So in my most recent game, one of the warlocks in the party had their patron send them another message, in this case to go to a certain location because a person the player is interested in will be there. However, the player was sick and tired of doing what their patron wanted and not being told why (and other story based reasons that we don't need to get into), so they threw the means of communication they used away, making it really clear that they are done with them.
Now normally, I would treat this as a case of the player doesn't have access to their warlock abilities (they multi classed so they can rely on their other skills) and leave it at that, but the party is going to the location anyway. In fact, the player made the decision for the group to go to the location. So what should I do in terms of the players warlock powers. They have pissed off their patron but they are doing what the patron wants them to do anyway.
I read somewhere that disobeying the Patron doesn't necessarily mean they lose their powers and abilities.
Of course, if you want to play it that way, great!
I don't know what it was, but off the top of my head, something interesting to do is to have this "means of communication" reappear in his pack or something. Another possibility is having the patron communicate through another medium, proving that the item was superfluous in the first place and the patron is more powerful than the player may have realized. Through this, the patron can clarify that the warlock is unable to simply throw away his patronage. And probably some other stuff. ;)
Yeah, there's no particular reason to make the player effectively lose character levels for this. I mean, you're the DM, you can if you want to, just like you could make the Fighter lose levels of Fighter if they break a leg and heal without magic, or many other "realistic" reasons players might not have access to all their powers.
Warlocks made a pact with their patron; there's no requirement that they lose powers if they break it, it could definitely be a "finders keepers" set of powers where now that it's been granted it's not easy to take away.
Alternatively, the warlock made a pact with the patron, but "Liking the patron" isn't a requirement in the pact. It could be a loophole - the pact says the warlock has to obey any orders, but if the warlock throws away any mechanism to receive orders, they can do whatever they want without breaking their pact!
Or, by going to that location, they actually ARE obeying the orders, and so upholding the pact.
Idunno, I tend to be wary of taking away levels from players. It's a massive punishment. And it has a very boring OOC way of avoiding it - a player could just not bother RPing their warlock's backstory and relationship with the patron. It pushes players away from deep engagement with their class and character, to murderhobo play where you better not mention any backstory or else the DM might use it against you.
Rather than taking levels away, maybe say they can't take any more levels in warlock until their patron is satisfied with their behavior.
And, kind of what Akacen said, it could be fun for the person they are meeting to have another communication device (maybe even the exact one the player threw away) and give it to the player, saying something like: This was delivered to me an hour ago with a request to pass it on to you.
Although how you decide to play your game is up to you, there is no where in the PHB that requires any sort of loyalty or obedience to the wishes or whims of the warlock's patron. The warlock makes some sort of bargain with the patron, the terms would be defined by the player in conjunction with the DM but the default pact would not necessarily imply abject slavery nor would disobedience in any way imply that the warlock would lose their abilities. Most games I have played in treat the abilities granted by the warlock's patron as knowledge that has been taught to the warlock in terms of how to access these abilities and it does not have any direct dependence on the current relationship with the patron.
You can of course play it however you like in your own game.
Here are some quotes from the PHB:
"At 1st level, you have struck a bargain with an otherworldly being of your choice"
"Your arcane research and the magic bestowed on you by your patron have given you facility with spells" ... the patron bestows the magic, there is no indication that they can take it away if the warlock doesn't follow their every whim.
Eldritch Invocations: "In your study of occult lore, you have unearthed eldritch invocations, fragments of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability." These abilities don't indicate any connection with the patron at all.
"At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service." .. it is a gift, again no indication that it would be taken back.
"The beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are mighty inhabitants of other planes of existence—not gods, but almost godlike in their power. Various patrons give their warlocks access to different powers and invocations, and expect significant favors in return."
They may expect significant favors in return but depending on your game world this wouldn't necessarily entail slavish obedience to requests. It is a bargains and favors relationship and not a master/slave relationship.
"Some patrons collect warlocks, doling out mystic knowledge relatively freely or boasting of their ability to bind mortals to their will. Other patrons bestow their power only grudgingly, and might make a pact with only one warlock. Warlocks who serve the same patron might view each other as allies, siblings, or rivals."
There is immense variation between warlock patrons.
The Fiend: "You have made a pact with a fiend from the lower planes of existence, a being whose aims are evil, even if you strive against those aims." It is clearly possible to oppose the aims of your patron while remaining a warlock.
"The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it." In the case of great old one warlocks there may not even be a bargain at all ... the GOO might not even be aware of your existence or entirely indifferent.
The range of possible bargains, relationships and favors is so large that the specifics depend on what the DM and player have worked out as part of the character background. In this case, if the pact did not specifically include slavery and immediate obedience to requests from the patron then I think the DM would be going too far in trying to impose penalties for disobeying the patrons wishes.
Though patrons are powerful in their own right and a warlock probably doesn't want a enraged patron following them around so there is some give and take.
So in my most recent game, one of the warlocks in the party had their patron send them another message, in this case to go to a certain location because a person the player is interested in will be there. However, the player was sick and tired of doing what their patron wanted and not being told why (and other story based reasons that we don't need to get into), so they threw the means of communication they used away, making it really clear that they are done with them.
Now normally, I would treat this as a case of the player doesn't have access to their warlock abilities (they multi classed so they can rely on their other skills) and leave it at that, but the party is going to the location anyway. In fact, the player made the decision for the group to go to the location. So what should I do in terms of the players warlock powers. They have pissed off their patron but they are doing what the patron wants them to do anyway.
I read somewhere that disobeying the Patron doesn't necessarily mean they lose their powers and abilities.
Of course, if you want to play it that way, great!
I don't know what it was, but off the top of my head, something interesting to do is to have this "means of communication" reappear in his pack or something. Another possibility is having the patron communicate through another medium, proving that the item was superfluous in the first place and the patron is more powerful than the player may have realized. Through this, the patron can clarify that the warlock is unable to simply throw away his patronage. And probably some other stuff. ;)
Yeah, there's no particular reason to make the player effectively lose character levels for this. I mean, you're the DM, you can if you want to, just like you could make the Fighter lose levels of Fighter if they break a leg and heal without magic, or many other "realistic" reasons players might not have access to all their powers.
Warlocks made a pact with their patron; there's no requirement that they lose powers if they break it, it could definitely be a "finders keepers" set of powers where now that it's been granted it's not easy to take away.
Alternatively, the warlock made a pact with the patron, but "Liking the patron" isn't a requirement in the pact. It could be a loophole - the pact says the warlock has to obey any orders, but if the warlock throws away any mechanism to receive orders, they can do whatever they want without breaking their pact!
Or, by going to that location, they actually ARE obeying the orders, and so upholding the pact.
Idunno, I tend to be wary of taking away levels from players. It's a massive punishment. And it has a very boring OOC way of avoiding it - a player could just not bother RPing their warlock's backstory and relationship with the patron. It pushes players away from deep engagement with their class and character, to murderhobo play where you better not mention any backstory or else the DM might use it against you.
Rather than taking levels away, maybe say they can't take any more levels in warlock until their patron is satisfied with their behavior.
And, kind of what Akacen said, it could be fun for the person they are meeting to have another communication device (maybe even the exact one the player threw away) and give it to the player, saying something like: This was delivered to me an hour ago with a request to pass it on to you.
Thank you all, I love the idea of their communication method reappearing in their pocket.
Although how you decide to play your game is up to you, there is no where in the PHB that requires any sort of loyalty or obedience to the wishes or whims of the warlock's patron. The warlock makes some sort of bargain with the patron, the terms would be defined by the player in conjunction with the DM but the default pact would not necessarily imply abject slavery nor would disobedience in any way imply that the warlock would lose their abilities. Most games I have played in treat the abilities granted by the warlock's patron as knowledge that has been taught to the warlock in terms of how to access these abilities and it does not have any direct dependence on the current relationship with the patron.
You can of course play it however you like in your own game.
Here are some quotes from the PHB:
"At 1st level, you have struck a bargain with an otherworldly being of your choice"
"Your arcane research and the magic bestowed on you by your patron have given you facility with spells" ... the patron bestows the magic, there is no indication that they can take it away if the warlock doesn't follow their every whim.
Eldritch Invocations: "In your study of occult lore, you have unearthed eldritch invocations, fragments of forbidden knowledge that imbue you with an abiding magical ability." These abilities don't indicate any connection with the patron at all.
"At 3rd level, your otherworldly patron bestows a gift upon you for your loyal service." .. it is a gift, again no indication that it would be taken back.
"The beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are mighty inhabitants of other planes of existence—not gods, but almost godlike in their power. Various patrons give their warlocks access to different powers and invocations, and expect significant favors in return."
They may expect significant favors in return but depending on your game world this wouldn't necessarily entail slavish obedience to requests. It is a bargains and favors relationship and not a master/slave relationship.
"Some patrons collect warlocks, doling out mystic knowledge relatively freely or boasting of their ability to bind mortals to their will. Other patrons bestow their power only grudgingly, and might make a pact with only one warlock. Warlocks who serve the same patron might view each other as allies, siblings, or rivals."
There is immense variation between warlock patrons.
The Fiend: "You have made a pact with a fiend from the lower planes of existence, a being whose aims are evil, even if you strive against those aims." It is clearly possible to oppose the aims of your patron while remaining a warlock.
"The Great Old One might be unaware of your existence or entirely indifferent to you, but the secrets you have learned allow you to draw your magic from it." In the case of great old one warlocks there may not even be a bargain at all ... the GOO might not even be aware of your existence or entirely indifferent.
The range of possible bargains, relationships and favors is so large that the specifics depend on what the DM and player have worked out as part of the character background. In this case, if the pact did not specifically include slavery and immediate obedience to requests from the patron then I think the DM would be going too far in trying to impose penalties for disobeying the patrons wishes.
Though patrons are powerful in their own right and a warlock probably doesn't want a enraged patron following them around so there is some give and take.