Pact Burner Warlock WIP || D&D w/ Dael Kingsmill

This time on MonarchsFactory we're talking the concept of shadowclasses, particularly pertaining to the warlock who is in breach of contract.
Some additional thoughts I've had since just this arvo while editing (this is how we'll find out who reads the decription, lol):
-More specialised and kickass abilities relating to your former subclass as the 1st/6th/10th/14th abilities; things in the vein of "You're unwelcome in hell - you can choose to have advantage on a single death saving throw" or whatever
-and then the sort of ranger inspired "favoured enemy is your former squad" dealio I talk about in the video, those abilities become the eldritch invocation replacement options
Still just thoughts but them's my thinkings.
Anyway, Hashtag Red Instead, #IndoorPartyInternational2020
---
If you'd like to support my work and become part of the Patron Pantheon, you can check out my Patreon page here: / daelkingsmill
Join in with community discussion at / monarchsfactory
---
Twitter: @DailyDael
Instagram: @daeldaily
Facebook: / monarchsfactory
---
Music is The Snow Queen by Kevin Macleod. incompetech.com/music/royalty...

[@Reformedhillbilly369]

In the game I run, the Warlock is the only class that can "consume" other class levels. The group I run for has a Glamour Bard that later on took 2 levels in Warlock for some abilities (Keep in mind, I had already made clear before the game began the nature of warlocks and pacts in my setting). Their patron was a voice in their head that asked them to do things. Which they did. They even stopped using their Bard support abilities and just focused on killing stuff with warlock abilities. So the next time they leveled up, I told them, "Your next level is in warlock and you lose one level of Bard and replace it with one in warlock." They thought this was really cool. I think they forgot this could happen. Though the other players are freaked out (rightfully) and keep warning her to stop, "Feeding the voice."

[@CorbiniteVids]

I really like that option. I think it'd have to be used sparingly but when executed right that sounds like great drama and a great option for mechanical flexibility if a player is feeling too boxed in or stagnant. And maybe if they end up betraying their pact, instead of all the levels that went over from x to warlock becoming pact burner warlock levels, they just change back to their original class and only their new levels become pact burner warlock levels

[@razumzhir0]

This is quite excellent, especially if they did not grow their barding very far, and were bored of being a bard, so this allows them to functionally change characters in a fun way. I hope the entire party gets that level of development, that could make the game feel too focused on one person. All other considerations waived, however, I love it.

[@theyxaj]

This happened in one of my groups as well, also with a bard!

[@pilgrimonthelongroad2875]

Warlock comes etymologically from an old english word meaning oath-breaker What you've made is a warlock warlock

[@MonarchsFactory]

Wait, WHAT? Really??

[@calunsagrenejr]

That's super interesting. So does that mean.... oh man, does that mean that when Paladins break their oaths, they could become Warlocks? I really dig it!

[@kmoustakas]

Damn sir!

[@michaelsommers2356]

@@MonarchsFactory 'Old English wærloga "traitor, liar, enemy, devil," from wær "faith, fidelity; a compact, agreement, covenant," from Proto-Germanic *wera- (source also of Old High German wara "truth," Old Norse varar "solemn promise, vow"), from PIE root *were-o- "true, trustworthy." Second element is an agent noun related to leogan "to lie" (see lie (v.1); and compare Old English wordloga "deceiver, liar"). 'Original primary sense seems to have been "oath-breaker;" given special application to the devil (c. 1000), but also used of giants and cannibals. Meaning "one in league with the devil" is recorded from c. 1300. Ending in -ck (1680s) and meaning "male equivalent of a witch" (1560s) are from Scottish.' www.etymonline.com/word/warlock

[@spiritandsteel]

Was about to comment exactly this thing. Thank you for beating me to it. Because of this, one of the ways that I like flavoring warlocks in my game is that they are *already* stealing their powers: *that* is their heresy, their "oath-breaking". Like- they made a mutual pact, perhaps, but then they ran with it. Or the terms weren't clear, or they found a loophole and got one over on their "patron". While the patron is powerful enough to grant power, it is not powerful enough to sever the connection once forged. It means that the class stays as-is, but the patron functions simply as a powerful NPC - one who can be appeased, potentially, but who regards their warlock as a dangerous loose cannon at best and a mistake and adversary at worse. In this case, I really adore Charisma as the warlock stat- it implies they outwitted or out-lawyered this otherworldly entity - by accident or design - to take a part of their power and keep it.

[@NRMRKL]

You see, I never had that "shouldn't the warlock lose their powers?" moment, because the first warlock-esque characters I read about were Ghost Rider, Silver Surfer and Spawn. All of them betrayed their "patrons", all retained their powers.

[@riptide3340]

Same here. It seems like it’s a question of are you “given” power, such as the case with your examples, or are you given “access” to someone else’s powers. The key difference is one is much easier to revoke than the other. Very interesting point though!

[@razumzhir0]

I agree, keeping the power is fun but the idea of that power now being somewhat restricted by the inability to replace what is lost or grow further is pretty slick

[@razumzhir0]

at least not without finding a new patron :D

[@Promatim]

I think the difficulty should go up around you, rather than losing (or suddenly being on a shaky footing with) your powers. If you piss off your Patron, suddenly you've... pissed off your Patron. That's a really bad idea. Now you've angered an Archfey or Noble Genie and hoo boy are they in hot pursuit of you.

[@quinnsinclair7028]

The problem with that interpretation is that it is drawing on "warlocks" from a different medium. Ghost Rider or Silver Surfer don't need more power from the Devil or Galactus to continue. When they break their bond what they have is enough. But the nature of D&D means that PCs need to keep leveling up. You can justify a warlock retaining the powers they had when they broke the pact but it is much harder to justify them gaining new powers from a patron they aren't serving anymore. That's why in most liveplay show when the warlock breaks their pact they keep what they have then multiclass into something else. The patron can't take what was already given but you can't justify them continuing to give more.

[@sheetedkid]

This reminds me of a cool (albeit dark) story from one of the games I played. My friend Dan played a warlock named Faustus Vorloi. The short version of the story is that he was new to the country and needed some money. Some locals lured him into the forest, drugged him, and disemboweled him to serve as bait for a night hag; those locals then took the hag's eyes and left them both for dead. Faustus made a pact with the hag (Rowena); she would help him survive until he could receive medical attention, and grant him the power to seek revenge; in turn, Rowena would be able to see through one of his eyes, and he had to track down each of the attackers in turn (at least one per year) and bring them before her to be punished. That part went fine. The wrinkle was that Rowena fell in love with him, and (by Rowena assuming a fair form and actually being kind of nice as hags go) vice-versa. Some time after finding the last of their attackers, Rowena announced she was pregnant with Faustus's child. Months of game time later (and near the end of the campaign), Rowena went into labor. Faustus helped with the delivery and brought their daughter into the world--only for Rowena to go mad and immediately try to eat the child. Faustus was forced to kill Rowena in order to save their baby, simultaneously ending his pact (which, to be fair, had basically been completed by that point). There's a happy ending; Faustus was able to capture Rowena's spirit--now restored to sanity--inside a ring so that he and their daughter could continue to commune with her after her death. He was also able to continue using all of his warlock abilities, since he still had a connection to Rowena through both their daughter and the ring.

[@Go1denOw1]

That's a helluva wicked plot! Very inspiring.

[@MonarchsFactory]

Daaaaamn

[@MassiveKreutz]

That's fucking awesome! Especially the first half. Would've been neater if the player fell in love with another PC and the spying hag would be jealous and so on... but that's just my thoughts! (maybe the eye would start hurting or something, or the hag might cast evil gaze or what's-the-spells-name, you know what I mean, and the warlock would have to take that eye out, or wear a lead eyepatch or something... huh...). Love the concept anyways ^^

[@cholulahotsauce6166]

What Dael said.

[@christofferhougaard]

I'm gonna be that guy.... I REALLY hope that night hag had alter self. I'm not judging taste, but sleeping with a nighthag is... Special. To say the least.

[@mcolville]

The problem with the warlock, sorry I feel so strongly about this that I needed to make another comment, the problem with the warlock is that there is no Faustian bargain. The warlock doesn’t have to do anything to get their power. They don’t have to harvest souls, they don’t have to take any action. It’s us who have a literary bent who project onto the warlock the idea of this bargain. But there’s no bargain. The player just selects warlock as a class, and kills monsters like every other class, and levels up. We as dungeon Masters imagine that clerics have to please their God, warlocks make a bargain with their patron, but the rules don’t say anything like that.

[@jchunick]

Aaaaand, for me, that's part of the reason why certain players love to dip into Warlock... all gain with no drawbacks. Though, I have a slight disagreement that nothing is expected in return. The PHB is clear on that point with these lines: "A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being." and "The warlock learns and grows in power, at the cost of occasional services performed on the patron's behalf." There's a pact; there's a cost... though it's certainly not presented as a Faustian bargain, to be sure. It does state that the relationship is more as apprentice and master which supports what you are saying. I mean, due to the varied list of patrons (GOO, fiend, archefey...) it could be argued that a Faustian bargain is restrictively narrow; certainly from a narrative sense.

[@sealot1]

This seems like a bit of an issue with the abstraction of experience points. If, say the wizard had no real issue with level for learning spells, but had to spend time researching tomes or experimenting to grow. Or perhaps the cleric needed to literally do god's work for greater boons - or perhaps in response to dire situations. And maybe the warlock needed to sacrifice souls to the fiend for greater power. But..I suppose one could include this in play? like giving the wizard a tome right around level time - with the implication that there would be deeper secrets in it- or similar actions for other classes. This might leave the fighters a little in the dust, though.

[@marshallsonsteby3862]

I think the necessity of rules stating drawback to a Warlock might make it less appealing as a base class for players to pick from (thinking back to AD&D). Granted, as a DM, it totally is fun to add drama by giving certain plot elements to challenge the Warlock (equally to other party members).

[@elivyre9439]

I think the problem with warlocks highlights what I consider to be a core aspect of D&D: The game is flawed. The game tries to be a framework for an infinite number of worlds and game tables, this means that it will inevitably fail. As a DM I consider this death-of-the-author perspective to be very liberating because I find that I rarely want to play a game as the book prescribes it. I agree that warlocks should be more dependent on their patron but others might disagree, and if we assume the books are an imperfect foundation rather than law, we are both right. Every DM, and every adventuring party, will have their own worlds with their own stories and the books can't possibly cover them all. I agree that it would be great if Wizards of the Coast would fix a few things that I don't like about the game, but what I love about D&D and the community that surrounds it is that I don't have to wait and hope that the next edition will address my concerns. Instead I am free to talk with my players and connect with DMs from around the world in-order to write my own rules for warlock patrons or solve other problems that the designers couldn't have anticipated. I don't mean to say that we shouldn't express frustration with the game. I don't want to dismiss your concerns by telling you to solve the problem yourself. Instead I guess my point is just that nothing in the game should be set in stone. There is an amazing community surrounding this game and as long as you properly communicate with your players there is nothing wrong with incorporating new ideas that radically alter the experience.

[@nessesaryschoolthing]

In 5e, rules are suggestions. Classes are meant to be broadly applicable and cover a wide range of possible stories. Warlocks in particular are a broad idea that can't be nailed down to a single mechanic for EVERY individual Warlock. If you want the "Faustian bargain" you are expected and encouraged to make it for yourself in a way that makes sense for your character. I hate to repeat the party line about this, and of course I think WotC should give us something to work with, but I think it is better design to expect us to ADD things that we want to be part of our experience rather than REMOVE things that we don't.

[@martijnvanweele6204]

I should have done this long ago. This video finally prompted me to make a list titled "ID&Deas" to save videos like this I come across.

[@MonarchsFactory]

Mad props for that portmanteau. I love a quality portmanteau.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

ID&Dea stolen! Ha!

[@Addy0302]

That is so much easier to say than it is to read

[@Zedrinbot]

6:50 funny note, in 5e Next, warlocks were originally intelligence based, which is probably why a lot of their mentions talk about them being researchers and whatnot. It was changed to charisma based on player feedback. At my tables though I let players make warlocks int or cha based (locked in once chosen.)

[@MonkeyJedi99]

Your call is a really good way to handle it! With more thought about it, it makes good sense game-design wise for them to be an Intelligence class, giving a second Int class next to Wizard. It would also reduce the membership of the Charisma club, which provides more "specialness" to the remaining Cha classes.

[@sylvanas9329]

WotC: Alright, here’s the warlock! Intelligence based, so we have two full casters for each stat. Players: BUT EARLIER EDITION WARLOCKS USED CHARISMA WotC: Ok fine we’ll make them charisma casters! Sheesh, make one fourth edition and everyone hates change...

[@liamross340]

@@sylvanas9329 this is why i love that at the start of every core book they’re just like “yknow do whatever you want. like this is how we built it but who cares do whatever have fun”

[@mcolville]

The Warlock doesn't make any literal sense. Their prime stat is Charisma, which makes perfect sense if they're petitioning their patron for their power. "Blood and souls for my lord Arioch!" But they don't petition their patron for their power, all they have to do is gain XP and level up and their patron will teach them more lore. But if they're lore-focused then Int should be their prime stat. You can't "force of personality" yourself smarter. I fear this is like Clerics and Gods. There's a really strong idea there; "clerics have a relationship with a divine power," "warlocks have a relationship with an otherworldly power" but the DevTeam were quick to run away from that. You can be a cleric without a god! You can be a warlock who's patron thinks you're a wanker! It's up to us as DMs to save the class' potential coolness from the watered-down, milquetoast lore the PHB gave us. Pact-burner warlocks for everyone!!

[@diegobenavente5433]

I made it so my players can opt in on an Int Warlock. That way they have a choice, though I also don't quite get the Charisma stat.

[@mcolville]

Int-based Warlocks are apparently really popular, I'm not sure why.

[@dicorockhimself]

@@mcolville it's the idea of the man who read to much and seen what he shouldn't have.

[@EricVulgaris]

Warlocks suffer similarly to rangers where their niche isn't very protected. I'm experimenting combining them into a short-rest focused magic hunter that uses parts of creatures or mutations. Calling it the Chimera

[@Matthewcmiel]

I kinda wish Warlock’s were MORE different than other classes. Namely I wish that their spell save DC was not tied to a stat at all, their abilities come from a patron, not their strength of will. It does become difficult to figure out leveling, and it draws focus, but I like it. The other thing I like is constitution based warlocks, the idea that channeling the power of the patron as a physical conduit, it is physically hard.

[@Robinwinghood]

I'm gonna be THAT person and have a brief laugh about the Pandemic box behind Dael

[@MonarchsFactory]

Oh nooooo

[@HelicopterShark]

Was coming to say the same, intentional or not... I had a little laugh

[@jackiecozzie4803]

Me and my family have played pandemic in lockdown more times than is tasteful

[@torifelten9066]

@@jackiecozzie4803 I have read more dystopia in lockdown. I recommend you don't follow in my footsteps.

[@awboqm]

5:58 “you leave when you’re dead” Sometimes you can’t leave even if you’re dead...

[@BlueSun_]

Undying Patron laughs at you're attempts to leave

[@jacksonhoppis]

Ghost Mafia Assemble

[@palmeraj826]

I've made a 'fallen Warlock' build very similia to this, I drew heavely from Guts from the "Berserk" series for inspiration and one of the things I added was that the warlock's soul is "branded" and is being chased by the patrons minions; this combined with a lovecraft style of "mortals arent ment to understand other worldly knowledge" causes them to have an "Insanity" stat. Everytime they cast a leveled spell or short rest they gain levels of insanity and only get rid of them with a "good night's rest" (long rest). after every leveled spell attack they make a CHA save to not go insane and the DC is determined by the level of their insanity. On a fail they go insane and they enter an insane stat (like a barb rage) where they get advantage/disadvantage to things like insight, perception and wisdom (will) saves but also get buffs like more spell slots and being able to "see the truth" (see invisable/see into the ethereal plane). and then I'd throw in things depending on the campaign like, "while insane "nightmares (ethereal creatures) can attack you", (based off don't starve's insanity mechanic) Obviously this isn't quite what you were oing for but figured i'd share the idea

[@AnkhAnanku]

8:03 nervously eyeing the dimensional ripper and displacer hound that “found” there way into the party’s possession...

[@JLawrenceKenny]

"It's me, I'm ya doctor now" I don't believe that woman's ever been to medical school

[@angelalewis3645]

🤣

[@Miscast]

The way you flip a concept that could very easily be a negative gameplay experience to something positive and exciting and rewarding is incredible. I really love the concept.

[@victorbazan2676]

Didn’t realize how badly I needed this...for a specific Warlock NPC my party has taken a shine to. Thank you!!!

[@kylewilkes9761]

The Deathlock in Tome of Foes implies that a warlock has a kind of arcane “leash” or tether that the patron uses to turn a failed warlock into a subservient deathlok. It also states other creatures and persons have learned ways to tap into that severed connection to create deathloks loyal to them instead. It makes me think of a variant of astral projection and it’s silver thread. Imagine a powerful necromancer realizes the loose thread he might be able to gain control of and now they’re after the PC, too. Perhaps a quest knot off that thread. Maybe the warlock binds it to something else?

[@gyrrakavian]

Perhaps by taking an strong oath?

[@jchunick]

My very first 5e character was a Warlock and I ended up discovering, based off his backstory and how I was playing him, (a fire genasi named Jalen), that he didn't want to serve his master. Of course, I hadn't realized that choosing the 10th archduke of the Nine Hells, Gargauth (who was too evil for even the nine other archdukes that they decided to kick him out of Hell, info can be found in the Forgotten Realms wiki), was being pretty nasty. I actually discussed this with my DM and we worked out that he would quest to find another Patron.. a celestial one. So, I really like this idea a lot.

[@fotipitrakkos1193]

Love the idea of "working within the system" to gain new abilities after the pact is broken. This has fantasy magic system written all over it. The idea that the warlock has learned enough secrets to begin to essentially compose their own invocations. There is so much potential for character quests to facilitate this arc, I am overwhelmingly inspired. Bloody good work, DM.

[@Dalarish]

I feel like the most important question to ask a warlock player when they start out as a warlock is a few questions. As the answer to them wil influence patron/warlock relationship 1. Have you payed the contract price in backstory or would you like to do it in game? 2. Are you okay with the possibility of loosing power if you upset the patron? I am of the school of thought that a warlock should almost never loose his power, following the thought line that the flavor text says something along the line "more often than not the relationship is that of a master, apprentice" and to me that implies that the power a warlock gains is theirs no matter what, like what you says about learning acient knowledge. I view it kind of like the patron having granted their warlock a seed of power the warlock is capable of growing without the help of the patron, this is not something the patron would want the warlock to know ofc as the patron wants the warlock feeling like he needs the patron so the patron makes sure that it makes it feel like it is the reason for the growth of power, and perhaps it is capabøe of making the power grow more quickly than what the player would be able to on his own, who knows. There is afterall something poetic using the power you gained from your patron to turn it against it. What you say about a pact burner sounds realy interesting. Another possibility could be to make a new pact with a new creature, I personaly like the idea of a warlock having multiple patrons in his lifetime. Say fiend warlock from lv 1-5 and a fey warlock from 6-10 etc etc and that the warlock have the features of the patron he had during lv ups. I have personaly been toying with the idea of granting my players additional subclasses as quest rewards, like a sorcerer doing an acient blood rite gaining the bloodline powers of another sorcerer in addition to his own or a warlock making more pacts.

[@thomasmerrick5058]

I’d love to see you take a crack at Sorcerous Origins, I feel like that’d be a blast. Also would love to see some FairyDaels on the Just-So stories by Rudyard Kipling.

[@theparchmentpaladin]

Thomas Merrick if I could like this comment twice, I would.

[@HobbylessWolf]

"I looked cute in the mirror." If that's not a big mood 😖

[@apocryphgaming9995]

Love it! The idea of a 'shadow-class' kinda reminds me of the Prestige Classes from 3.5e. You couldn't just 'choose' to play it; there were... certain requirements. The way I dealt with a Pact-Breaker once is to rescind their Warlock abilities (yes, I know it sucks, but bear with me here!), at which point the player essentially becomes a Free Agent. Their Patron is not the only Otherworldly being out there. There are many, many others and all of them tend to watch other Warlocks. They've seen you walk away from your Patron, and some of them are interested in making a deal. You have some bargaining power, here: Whilst your loyalty will forever be questioned, at the end of the day you've proven yourself to be a capable, resourceful Warlock. The higher your Character Level, the more valuable this bargaining chip becomes. So then you enter that oh-so-fun stage: CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS!

[@echobravo7499]

Fabulous videos as always! Love you and your positive energy! Your great!

[@malcolmmackenzie9799]

I love everything about this so much I have been feeling all of these things and needed someone to articulate them thank you so much

[@Matthewcmiel]

So excellent, I love the flavor, I love the abilities. Warlock’s are weird and you’re awesome

[@stevenmitchell2389]

I love this!!!! Narrative help for warlocks is always useful

[@vizerandevir6422]

Best take on warlock I've heard in a while. Well done.

[@Mepholar]

Fun concept. Some more ideas for using your patrons knowledge against them: 1) can perform rituals to tap into/ attune to the energy now denied you. Basically requiring 10 min or short rest prep time. 2) focuses and markings to channel in lieu of no more patron. Ex: tattooed leylines on your skin, arcane circles, burning pages of runic script for temp effects, talisman’s to leech power from sources you still sense 3) performing rituals to mask your presence or shield yourself from patron powers/ gaze. Ex.: sprinkle with holy water, carrying iron to repulse fey, intoxication to stupefy your mind to old ones thoughts and murmurs, a vow of pacifism or binding your sword arm with consecrated wrappings for hexblade, purifying any blood split after the fact (with oils, incense, or salt, etc.) so patron is denied using it as a source to connect with your plane, etc., etc.

[@josephgarcia9076]

Beautiful! Monarch Factory is the best way to start a Saturday!!

[@gyrrakavian]

Just glad to have you back and hope you're feeling better.

[@IceDrake071]

More world building streams would be fun! The conversations and the thought processes are great to listen to on VOD while I work. They’ve helped my society building a lot.

[@Jeromy1986]

Now, when you say "pact burner" it sounds like someone who intentionally makes and breaks pacts repeatedly. The idea of a Warlock with multiple Patrons makes me think of Harry Dresden.

[@patrickbuckley7259]

Yeah I can't shake the image of a guy who has sold his soul to a bakers dozen otherworldly beings in an attempt to make sure that if he ticks off any one of them or they try to back stab him, he'll have 12 more backing him up. Either that or a guy who starts learning as much as they can about other worldly beings and kind of slowly becomes ad anti-magic warlock with lots of protection spells and features that lets them protect against, and undermine otherworldly forces.

[@GoblinLord]

@@patrickbuckley7259 a caster literally telling you "ay yea, Ay've sold my soul to a baker's dozen of devils and such, love, I don't even keep track of em anymore" as they take a long drag is a vibe and a half

[@collabswithoutpermission]

I wish I had thought of something like this 2 years back! Ah! Woe is me. Also love your last-second bits you do at the end of videos. Classic.

[@Timby_]

warlock can have a little bit of ancient lore... as a treat

[@thastygliax]

Still as adorable as ever! The pact burner reminds me of my very first 5e character, who was a warlock. I didn't want to do the obvious thing of, oh, she's a tiefling, she must serve an archfiend. So I gave her the Great Old One patron. But she was no mad cultist--she was more like a Call of Cthulhu investigator who had read too many forbidden times and unlocked how to cast spells from them. Which she used to fight back against exactly the kinds of eldritch horrors she'd been obsessively reading about!

[@arthuryu6602]

I don't play D&D and mostly have no idea what you're talking about, but it's still very interesting. You are such a good narrator, and I really enjoy your mythology videos!

[@foxross]

In the campaign that I'm running at the moment (online of course), I have a player who has a bannerette fighter that has had a number of lengthy conversations with a warlock shop keeper about fiendish pacts. The player is now quite set on becoming a warlock and has his whole storyline ahead of him. This video has been really thought-provoking for me and I look forward to seeing more of the Pact Burner when it is ready. I like to imagine that Part 2 might arrive around the time that I will most need it. Thanks Dael!

[@TXWatson]

I'm 100 percent making a response video to this. I've got a script mostly written for a lore interpretation video about how magic works in D&D 5e metaphysics based on the commonalities and differences between classes, with a particular emphasis on/explanation for the idea that losing metaphysical association with some power (god, patron, etc) doesn't inherently cost any access to spellcasting ability. I think it'd mesh really well with this kind of reasoning and accompanying game dev. The short version is that access to magic involves poking holes in the membrane that separates individual consciousness from the Complete and Simultaneous Multiverse. Different kinds of magic entail different ways of opening up that gateway, and different kinds of guidance re: how it can be used. Leveling up gets more powerful spells cuz you're literally able to make the hole bigger and still handle it without tearing your soul apart, and if you abandon your god or patron or whatever put the hole there, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sometimes gods put their faith in the wrong mortals. (just for the record I also agree with Matt's comments that D&D magic doesn't, and maybe doesn't have to, make any literal sense. I love this kind of theorizing and gamemaking that says every game rule has a coherent diagetic parallel, but I worry there's a risk that the way I talk about it might come off as "This is the Right Way to Have Fun" and I don't want to do that)

[@quastor749]

When she talked about these small tasks I couldn’t help but notice the similarities between this and Erebos

[@seanclarke1233]

I was browsing through youtube and this comes up in my recommended and it's literally the exact arc I was thinking of doing for my past hexblade warlock

[@joaomrtins]

0:14 "Still look cute?" Always!

[@frankbenner5182]

Glad you're back. Missed ya.

[@NorroTaku]

I found this channel again! today is a great day I had burned my contract with the GOO by the name of Utobee and they denied me all my knowledge but have bested my patron and found you again despite all the odds All hail

[@bootybandit4349]

Dale uploads a video: Wizards of the coast: Right that down! Right that down!

[@Go1denOw1]

seriously

[@quinnsinclair7028]

Write that down.

[@tehspikey]

I feel you, Dael. My undercut is like 2 inches long now. Seriously thinking of getting some clippers and doing it myself.

[@DaBezzzz]

Me about to watch this video: eh, not my kinda topic, but ill watch it cuz i love daels videos Me, literally 1 minute in: I WILL USE THIS

[@TaberIV]

Can't believe Tom Hanks kept you from getting a haircut

[@sunwarrior310]

One of my players plays a warlock and from the very first session she came up with the idea that her warlock would offer the bodies of creatures killed within the past minute by her to her patron as an offering. Each time she slays a foe, she takes her time after combat to perform a ritual to offer "magic" them away. This fulfills part of her pact along with the other odd tasks she's given and allows her to adventure as most adventurers do while explaining her powers she's given

[@dustyprater7884]

Great Video!! I'd like to hear more of your opinions on Cleics, as you tangentially mentioned the Domains in your "Building a Pantheon" Video.

[@WandersNowherre]

Dael this is definitely something I'm going to need. One of the potential campaign Big Bads of my game is an ancient, sentient mask bent on (spoilers for my players) replicating itself and 'masking' every sapient creature on the world, turning them into its hivemind drones to 'protect' them from a fated extraplanar invasion. Naturally the party bard put the first fragment of the mask On His Goddamn Face and later made a warlock pact with it he is now hardcore regretting as its goals become more apparent. It has left a metal shard inside his skull it can use to talk to him, listen to his thoughts and cause him pain at will. If the party finds a way to extract it, the pact will technically be broken as the mask is far from omnipotent and needs a physical anchor to project to. I'm not sure what will happen to the bard if they do this. Input welcome:)

[@JediKalElStarkiller]

This is a brilliant idea. I so want to use this for my Warlock.

[@nobodyimportant2470]

A twist to Warlocks I have toyed with is the Rental Warlock. Your patron operates a temp agency and pays you with basic abilities while renting you to various other begins in exchange for something it wants. While rented you gain access to spells based on the powers of whoever you are currently working under. PC is also paid with a number of limited use spells they can use after the rental ends and carries a ledger they use to cast the banked spells.

[@michaelhawks8616]

Love your vids glad your back in the saddle mate those pesky roos pack quite a wallop keep your chin up

[@noslenyrahcaz]

This is a really neat concept

[@pacingandmuttering5106]

Charisma is an interesting ability for me. The mental scores are hard to define, but I think about it like this: Intelligence is the application of knowledge and critical thinking. It's used for problem solving and piecing bits of info together i.e. investigation checks and seeing through illusions. Wisdom is the acquisition of information and being aware and mindful of yourself and your surroundings. It's used for gaining understanding and information and centering yourself i.e. insight checks and most Wisdom saves. The thing is, Charisma doesn't fall as easily into those qualities. It's saving throws seem somewhat arbitrary and on the surface there doesn't seem to be anything in common between Paladin, Sorcerer, Warlock and Bard spellcasting, convincing someone of something and avoiding being Banished to another plane. In my opinion, the through line for that is confidence and force of will. Sorcerer's power comes from inside, their belief in themselves is the only conduit they have. Warlocks and Bards both have personally forged connections to arcane sources and were granted personal power, again hinging on the force of their will. Paladins act as emissaries on the prime material, unlike Clerics who are more like conduits. I always saw Paladin's more like Warlocks or Angels, granted power by their deities and left to their own devices, under the assurance that their will is a reflection of their god's. Lying, persuading, performing and intimidating all hinge on your genuine belief that you won't screw it up. Anyway, that's just my 2 cents. I don't just see it as nothing but pure charm, so Warlock's casting using it always made sense to me.

[@tomlaptain646]

The thing which people always seem to forget with paladins, is that in the rules of 5e their power isn't derived from a god, but rather an oath, and the way I see it, specifically their dedication to that oath, and their conviction that their cause is just, hence charisma being their spellcasting ability. Whether it is simply the sheer power of this conviction and dedication influencing the weave of magic, or if a god, out of respect or desire for the oath to be fulfilled, had granted the paladin power, the main conduit for this power is the oath. Feel like I should clarify that I'm not saying DMs who run pallys differently are wrong, but this is my input from my interpretation of the phb.

[@goshohgosh4568]

First video of yours I've seen. But welcome back and I hope that you're pain free.

[@RedbeardTheTired]

In my personal experience, I've found that the most interesting warlocks are the ones that eschew the faustian bargain archetype in favour of more unconventional deals, arrangements, or relationships. I once made a character who's grandmother was not only a witch, but his warlock patron, always looking out for him with a little Raven familiar and so on... But on the flipside, my current character literally snuck himself and one of the other party members out of a warlock contract, with powers intact, by becoming a patron himself through outwitting the original patron (in this case, a bored and nihilistic god). It's made for some very interesting moments, and a new subclass for my friend: the Charlatan patron. Not so much a pact burner as newly self-employed.

[@darshvia]

I'm just going to chuckle at the beginning, be really enthralled by the main body, then giggle some more at the end.

[@Ryuu798]

Apparently warlocks did use to be INT based back in the original 5E playtesting, but the players said it felt strange to play and so that's why they just shoved it in with all the other CHA spellcasters yet much of the lore is about wanting to obtain more knowledge and power. Honestly I think Intelligence makes more sense even beyond balancing out the classes main stat distribution. -Less shrewd characters would be unlikely able to negotiate an agreement that is mutually beneficial for themself in the first place. -Intelligence makes it about finding every loophole and exploit in the contract, which is a perfect excuse in how they can still level and gain new powers if their patron is ever gone. Compared to the thing where Charisma is described as being about willpower and a strong sense of identity. -It perfectly fits the whole Lovecraftian thing of researchers looking where they shouldn't and gaining knowledge and abilities they shouldn't really ever have. -It completely differentiates them from Clerics and with Intelligence being the more visceral and concrete of the mental stats it reinforces them making a calculated deal with a higher power instead of being rewarded for blind trust in them. I've actually just started playing a INT Aasimar Celestial Warlock whose patron is their half angel Divine Soul Sorcerer father. Who is also a famous adventurer on top of that. So things should get interesting.

[@Geoffercake]

Int based warlocks make a lot of sense and were playtested that way before 5e was released. As for the pact, I've always seen it as the patron can't just take the power back, it's bonded to you, it's yours. They can, obviously, send their agents after you. However, I might limit the levels a pact-broken warlock can get after they've broken the pact, depending on the character and the narrative. As in they get no /more/ power than what they already have

[@blakscot]

Please make more videos featuring your own story-driven home brews. I don't play d&d, but your perspective so creative that it inspires me to think outside the cube. Plus, I just like to hear you talk.

[@RobinBaggett]

Friend: So what are you doing today? Me: Hydrating and chilling out Friend: ..... Me: The doctor ordered it.

[@kevingriffith6011]

One of the benefits of serving an otherworldly power is that you quickly learn who their enemies are. If your pact isn't working out and you find yourself as a pact-burner, then you probably know someone who is hiring warlocks who would gleefully accept your service because it would frustrate your former patron ever so much... especially if you're offering your old pact boon to your new patron.

[@The-Random-Hamlet]

I've had a couple of warlocks in 5E. One was a Great Old warlock. One of the things he would do was after he and his group would clear out certain lairs and dungeons that he deemed suitable he would bury a scrimshaw he had carved covered in his own blood somewhere in the place. When he was asked about it he said it was "So the Colony would know where to look." Another was a Fiend warlock. He was essentially married to his patron (In this case Glasya) and as such he had to play the part of the dutiful husband. IT lead to heavy drinking. At least when he was on his own on the material plane.

[@c.a.mcdivitt9722]

There is no way Dael can NOT look cute. She's smart, and that counts as a +5 to cute- ness.

[@tobistein6639]

For sure.

[@torifelten9066]

And she gets a +5 for being a d&d nerd.

[@alexanderwei605]

Love this. Played a warlock who turned his back on his patron. Could only do so with the backing of a more involved villain and it boiled down into a dual with their old fey werepatron. Tons of fun.

[@CorbiniteVids]

When you said the spellcasting mod changes from cha to int you had me. I had been really wondering how to handle this kind of situation for a long time and I had no solutions but even that on its own would just make a lot of sense, especially alongside your other points that can be fleshed out. I think maybe a fun way to actually execute this as a DM would be to have an extra behind the scenes character sheet developed for that warlock, and every time that warlock levels up you level that character sheet with it but with any of the alterations and replacements (ie enemy of the archfey instead of pact of the archfey), and when the warlock makes the decision to break the pact there's a big dramatic moment where you ask for their character sheet and hand the alternate one to them. Of course giving them a chance to move items over and all. I think another interesting video to see would be sort of in a similar vein, which would be how to handle when clerics betray their deity (which I don't think you've made a video on) I've had some thoughts about how to handle that but they mostly revolve around revoking spellcasting from the cleric until they find another deity to worship, which isn't really satisfying and I don't want a player to feel like their character is a burden to the party (it could be fun if the character feels that way and it's roleplayed but I don't want the player to internalize that you know?) but at the same time the relationship between cleric and deity is different from that of a warlock and their patron, since in the flavor as written a cleric's magic does come directly from their patron

[@halocemagnum8351]

I once played as a warlock that was basically like this (except without all the cool stat buffs). My character had a contract with his patron that basically said "Bring me king's blood, or... I'll get it myself from your kid." Long story short, he failed to get the king's blood, and his kid (who was technically the bastard son of a princess) got yoinked into the nine-hells. So my character starts out with a bunch of warlock power but his pact is technically already fulfilled. And his quest is actually to find a way to get rid of his warlock powers, which he sees as a curse, and a way that the Great Fiend still holds influence over him. It made for pretty cool rp and character motivations throughout the story.

[@gigachad8110]

I would love to see an updated version of this as it's fleshed out as it is a good narrative tone that can really offer great roleplay moments in a party. On that note I would also like to see a subclass of something similar for the Cleric to round out all the classes that kind of look to a higher power for their abilities. Something like the Domain Rebuker Cleric. I'm not sure what it's abilities would look like but I think it's a good idea to float around that's similar to this.

[@sylverhat1033]

Great video as always! For ideas for other videos: I'd be interested in your take on Necromancy or a tale from Egyptian mythology.

[@melissaramla2984]

Ooh same!

[@milo14564]

Great video. I had a similar conversation with my DM, as a what if, when my character shifted from Bard to Warlock, due to a story experience. In Critical Role, Ford had to find a new Patron to get his abilities back. I would say you could counterspell against the bonus spells that are specific to that patron. You don't want the ability to be so powerful that it messes up balance. Also, I've looked through a lot of the comments. I can't believe I'm the only one staring at the Pandemic game on the shelf in the background.

[@wanderinghistorian]

This is cool. In my game I implemented a more simple solution. 1. The things your patron taught to you are yours to keep. They are secrets they taught to you. 2. However if you break your pact, you can no longer advance as a warlock and you gain a powerful enemy.

[@twil004]

I love this. I just finished a campaign I ran with a warlock player who turned his back on his patron. When he did his patron sent other warlocks to hunt him down and I used this as an opportunity for him to still gain abilities even though they were no longer given to him. I told him that the same way he takes power from his patron he is able to take from other warlocks he defeats. This allows him to still level up in his warlock class by syphoning abilities from defeated warlocks sent to hunt him down. So in essence its like he's looting power like items.

[@felixheitzer2262]

Very cool ideas, fluffy 👍

[@pedroscoponi4905]

Because they're both charisma casters, you could always convert a broken pact warlock into a sorcerer of a similar origin - maybe at a lower level, maybe at the same level. It requires pulling from UA for things like the Great Old Ones but it's an option!

[@yellowrose0910]

But thematically they're quite different: WAR bought their powers while SOR have it naturally. Although I can see that maybe you keep the raw power you originally got from your Patron and so it's like a SOR with unnatural power (vs natural power)...

[@pedroscoponi4905]

@@yellowrose0910 My thinking is that even after the pact is over, the magical "scar" or "print" of your patron still gives you some power. Like you couldn't ever _erase_ that connection fully

[@JoshIdstein]

I have a level 1 party in a freshly started roll20 campaign, "Lockdown", right now. One of my roommates plays an elven noble warlock who forged a pact with a demonic entity to reclaim his lost colonies. Thing is, she already hates playing according to the demon's wishes. I'm so gonna introduce this into my homebrew collection... Dael, half of my campaign rules are stuff I stole from you, you're amazing, keep this stuff coming! :D

[@joandudley4847]

Awesome video! Huge fan! Can you PLEASE do in depth ideas about the planes? Like you did for the Feywild? Maybe a mini series covering each one or your favourites? The DMG has such tiny paragraphs about most of them. I’d also love to see a video on characters you’ve made or played?

[@ed-chivers]

Hi Dael - I'm just catching up on this one, it's been in my "watch later" list for ages! I 100% love the concept of a warlock gone rogue. I have a warlock player in the game I run and while the whole pact burner thing might not come up, it's a great idea to have in my back pocket. It was a good reminder to have the warlock serving the patron, too, I often forget to include that part of the deal and just figure that PC has cool powers with no consequences. Well, not any more! (My warlock player is going to find their life develops some complications, and they may not thank me!) Also, since nobody else in the comments seems to have mentioned it, I've got to say that is an awesome shirt :)

[@MonarchsFactory]

THANK you! I really love that shirt a lot. I hope your warlock player has fun really roleplaying a warlock!

[@nikkibrowning4546]

literally came in KZbin to click on a playlist for background noise. Saw you video and didn't even think hesitate to click it.

[@klousewhite3591]

This is a great take on what to do when the Warlock DOESN'T stay loyal to the patron. Either way the drama is there and I love the idea of them keeping stuff and wondering, "is my familiar spying on me now?" or "will using my book of shadows draw attention from my ex-sugar daddy?" Great vid as always, cheers.

[@Thefurnaceguy8488]

Your video got me thinking about Warlocks, and now I'm working on a new patron: The Chained Trickster. A deity in the vein of Prometheus, the Chained Trickster is being punished for stealing fire for mortals and doesn't have temples or clerics, but has spent the millenia gathering powerful secrets, and is now ready to share them. Pact spells focus on fire damage and illusion. The patron is seeking revenge against a lawful good deity, and possible endgame content could include trying to release the patron.

[@mikethewizard7378]

It would be cool to see you do a video on Paladin’s with analysis on the take that their power stems from their ideals and deeds rather than gods. Cool video! Stay safe

[@davidhuther9965]

Warlocks can have some ancient lore, as a treat.

[@dragonking184]

I like this idea very much (and not gonna lie Oathbreaker paladin was the first thought in my head when i saw this). However i have a different take on what the player would keep/give up. The way i kinda thought of this was that once you break you pact everything you've learned from that patron either gets weakend or completely removed. Things that go away: Expanded spell list (except for the spells you already learned from it) Specific abilities aquired from that patron. Mystic Arcanums Things that get weakend: Pact boon(Tome) - so instead of keeping your book of secrets just like how it was. It instead becomes a regular spellbook that is atunned(optional) to you. All spells on there now take up spell slots but you gain spell slots equal to half the total spells you know of that level. (Example: you know 6 3rd level spells, you would gain 3 3rd level spell slots.) Pact Weapon - the weapon becomes just a normal weapon that you are proficient in. You can not summon it to you nor can you change it. Pact familiar - honestly what you saod hits the mark for me. Eldrich invocations concerning spells - same thing with the tome, they just take up spell slots now. Anything not in either category is to be assumed that the player keeps it with no drawbacks or i probably just forgot to mention it. I did it this way because it feels much more immediate and mechanically changing. I will say though that this comes from a perspective of warlocks being about the pact you made not the physical acts your patron asks of you. However what you came up with is incredibly cool and i think i just changed to better suit my personal style of play. Personally i feel like an otherworldy being wouldn't let you still have all the cool stuff thwy let you borrow. Which is how i see the pact as, borrowed magic.

[@little_isalina]

I like to think of warlocks as gaining warlock powers once and then developing their access to them on their own. So basically if your betray your patron you keep your power, you can continue levelling as a warlock. But you have a very powerful new enemy, with whom you have broken contract, and your patron might want to settle your debt violently.

[@ohthatstea]

Warlocks can have a little secret of the universe, as a treat.

[@robintheviking8990]

I love the idea of Shadow Classes! I might have to make some for different classes.

[@Norpfang]

thanks for the red today :)

[@MonarchsFactory]

Of course! :)

[@3faltigeralexandro]

When I saw the title, I thought of a Warlock whose speciality is that they change Patrons very often, gaining whatever benefits they can, then "burning" the pact (ideally before they have to actually take any responsibilities) and moving on to the next patron.

[@andrewzell3576]

Hey Dael, perfect timing! I just rolled up an eladrin Archfey warlock, though I'm still struggling with what/how their patron is. If you're looking for more videos to make, how about one on how you'd do archfey patrons? Or really any less divine godlike beings?

[@Zoidberg023]

This is a fantastic idea. I had a similar idea regarding druids using metal armor and losing their nature magic (in Pathfinder.) Have the class 'prestige' into a similar, but different class. Like one with less emphasis on the more earth-based spells and more on the savagery of the animal forms, etc.

[@pbt6970]

I personally play magical sort of characters, and usually warlock, or sorcerer, and I love this idea.

[@Armaggedon185]

Would love to pick your brain about setting details and inspirations, as you'd done with the giants, since your descriptions are always so wonderfully vivid.

[@StephireGG]

YAY DAEL IS BACK

[@mattmurray778]

Mark of the pack breaker:; your pack burner can always be found and carries a magical seal that reveals your location and transgression to your warlock followers.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

I am already thinking of some neat "miscellaneous tasks" for warlocks. Things like "tear out every third page of that religious text and put them back in random order." or "give a mouse a cookie, then walk away." - This idea of a price for unfaithfulness needs to be a player-DM discussion with Clerics, Druids, Paladins and Rangers (and some other subclasses that have a concept of "patron") as well.

[@Myzelfa]

Thinking about it, I prefer the idea that once a warlock bond is made, it can't be severed unless both parties agree to it. For example, the way Ghost Rider uses his own curse against the devil that put it on him, and that devil could and would remove it, but only with his consent. So a burned Warlock would continue to get their powers from their patron, but every time they use them they give the former patron information about where they are and what they're doing, and draw unwelcome attention to themselves. You could instill a simple mechanic where every time a burned Warlock uses an invocation, it triggers an encounter later down the line, or makes an existing one tougher.

[@EnnuiElpis]

Canonically in the game, there is actually an in-game consequence for a warlock breaking their pact. It's that when they die, if they haven't mended their relationship with their patron, they come back as a deathlock bound to the patron with their free will basically stripped away and forced to serve them for all eternity. So, if one of the warlocks in your game breaks their pact and then dies, there will be no resurrecting them. Their soul is stripped away to their patron's realm and their body resurrected as one of these things. I guess the DM would then have a cool villain to throw at the party.

[@johnekare8376]

Your idea about giving a bonus or benefit to the pact burner when he is trying to detect threats from his old patron sparked an idea in me. I'm not sure if it's too mechanically fiddly or demands too much of the DM, but here it goes: Paranoia, whenever you roll a perception check you can choose to reroll it; if you do, the second roll can only be considered a success if there is anything perceivable present pertaining to your old patron. The DM decides if there is and how to narrate a "false positive". This I think could be some excellent opportunities for the player to descend into madness. DM: "The bartender looks at you curiously"; PB: "Maybe he is part of the cult! Can I recognise any marks or insignia pertaining to the cult of my old patron?"; DM: "Roll a perception check"; PB: "Ah, shoot, a 4. I want to reroll... Yes! 16!"; DM: "Yea, you can barely make out the top of the skull crest hanging in a chain around his neck, tucked under his shirt." It gives the player the opportunity to decide when to risk false positives, and if he/she does, it mimic in game mechanic the effect of no being able to trust your one mind. Thematically it would sit very well with former Old One Locks...

[@johnekare8376]

Oh, and remember: "Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not out to get you."

[@shallendor]

My GOO Warlock made a pact with the Time Lord Rassilon and he was suppose to spread the name of Rassilon! He mainly did it by introducing his make believe invisible friend as Rassilon! He was spying for the elves and did it by making people think he was crazy by introducing his "friend" that nobody could see as Rassilon! He was a fun character to play and roleplay!