explanation that works. The existence of eldritch blast, and other warlock magic, proves that warlock patrons are not gods. They're a metaphysically different class of beings.

Gods, for some reason, can't give you that spell.

MikeQ

21:26

Maybe they can but just don't give it to clerics

Himitsu_no_Yami

Maybe this interpretation. It's not seen as something from gods so Clerics don't get it as they constantly interact with the public on behalf of the god whereas Warlocks are the ones who do things for gods outside the public view so they get it as it's a more effective tool and there's no reason to not give it to them

Powerdork

Paladins!

If you can have two holy warriors with distinct mechanical expressions, you can have three.

MikeQ

Or 5, including Zealot barbarian and Favored soul sorcerer

Mark Wells

@Powerdork Why can we have two or three or five holy warriors with distinct mechanical expressions? What does that reflect about them?

Himitsu_no_Yami

Also, you could argue that celestial Warlock patrons are NOT gods. See "The beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are mighty inhabitants of other planes of existence—not gods, but almost godlike in their power." and "Your patron is a powerful being of the Upper Planes. You have bound yourself to an ancient empyrean, solar, ki-rin, unicorn, or other entity that resides in the planes of everlasting bliss."

Powerdork

21:30

@MarkWells That fantasy religion has variance.

Himitsu_no_Yami

See the Sworn and Beholden and The Celestial sections on the Warlock page

Mark Wells

Yes, it's explicit that warlock patrons are not gods.

Himitsu_no_Yami

So, if they're not gods then they're not Clerics

Mark Wells

Right, proper gods get to have Clerics and have to follow god rules like not giving their followers eldritch blast. Other beings have to make sketchy deals with mortals, subject to a different set of rules.

And I think what I'm still missing is why an ancient empyrean or solar is making sketchy deals at all. They seem like they should be above that.

MikeQ

Sketchy deals are an option but that doesn't have to cover all cases. Much like paladins, there could be gods involved. Maybe the patron is some intermediary or avatar.

Of course, DM has final say, so if the DM is really a stickler about their game's lore, then they can impose whatever arbitrary distinctions they want

BESW

21:51

Please don't buy the new edition of Big Eyes Small Mouth, it's supporting a long history of shady and abusive business practices (Twitter thread). The new publisher is not new management, just a way to escape the liability of the old publisher.

11

Rubiksmoose

22:16

@BESW That's really gross...

BESW

(And yanno, just generally if you want a game about a cultural touchstone, try looking for games written by people from that culture. Like Tokyo NOVA or Golden Sky Stories or Sword World or...)

Shalvenay

22:29

@MarkWells who said the deals had to be sketchy?

@Himitsu_no_Yami also, eladrinlocks were a thing in prior editions, so celestial pact is not without precedent

@MarkWells bigger constraint (in FR at least) is that proper gods need to have a certain critical mass of followers in order to not get demoted by Ao

trogdor

23:08

@BESW well also it sounds like you could just end up without what you are buying, on top of the morality aspect of how he apparently treats his buisness associates

certainly not where I want to throw my money

also I love the excuse "it was company liability not his" he was the company guys

the company was a mask he put on and it's fooling you if you say that :/

Medix2

Strange 5e-dnd question I don't think will fit in Stack: Is there a spell that targets X type of thing (humanoid, or creature, "creature on the ground", etc...) that transforms that thing into no longer being X?

Himitsu_no_Yami

@Medix2 spells that raise the dead (making undead - not resurrection), target things like "a corpse or pile of bones" and turn them into creatures

Medix2

Yeah I thought about animate dead and animate objects but those are somewhat iffy... nothing says you can't be both a creature and an object

Himitsu_no_Yami

@Medix2 pretty sure I've seen a million answers on this site assert that you can only be one or the other

but I can't think of any off the top of my head

MikeQ

Once a object gets a creature's stat block, it's considered a creature and not an object.

Mark Wells

23:18

@Medix2 Power word: kill?

Medix2

Oh... a spell with a lasting effect*

Don't really wanna get into the whole creature/object mess though... It's discussed enough here and whether "a dead creature" is a creature etc...

MikeQ

Transmute Rock would also count, I think. Are you looking for a list?

Medix2

Nah I just need one example, want to put it in an answer to this question

KorvinStarmast

@MarkWells because it is like Damiano from Damiano's Lute A warlock. That is why

The celestial warlock is a lot like a Divine Soul or a favored soul

Transcript for