Bear in mind that Warlocks are not Clerics. They do not worship their patron, nor do they even need to have similarly aligned interests. While it may be a bit tougher to explain why a Lawful Good character entered a pact with a Chaotic Evil fiend, the nature of that pact is flexible enough to allow for entirely plausible, interesting, logical, and fun explanations. For example, a Lawful Good worshiper of, say, Tyr, could have decided to study their most hated enemy, a Chaotic Evil demon, to be better equipped to fight them effectively. In their studies, they might have even managed to contact and "trick" the demon into giving them knowledge and power (i.e. pact). That would work for a LG Warlock with a Fiend patron, could even be an Acolyte background. Or a Neutral Good orphaned child, living in the streets of Waterdeep, might find a discarded old rotting tome in a dumpster while foraging for food, and upon reading it, discover eldritch secrets regarding Ghaunadaur, The Elder Eye, The Ancient One, The Lord of Slime, That Which Lurks. Works for a NG Warlock with a Great Old One patron, Urchin background.
No need to evil, nor haunted, although perhaps the name "Warlock", and the common stereotypical depictions, push you towards it.
Bear in mind that Warlocks are not Clerics. They do not worship their patron, nor do they even need to have similarly aligned interests. While it may be a bit tougher to explain why a Lawful Good character entered a pact with a Chaotic Evil fiend, the nature of that pact is flexible enough to allow for entirely plausible, interesting, logical, and fun explanations. For example, a Lawful Good worshiper of, say, Tyr, could have decided to study their most hated enemy, a Chaotic Evil demon, to be better equipped to fight them effectively. In their studies, they might have even managed to contact and "trick" the demon into giving them knowledge and power (i.e. pact). That would work for a LG Warlock with a Fiend patron, could even be an Acolyte background. Or a Neutral Good orphaned child, living in the streets of Waterdeep, might find a discarded old rotting tome in a dumpster while foraging for food, and upon reading it, discover eldritch secrets regarding Ghaunadaur, The Elder Eye, The Ancient One, The Lord of Slime, That Which Lurks. Works for a NG Warlock with a Great Old One patron, Urchin background.
No need to evil, nor haunted, although perhaps the name "Warlock", and the common stereotypical depictions, push you towards it.
In addition, fiends are not universially chaotic...Demons are, but Devils are lawful, and Yugaloths are Neutral (not counting other uncategorized fiends), so chaos is not always guarranteed.
As a general comment to the OP; I know that the basic rules only list the Fiend as an option, but you cannot judge a class in full by one subclass. You could make an argument that practically any class could be considered an "evil" class by cherry picking one subclass to base your opinion on (Way of Shadow Monk, Death Cleric, Oathbreaker/Vengeance Paladin, Necromancy Wizard, half the Rogue subclasses, etc...)
Apart from having to have a patron, I don't think warlocks are forced into much at all. In fact I'd say that they are maybe the class with the most choice of what you can do with them.
Their subclasses are really interesting imo, and each of them get unique spells and thematic abilities to differentiate them, and they almost get a second subclass with the blade/tome/chain choice which is so much creative freedom in how to build them.
I've got no clue what you mean about forced into the haunted one background. My warlock I've got setup as a backup character has the entertainer background. People from any background can have a reason to end up in a pact, whether willingly or accidently.
A lawful good folk hero could attract the attention of an angel, and gain them as a patron to go and do good in the world! The complete opposite of your idea of what a warlock is forced to be.
I'm just hoping they get a draconic patron option at some point, then there is finally an excuse to kill off the sorcerer class for good.
Actually, I don't want the sorcerer to get killed off. I do want it to be changed a bit tho. Metamagic is a cool feature, but sorcerers need tweaks to hit die, to their spell system, and their proficiencies. RIght now they are useful as combat casters, except their not. They have a big range of damage spells, but they have awful cantrips, and only a few spell slots, so basically they can attack four or five times before they have to go hide in the corner and wait for the fighters to deal damage. Warlocks have the best cantrips in the game, and even some that can be enhanced with eldritch invocations. I do think they need a primary stat change, because most people pick them for a party face, except bards are a better choice overall if you're going for that approach.
I dislike metamagic being sorcerers whole unique thing. It was better as a feat for all casters.
Sorcerers special thing was spontaneous casting which all classes get now, leaving sorcerers with no identity. WotC flailed around trying to find them an identity, and then when their playtest idea got mixed results they panicked and stuck metamagic to the side with flex tape to keep it alive.
Thematically I love them, but I just think that they're redundant and unneeded at this point. Metamagic should have remained available to all, and without metamagic sorcerers are just a wizard with everything decent removed and a cooler theme.
Warlocks can basically be reflavoured as better sorcerers if you just say the power comes from a bloodline and not a patron. Most of their power sources are similar themes anyway.
That's true. My thing with sorcerer's is that they are the one class where I actually like the subclasses bothe mchanically and flavour-wise, warlocks have the overall best ones flavour-wise, but as I have said before, none of them add much mechanically.
Just realized a MAJOR mistake on my post. Instead of saying Lurker in the Deep, I said great old one (two completely different subclasses). Lurker in the Deep is Cthulhu, I don't know what great old one is.
Just realized a MAJOR mistake on my post. Instead of saying Lurker in the Deep, I said great old one (two completely different subclasses). Lurker in the Deep is Cthulhu, I don't know what great old one is.
Great Old One would be Cthulhu. Lurker in the Deep would be a Kraken or other deep underwater / Plane of Water creature.
The Warlock class page specifically says Cthulhu is an example of a Great Old One.
The Great Old One Entities of this type include Ghaunadar, called That Which Lurks; Tharizdun, the Chained God; Dendar, the Night Serpent; Zargon, the Returner; Great Cthulhu; and other unfathomable beings.
The Lurker in the Deep You made a pact with an entity that lurks somewhere deep in the ocean, or even on the Elemental Plane of Water, such as a mighty kraken, an ancient primordial, or a monstrous being from creation’s earliest days.
Just realized a MAJOR mistake on my post. Instead of saying Lurker in the Deep, I said great old one (two completely different subclasses). Lurker in the Deep is Cthulhu, I don't know what great old one is.
Well, Lurker of the deep are powerful creatures that live deep under the water or in the Elemental Plane of Water. Leviathans, Krakens, Dragon Turtles, Water Primordials, and Abeloths are common choices for patrons.
The Great Old One does include Cthulhu as an options, as well as many far realm entities that are meant to be unfathomable, truly alien and beyond human comprehension.
In Lovecraft, he is described as one of the great old ones, that is why I confused them. But yes, he fits better under the lurker in the deep category.
Anybody ever noticed that all the marital classes have spellcasting counterparts? Warlocks and blood hunters match, sorcerers and barbarians, rogues and bards, fighters and wizards, monks and clerics? They all have a similar type, for example, sorcerers have the same hit die and a similar spell list to wizards, but are more enhancable, wizards are versatile, and the same applies to fighters and barbarians?
Wizards are the most versatile casters, they get a little bit of everything and they can learn new spell when they find them. Fighters have every weapon and armor proficiency, and can take new fighting styles and extra attacks more than any other class. If we are comparing spells to weapons, the similarity is clear.
Blood Hunters are critical role, they have their own sourcebook for them (Wildemount), and they even use the warlock spell table for thei spellcaster subclass (profane soul).
Rogues and Bards are sneaky, they get expertises, they have a lot of abilities but not a lot of proficiencies (bards have a fair amount of spells). Both the arcane trickster and the bard get to steal spells from othe classes.
Blood Hunters are critical role, they have their own sourcebook for them (Wildemount), and they even use the warlock spell table for thei spellcaster subclass (profane soul).
Bear in mind that Warlocks are not Clerics. They do not worship their patron, nor do they even need to have similarly aligned interests. While it may be a bit tougher to explain why a Lawful Good character entered a pact with a Chaotic Evil fiend, the nature of that pact is flexible enough to allow for entirely plausible, interesting, logical, and fun explanations. For example, a Lawful Good worshiper of, say, Tyr, could have decided to study their most hated enemy, a Chaotic Evil demon, to be better equipped to fight them effectively. In their studies, they might have even managed to contact and "trick" the demon into giving them knowledge and power (i.e. pact). That would work for a LG Warlock with a Fiend patron, could even be an Acolyte background. Or a Neutral Good orphaned child, living in the streets of Waterdeep, might find a discarded old rotting tome in a dumpster while foraging for food, and upon reading it, discover eldritch secrets regarding Ghaunadaur, The Elder Eye, The Ancient One, The Lord of Slime, That Which Lurks. Works for a NG Warlock with a Great Old One patron, Urchin background.
No need to evil, nor haunted, although perhaps the name "Warlock", and the common stereotypical depictions, push you towards it.
In addition, fiends are not universially chaotic...Demons are, but Devils are lawful, and Yugaloths are Neutral (not counting other uncategorized fiends), so chaos is not always guarranteed.
As a general comment to the OP; I know that the basic rules only list the Fiend as an option, but you cannot judge a class in full by one subclass. You could make an argument that practically any class could be considered an "evil" class by cherry picking one subclass to base your opinion on (Way of Shadow Monk, Death Cleric, Oathbreaker/Vengeance Paladin, Necromancy Wizard, half the Rogue subclasses, etc...)
Apart from having to have a patron, I don't think warlocks are forced into much at all. In fact I'd say that they are maybe the class with the most choice of what you can do with them.
Their subclasses are really interesting imo, and each of them get unique spells and thematic abilities to differentiate them, and they almost get a second subclass with the blade/tome/chain choice which is so much creative freedom in how to build them.
I've got no clue what you mean about forced into the haunted one background. My warlock I've got setup as a backup character has the entertainer background. People from any background can have a reason to end up in a pact, whether willingly or accidently.
A lawful good folk hero could attract the attention of an angel, and gain them as a patron to go and do good in the world! The complete opposite of your idea of what a warlock is forced to be.
I'm just hoping they get a draconic patron option at some point, then there is finally an excuse to kill off the sorcerer class for good.
Actually, I don't want the sorcerer to get killed off. I do want it to be changed a bit tho. Metamagic is a cool feature, but sorcerers need tweaks to hit die, to their spell system, and their proficiencies. RIght now they are useful as combat casters, except their not. They have a big range of damage spells, but they have awful cantrips, and only a few spell slots, so basically they can attack four or five times before they have to go hide in the corner and wait for the fighters to deal damage. Warlocks have the best cantrips in the game, and even some that can be enhanced with eldritch invocations. I do think they need a primary stat change, because most people pick them for a party face, except bards are a better choice overall if you're going for that approach.
It is done.
I dislike metamagic being sorcerers whole unique thing. It was better as a feat for all casters.
Sorcerers special thing was spontaneous casting which all classes get now, leaving sorcerers with no identity. WotC flailed around trying to find them an identity, and then when their playtest idea got mixed results they panicked and stuck metamagic to the side with flex tape to keep it alive.
Thematically I love them, but I just think that they're redundant and unneeded at this point. Metamagic should have remained available to all, and without metamagic sorcerers are just a wizard with everything decent removed and a cooler theme.
Warlocks can basically be reflavoured as better sorcerers if you just say the power comes from a bloodline and not a patron. Most of their power sources are similar themes anyway.
That's true. My thing with sorcerer's is that they are the one class where I actually like the subclasses bothe mchanically and flavour-wise, warlocks have the overall best ones flavour-wise, but as I have said before, none of them add much mechanically.
It is done.
Actually, a sage background works fairly well. They could make a deal with the devil to gain arcane knowledge.
It is done.
Just realized a MAJOR mistake on my post. Instead of saying Lurker in the Deep, I said great old one (two completely different subclasses). Lurker in the Deep is Cthulhu, I don't know what great old one is.
It is done.
Great Old One would be Cthulhu. Lurker in the Deep would be a Kraken or other deep underwater / Plane of Water creature.
The Warlock class page specifically says Cthulhu is an example of a Great Old One.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Well, Lurker of the deep are powerful creatures that live deep under the water or in the Elemental Plane of Water. Leviathans, Krakens, Dragon Turtles, Water Primordials, and Abeloths are common choices for patrons.
The Great Old One does include Cthulhu as an options, as well as many far realm entities that are meant to be unfathomable, truly alien and beyond human comprehension.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
I think Cthulhu could serve as both a Lurker in the Deep and a Great Old One patron.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
In Lovecraft, he is described as one of the great old ones, that is why I confused them. But yes, he fits better under the lurker in the deep category.
It is done.
Cthulhu is the epitome of a Great Old One.
Lurker would be for something like Uktoa(SP?) From Wildemount.
I......I am not even gonna.....
ok
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Anybody ever noticed that all the marital classes have spellcasting counterparts? Warlocks and blood hunters match, sorcerers and barbarians, rogues and bards, fighters and wizards, monks and clerics? They all have a similar type, for example, sorcerers have the same hit die and a similar spell list to wizards, but are more enhancable, wizards are versatile, and the same applies to fighters and barbarians?
It is done.
I... I don't see how any of those classes are related. The only one I can slightly see is bard and rogue, as they're both skill monkeys.
Blood Hunter isn't even an official class.
Wizards are the most versatile casters, they get a little bit of everything and they can learn new spell when they find them. Fighters have every weapon and armor proficiency, and can take new fighting styles and extra attacks more than any other class. If we are comparing spells to weapons, the similarity is clear.
Blood Hunters are critical role, they have their own sourcebook for them (Wildemount), and they even use the warlock spell table for thei spellcaster subclass (profane soul).
Rogues and Bards are sneaky, they get expertises, they have a lot of abilities but not a lot of proficiencies (bards have a fair amount of spells). Both the arcane trickster and the bard get to steal spells from othe classes.
It is done.
Blood Hunters are not in Explorer's Guide to Wildmount. They're still unofficial.
Bloodhunters Npc/enemies exist in Wildemount. So technically, Bloodhunters or official but the PC class for Bloodhunters is not.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
They are as a Monster: Blood Hunter, so their existence is technically canon. Not as a PC class, but still....
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting