I think there are tools already in the system such as piety to manage this sort of thing. But if you don’t have an end goal in mind for it I would ask what’s the point? If it’s just flavour then you don’t need mechanics for this just add the flavour.
I am not entirely sure what you asking the first time if the answers we gave did to hit the mark, even less so the follow up.
personally as a player I would find having to say please and thank you every time I wanted to use a cantrip tedious, as a DM I wouldn’t find it fun to manage. It also doesn’t really fit with the GOO
It would be like me giving a crumb to an ant and then shouting at it “a thank you would be nice”
I want to clarify, because I think a lot of people misunderstand my intentions here. First off, the player that is playing this character is a close friend with whom I have a strong, trusting relationship. They are also, as I said, an excellent player who is valuable to the table, and to the game as a whole. My intention is not to punish the player for not playing up the Great Old Ones side of things. This was, by all accounts, an intentional decision by both the player and the character they're playing - they are playing a grifter who made a pact to get out of a bind, and now they just use the powers the pact gave them without really giving any thought to their source. This is fine. As a character decision, it's a perfectly good one. "I am a user. I got a new tool. I am using it. It never occurred to me that this particular tool is not to be trifled with."
I also understand that the Great Old Ones aren't gods, and that they don't expect prayers and rituals. However, with the pact being made, there was some expectation of reciprocity, and there clearly hasn't been any. I want to create opportunities to remind the character that their power was not a freely-given gift, and that they need to start earning their keep. I don't want to turn them into a mindless servant of the Great Masters, I just want to constantly needle them with reminders of their debt, so I can create situations where they have to choose between living their lives the way they want to and repaying their debt to the Great Old Ones. I want to make the character regret their pact without making the player regret their decision to play a warlock.
I have some leeway here. As I said, this is a good player, and they'll be on board with (and in fact, appreciate) a certain amount of emotional manipulation and torture of their character in the cause of creating a more interesting story. But I don't want a deus-ex-machina solution that has no ACTUAL cost ("Here's a magic weapon, use it to kill a bunch of creatures you were going to kill anyway"), or a cost that makes gameplay less fun (revoking powers, weakening the character, etc.). If anybody is familiar with 7th Sea 2nd Edition, I'm thinking about something similar to the dievas. The Great Old Ones will continue to grant the character power, but will make progressively more sinister demands. Little things at first, just to normalize the behavior (asking the player to say "please" and "thank you" whenever they cast a spell), then progressively more extreme requests ("kill something" becomes "desecrate that altar" becomes "destroy a thinking mind"), until the requests become the kind of thing that the player has to decide between the pact and their allegiance to the team/goodness/their humanity.
I'm going to ask again :) ... did you explain to the player before they created their character that the Great Old Ones in your game world are completely DIFFERENT from those described in the PHB. Here is the quote from the PHB again.
""Your patron is a mysterious entity whose nature is utterly foreign to the fabric of reality. It might come from the Far Realm, the space beyond reality, or it could be one of the elder gods known only in legends. Its motives are incomprehensible to mortals, and its knowledge so immense and ancient that even the greatest libraries pale in comparison to the vast secrets it holds. 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."
There is NO indication in the PHB that a pact has to have ANY form or reciprocity whatsoever in the case of a GOO. FIEND pacts are often described this way. GOO pacts are NOT. Your entire description above is the DM trying to force some preconceived notion of what a GOO is onto a player who appears to have read the PHB and decided that drawing on an unknown power after making a pact is perfectly ok. Which it is. If you, as the DM, want to make the story more interesting by having the GOO step in and start making requests then that is a plot device that you want to force on the player ... but do it for the story ... don't do it because you have some vision of GOO behaviour that significantly diverges from that described in the PHB.
If your player knew in advance that their GOO pact was going to involve this creature coming back and making lots of demands and warping the storyline before they created the character then the player could have decided to play something else or accept the possible storylines the DM was planning to foist off on them. However, in this case the player and character are consistently playing having made a pact with a hands off type of GOO that may not even be aware that they have a warlock. There is nothing for the DM to fix. The player/character is not wrong in how they are playing it.
Then again, there is not indication that you can't have a pact where the GOO actually wants something from you. Despite being inscrutable and unknowable, a GOO might still demand things from its warlocks. The demands might not make any sense, but it can still order you to do things.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
Then again, there is not indication that you can't have a pact where the GOO actually wants something from you. Despite being inscrutable and unknowable, a GOO might still demand things from its warlocks. The demands might not make any sense, but it can still order you to do things.
I completely agree :). You can have a huge range of GOOs and possible GOO pacts.
However, if the player made a pact with one kind (a hands off laid back GOO) as part of their character creation process and the DM subsequently comes along and insists "no, the GOO you made a pact with is actually interested in sowing evil across the multiverse and is going to make you take ever more evil actions or they will force you to give up your powers (OP quotation:"until the requests become the kind of thing that the player has to decide between the pact and their allegiance to the team/goodness/their humanity.") then I would have to say that from a DM perspective that goes too far. It is rail roading character development and essentially rewriting the kind of GOO the player chose to make a pact with. A DM can do it but they can't expect the player to like it ... and unless the player buys in to the planned plot development, in advance, then when the DM forces the player to choose between ultimately evil actions or remaining a warlock ... as a player, I would say the game isn't fun anymore and walk away. Maybe his player is different.
Then again, there is not indication that you can't have a pact where the GOO actually wants something from you. Despite being inscrutable and unknowable, a GOO might still demand things from its warlocks. The demands might not make any sense, but it can still order you to do things.
I completely agree :). You can have a huge range of GOOs and possible GOO pacts.
However, if the player made a pact with one kind (a hands off laid back GOO) as part of their character creation process and the DM subsequently comes along and insists "no, the GOO you made a pact with is actually interested in sowing evil across the multiverse and is going to make you take ever more evil actions or they will force you to give up your powers (OP quotation:"until the requests become the kind of thing that the player has to decide between the pact and their allegiance to the team/goodness/their humanity.") then I would have to say that from a DM perspective that goes too far. It is rail roading character development and essentially rewriting the kind of GOO the player chose to make a pact with. A DM can do it but they can't expect the player to like it ... and unless the player buys in to the planned plot development, in advance, then when the DM forces the player to choose between ultimately evil actions or remaining a warlock ... as a player, I would say the game isn't fun anymore and walk away. Maybe his player is different.
Fair enough.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
I get what you guys are saying, but the Great Old Ones do interact with the Prime Material from time to time. And when they do, people go insane and horrible things happen (check out any Call of Cthulhu product). I agree that the GOO’s demands should be erratic and may not seem entirely coherent, but the PC shouldn’t be allowed to keep siphoning power to fuel his spells without some cost to his body, mind or soul (or heart, if he has loved ones). To let him do so would unjustly enrich the player through literally no effort of his own except picking the right patron at the start of the game.
I feel like we've strayed from the point. This has become a discussion where I've said "I think my wizard's going to cast fireball, who should he target" and everybody's chiming in saying "not all wizards have fireball, you know."
It's safe to assume that, regardless of whether I'm aware or not (I am) that Great Old Ones have MANY goals, and SOME of them MAY NOT be interested in direct servitude from their pacts, I've decided to go the other way. Rather than point out that I don't have to, any way we could get back on track and discuss a few ways I could push the character a little closer to howling madness and regret?
I feel like we've strayed from the point. This has become a discussion where I've said "I think my wizard's going to cast fireball, who should he target" and everybody's chiming in saying "not all wizards have fireball, you know."
It's safe to assume that, regardless of whether I'm aware or not (I am) that Great Old Ones have MANY goals, and SOME of them MAY NOT be interested in direct servitude from their pacts, I've decided to go the other way. Rather than point out that I don't have to, any way we could get back on track and discuss a few ways I could push the character a little closer to howling madness and regret?
I mean it’s the internet, did you not see getting side tracked of pedantry coming?
but otherwise you got a number of answers prior to it getting side tracked that you kind of dismissed in your reply.
you say you don’t want to punish the player but started a thread called punishing the player
you say you don’t want to alter the game mechanically or nerf the power while wanting to introduce a “please thank you” mechanic which could nerf the player.
you said you don’t want to take away the warlocks powers or gift better ones but then you give the character no reason whatsoever to have to choose to carry out the machinations of your GOO
we have told you across multiple posts that
a) mechanics exist to manage this already you don’t need new ones
b) if you aren’t trying to make this mechanical almost everything you are describing can just be flavour you add around your players actions, no mechanical changes needed
c) the stuff you can’t do with flavour would need to be managed by you and/or the player and may take away from The experience.
d) what you are describing sounds like a plot arc you should be incorporating into the overall narrative not just a side feature.
so yeah you can focus on the GOO deep dive that has sprung up from treating a GOO patron like a fiend patron but it kind of doesn’t change the original advice which you dismissed.
tldr - make mechanical changes or RP it but accept that you will have to nerf the player/offer boons to get the outcome you want and your GOO is a fiend ;)
I mean it’s the internet, did you not see getting side tracked of pedantry coming?
but otherwise you got a number of answers prior to it getting side tracked that you kind of dismissed in your reply.
you say you don’t want to punish the player but started a thread called punishing the player
you say you don’t want to alter the game mechanically or nerf the power while wanting to introduce a “please thank you” mechanic which could nerf the player.
you said you don’t want to take away the warlocks powers or gift better ones but then you give the character no reason whatsoever to have to choose to carry out the machinations of your GOO
we have told you across multiple posts that
a) mechanics exist to manage this already you don’t need new ones
b) if you aren’t trying to make this mechanical almost everything you are describing can just be flavour you add around your players actions, no mechanical changes needed
c) the stuff you can’t do with flavour would need to be managed by you and/or the player and may take away from The experience.
d) what you are describing sounds like a plot arc you should be incorporating into the overall narrative not just a side feature.
so yeah you can focus on the GOO deep dive that has sprung up from treating a GOO patron like a fiend patron but it kind of doesn’t change the original advice which you dismissed.
tldr - make mechanical changes or RP it but accept that you will have to nerf the player/offer boons to get the outcome you want and your GOO is a fiend ;)
I agree with you that Old Ones and fiends are different but there must be SOME negative impact from having a GOO as a patron. Otherwise every idiot in the known universe would be lining up to make a pact with these guys 😊.
Okay but what’s the negative impact of having a god as paladin or cleric? what’s the negative impact of knowing theives cant and getting sneak attack? What’s the negative impact of having a spell book? What’s the negative impact of having a fighting style?
The reason to pick different patrons is not to find the one with the least negative impact on your day to day it is
mechanical - get access to spell lists
flavour - because the PC has a story they want to tell
This whole discussion actually shows, why I have a hard time with Warlocks in comparison to all other classes. Having a patron and forging a pact to get your powers has so much roleplaying implications, especially when the PCs start getting really powerful.
On the one hand, it is a bit unfair to force players into following their patrons subtle plans, and warlock players should have agency over their actions, as every other player has, on the other hand, especially powerful warlocks should be forced to further their patrons goals.
There are for sure players that embrace these RP opportunities, howerver, when warlocks just ignore their patron, I, as a DM, would push them back on track. Including consequences if they oppose their patrons.
So, in my opinion, warlocks have the highest RP requirements of all classes and are actually hard to play right.
@sardonicmonkey yes, but you can’t make a pact with the Great Old Ones and not have negative consequences in your life. You just can’t. Lovecraft said so and he basically invented the GOO. It’s not about balance, it’s about respecting how awe-inspiring and terrifying these beings really are.
Okay so I fear saying this and side tracking again but I disagree with the argument “x are hard to play right” there is no right way to play a class.
good way? Sure. Bad way? Yep. Optimal way? Maybe. Right or wrong way? Nope.
if a player wants to play a GOO warlock with no attention paid to the GOO then let them, you have a million ways to have that PC go through interesting choices and encounters without paying lip service to works of fiction some old white guy wrote 100 years ago.
Player Experience > DM’s unpublished Cthulhu novel
Okay so I fear saying this and side tracking again but I disagree with the argument “x are hard to play right” there is no right way to play a class.
good way? Sure. Bad way? Yep. Optimal way? Maybe. Right or wrong way? Nope.
if a player wants to play a GOO warlock with no attention paid to the GOO then let them, you have a million ways to have that PC go through interesting choices and encounters without paying lip service to works of fiction some old white guy wrote 100 years ago.
Player Experience > DM’s unpublished Cthulhu novel
Yeah, good point 😊.
But when the character reaches 20th level at least give him the chance to hang out on the beach at St. Bart’s sipping margaritas with Cthulhu. You gotta admit, that’d be pretty cool 😎.
But when the character reaches 20th level at least give him the chance to hang out on the beach at St. Bart’s sipping margaritas with Cthulhu. You gotta admit, that’d be pretty cool 😎.
The real question is, how would Cthulhu sip? The tentacles would get in the way. I guess the answer would just break my sanity and I shouldn't want to know.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
But when the character reaches 20th level at least give him the chance to hang out on the beach at St. Bart’s sipping margaritas with Cthulhu. You gotta admit, that’d be pretty cool 😎.
The real question is, how would Cthulhu sip? The tentacles would get in the way. I guess the answer would just break my sanity and I shouldn't want to know.
I would check this over with your player first to make sure they're cool with the mechanics, but you might impose consequences for low rolls on perception, insight or social skills. GOO patrons make you a little off, so if the player rolls a poor perception check, they might see things that aren't there. For a character prone to paranoia, a low insight roll might convince them a perfectly nice person is some kind of unspeakably horrible thing or that evil cult member is a lovely fellow whom they might want to help. I'm also assuming the warlock takes lead on social rolls sometimes. If the player rolls low, it might make sense for the DM to say, well here's something that comes out of your mouth. Is it prophecy? Gibberish? Random corruption of definitions coming from letting a GOO in your head? It can vary. The trick here is to make sure the results are a little unpredictable. My examples switch good and evil, but it makes sense for randomness to be a factor. Maybe the character completely understands a person except they think the barbarian is actually a rogue. Or maybe they can't see the color purple and anyone wearing it doesn't exist to them, despite evidence to the contrary. These examples are still a little predictable for a GOO or Archfey warlock. Maybe roll a percentile dice and have random side effects happen, or the more regular side effects don't happen on certain numbers. Emphasize uncertainty.
A lot of advice for GOO warlocks is impose mental illness, but I personally despise that advice because it involves touching on subjects that players might not be happy with, especially if you don't have much experience with mental illness. If you decide to go this path, I personally recommend some kind of disorder that in no way is tied to an actual diagnosis.
Also, compound these results. This part can be a little more tricky, but can come into play with recurring NPCs or settings. The more the character misunderstands something, the more corruption of reality happens when a new consequence is imposed involving that misunderstanding. This shouldn't happen all the time, since a warlock should have the opportunity to thwart their patron. Some moments of absolute clarity could make the character feel tortured if they did things that would otherwise be against their alignment.
All of this is more advice for a passive patron, but if you want to impose more active consequences, I recommend side plots. Think how the Zhentarim might ask a member to accomplish some goal like stealing paperwork from an organization the players are fighting, but more HP Lovecraft style. Honestly, random plot generators for writers can provide good ideas if you want some help being unpredictable. Why does a GOO care about a little girl's diary? I don't know, but it's here somewhere! You said your patron wants you to orange the goblins? What does that mean? There are even HP Lovecraft story generators. And if enough of those plots aren't accomplished, you might try imposing a condition like frightened, charmed, or blinded for a very short period of time. I don't recommend this last bit, though. It's more a tool of last resort.
And, of course, the other characters should be able to talk the warlock out of things. The warlock might get murderous urges or decide they can't go forward until they complete some sort of compulsion, but the other characters need to be able to redirect the warlock if it holds up the plot or you don't want to go down a storyline that would ensue.
Tl;dr: Make the information given to the character full of uncertainty, inexplicableness, and eldritch horrors. Then the player can't forget there are consequences to their bargain.
Then again, there is not indication that you can't have a pact where the GOO actually wants something from you. Despite being inscrutable and unknowable, a GOO might still demand things from its warlocks. The demands might not make any sense, but it can still order you to do things.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
I completely agree :). You can have a huge range of GOOs and possible GOO pacts.
However, if the player made a pact with one kind (a hands off laid back GOO) as part of their character creation process and the DM subsequently comes along and insists "no, the GOO you made a pact with is actually interested in sowing evil across the multiverse and is going to make you take ever more evil actions or they will force you to give up your powers (OP quotation:"until the requests become the kind of thing that the player has to decide between the pact and their allegiance to the team/goodness/their humanity.") then I would have to say that from a DM perspective that goes too far. It is rail roading character development and essentially rewriting the kind of GOO the player chose to make a pact with. A DM can do it but they can't expect the player to like it ... and unless the player buys in to the planned plot development, in advance, then when the DM forces the player to choose between ultimately evil actions or remaining a warlock ... as a player, I would say the game isn't fun anymore and walk away. Maybe his player is different.
Fair enough.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
I get what you guys are saying, but the Great Old Ones do interact with the Prime Material from time to time. And when they do, people go insane and horrible things happen (check out any Call of Cthulhu product). I agree that the GOO’s demands should be erratic and may not seem entirely coherent, but the PC shouldn’t be allowed to keep siphoning power to fuel his spells without some cost to his body, mind or soul (or heart, if he has loved ones). To let him do so would unjustly enrich the player through literally no effort of his own except picking the right patron at the start of the game.
What do you guys think?
I feel like we've strayed from the point. This has become a discussion where I've said "I think my wizard's going to cast fireball, who should he target" and everybody's chiming in saying "not all wizards have fireball, you know."
It's safe to assume that, regardless of whether I'm aware or not (I am) that Great Old Ones have MANY goals, and SOME of them MAY NOT be interested in direct servitude from their pacts, I've decided to go the other way. Rather than point out that I don't have to, any way we could get back on track and discuss a few ways I could push the character a little closer to howling madness and regret?
Rule-wise or roleplay-wise?
There is no dawn after eternal night.
Homebrew: Magic items, Subclasses
I mean it’s the internet, did you not see getting side tracked of pedantry coming?
but otherwise you got a number of answers prior to it getting side tracked that you kind of dismissed in your reply.
you say you don’t want to punish the player but started a thread called punishing the player
you say you don’t want to alter the game mechanically or nerf the power while wanting to introduce a “please thank you” mechanic which could nerf the player.
you said you don’t want to take away the warlocks powers or gift better ones but then you give the character no reason whatsoever to have to choose to carry out the machinations of your GOO
we have told you across multiple posts that
a) mechanics exist to manage this already you don’t need new ones
b) if you aren’t trying to make this mechanical almost everything you are describing can just be flavour you add around your players actions, no mechanical changes needed
c) the stuff you can’t do with flavour would need to be managed by you and/or the player and may take away from The experience.
d) what you are describing sounds like a plot arc you should be incorporating into the overall narrative not just a side feature.
so yeah you can focus on the GOO deep dive that has sprung up from treating a GOO patron like a fiend patron but it kind of doesn’t change the original advice which you dismissed.
tldr - make mechanical changes or RP it but accept that you will have to nerf the player/offer boons to get the outcome you want and your GOO is a fiend ;)
Every time he casts a spell he wakes up that night with horrible bone-chilling nightmares
The nightmares are so bad he wakes up screaming and he can’t sleep well and cause he’s so tired he takes a penalty to die rolls the next day
I agree with you that Old Ones and fiends are different but there must be SOME negative impact from having a GOO as a patron. Otherwise every idiot in the known universe would be lining up to make a pact with these guys 😊.
Okay but what’s the negative impact of having a god as paladin or cleric? what’s the negative impact of knowing theives cant and getting sneak attack? What’s the negative impact of having a spell book? What’s the negative impact of having a fighting style?
The reason to pick different patrons is not to find the one with the least negative impact on your day to day it is
mechanical - get access to spell lists
flavour - because the PC has a story they want to tell
don’t really get a need to “balance” GOO
This whole discussion actually shows, why I have a hard time with Warlocks in comparison to all other classes. Having a patron and forging a pact to get your powers has so much roleplaying implications, especially when the PCs start getting really powerful.
On the one hand, it is a bit unfair to force players into following their patrons subtle plans, and warlock players should have agency over their actions, as every other player has, on the other hand, especially powerful warlocks should be forced to further their patrons goals.
There are for sure players that embrace these RP opportunities, howerver, when warlocks just ignore their patron, I, as a DM, would push them back on track. Including consequences if they oppose their patrons.
So, in my opinion, warlocks have the highest RP requirements of all classes and are actually hard to play right.
@Voras totally agree
@sardonicmonkey yes, but you can’t make a pact with the Great Old Ones and not have negative consequences in your life. You just can’t. Lovecraft said so and he basically invented the GOO. It’s not about balance, it’s about respecting how awe-inspiring and terrifying these beings really are.
You can’t just hustle them and get away with it.
Okay so I fear saying this and side tracking again but I disagree with the argument “x are hard to play right” there is no right way to play a class.
good way? Sure. Bad way? Yep. Optimal way? Maybe. Right or wrong way? Nope.
if a player wants to play a GOO warlock with no attention paid to the GOO then let them, you have a million ways to have that PC go through interesting choices and encounters without paying lip service to works of fiction some old white guy wrote 100 years ago.
Player Experience > DM’s unpublished Cthulhu novel
Yeah, good point 😊.
But when the character reaches 20th level at least give him the chance to hang out on the beach at St. Bart’s sipping margaritas with Cthulhu. You gotta admit, that’d be pretty cool 😎.
The real question is, how would Cthulhu sip? The tentacles would get in the way. I guess the answer would just break my sanity and I shouldn't want to know.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Totally 😂😂😂
I would check this over with your player first to make sure they're cool with the mechanics, but you might impose consequences for low rolls on perception, insight or social skills. GOO patrons make you a little off, so if the player rolls a poor perception check, they might see things that aren't there. For a character prone to paranoia, a low insight roll might convince them a perfectly nice person is some kind of unspeakably horrible thing or that evil cult member is a lovely fellow whom they might want to help. I'm also assuming the warlock takes lead on social rolls sometimes. If the player rolls low, it might make sense for the DM to say, well here's something that comes out of your mouth. Is it prophecy? Gibberish? Random corruption of definitions coming from letting a GOO in your head? It can vary. The trick here is to make sure the results are a little unpredictable. My examples switch good and evil, but it makes sense for randomness to be a factor. Maybe the character completely understands a person except they think the barbarian is actually a rogue. Or maybe they can't see the color purple and anyone wearing it doesn't exist to them, despite evidence to the contrary. These examples are still a little predictable for a GOO or Archfey warlock. Maybe roll a percentile dice and have random side effects happen, or the more regular side effects don't happen on certain numbers. Emphasize uncertainty.
A lot of advice for GOO warlocks is impose mental illness, but I personally despise that advice because it involves touching on subjects that players might not be happy with, especially if you don't have much experience with mental illness. If you decide to go this path, I personally recommend some kind of disorder that in no way is tied to an actual diagnosis.
Also, compound these results. This part can be a little more tricky, but can come into play with recurring NPCs or settings. The more the character misunderstands something, the more corruption of reality happens when a new consequence is imposed involving that misunderstanding. This shouldn't happen all the time, since a warlock should have the opportunity to thwart their patron. Some moments of absolute clarity could make the character feel tortured if they did things that would otherwise be against their alignment.
All of this is more advice for a passive patron, but if you want to impose more active consequences, I recommend side plots. Think how the Zhentarim might ask a member to accomplish some goal like stealing paperwork from an organization the players are fighting, but more HP Lovecraft style. Honestly, random plot generators for writers can provide good ideas if you want some help being unpredictable. Why does a GOO care about a little girl's diary? I don't know, but it's here somewhere! You said your patron wants you to orange the goblins? What does that mean? There are even HP Lovecraft story generators. And if enough of those plots aren't accomplished, you might try imposing a condition like frightened, charmed, or blinded for a very short period of time. I don't recommend this last bit, though. It's more a tool of last resort.
And, of course, the other characters should be able to talk the warlock out of things. The warlock might get murderous urges or decide they can't go forward until they complete some sort of compulsion, but the other characters need to be able to redirect the warlock if it holds up the plot or you don't want to go down a storyline that would ensue.
Tl;dr: Make the information given to the character full of uncertainty, inexplicableness, and eldritch horrors. Then the player can't forget there are consequences to their bargain.
@LynaAshford @Kotath I Like these! These are great ideas.