I'm looking for ideas on how players could forcibly separate an enemy Warlock from their patron. As well as preventing that same Warlock from gaining another patron. Essentially locking them out of ever becoming a Warlock again.
I'm not sure exactly how to go about doing this, but I had the idea pop up recently as something interesting for a future baddie
This is pretty tough, because Warlock Patrons are both really varied and really powerful. What could prevent a person both from communing with a Great Old One or contacting the Raven Queen? I'm pretty sure no answer exists by RAW, because otherwise Warlock characters would be completely and totally screwed when the DM uses it against them. So it's definitely a make-something-up question, not a "how do you do this by the rules", because by RAW you can't.
There are two things I could think of. One is psychological, like a souped-up version of a geas spell. Something that makes it so that even though the character technically could get a warlock patron, they are personally unable to for their own reasons.
Another is some kind of generalized telepathy blocker, that blocks all telepathic communication to and from the person. That might make them unable to communicate with this and any future patrons.
Both of these are tricky because the patrons are basically gods, they're incredibly powerful beings. Anything a PC can do, one of these patrons is probably powerful enough to undo.
Yeah, that was the main issue I was having when trying to think up ideas on my own. As the DM, I know I could just say that the entity doesn't care enough to undo the effect, or some other hand-wavy thing like that. But that feels really lame, and I want it to be at least somewhat plausible.
Hm, going off the idea of the geas spell, an upcasted Modify Memory spell might work as well. Or even a combination of the two spells. One to make them forget they are a Warlock and have a patron, and the other to prevent them from being able to make another pact.
One idea I had was some kind of ancient artifact or something that blocked communication with really powerful beings, and another one that forcibly separated certain classes from the source of their power (Clerics from their gods, Warlocks from their patrons, Paladins from their Oaths, and even Sorcerers and Wizards from the weave).
They would have to be incredibly powerful items in order to do that though. Which again, is where the issue seems to lie. who but another deity would be able to create such items? If created by another deity, why would they create something that could potentially be used against them? But if it was created by mortals, how were they able to do so?
Within the narrative, you've basically hit the nail on the head. If a Patron agrees to a pact, there is very little any mortal can do about it.
However, there is a mechanical quirk to consider. In order to multi-class, a character has to meet the minimum attribute score for both classes. In the case of a Warlock, that attribute is Charisma. Now, 5e doesn't technically require a minimum score for a primary class (because what would be the point of that?), but it could easily be rationalized that if you fall beneath that threshold in some permanent way, you also lose your ability to activate those class abilities.
Your villain could find a way to drain the warlock of Charisma until they lose the ability to channel their patron. It wouldn't technically separate them from their patron, but would render them impotent.
Patrons bestow gifts to their Warlocks as part of a contractual agreement, and aren't necessarily willing to go any further than that without a quid pro quo. Losing the ability to channel could be seen as a failing on the Warlock's end of the agreement, and the Patron would have no incentive to invest any more energy into a failed contract.
Sometimes the relationship between warlock and patron is like that of a cleric and a deity, though the beings that serve as patrons for warlocks are not gods. ... ... More often, though, the arrangement is similar to that between a master and an apprentice.
I'm looking for ideas on how players could forcibly separate an enemy Warlock from their patron. As well as preventing that same Warlock from gaining another patron. Essentially locking them out of ever becoming a Warlock again.
I'm not sure exactly how to go about doing this, but I had the idea pop up recently as something interesting for a future baddie
This is pretty tough, because Warlock Patrons are both really varied and really powerful. What could prevent a person both from communing with a Great Old One or contacting the Raven Queen? I'm pretty sure no answer exists by RAW, because otherwise Warlock characters would be completely and totally screwed when the DM uses it against them. So it's definitely a make-something-up question, not a "how do you do this by the rules", because by RAW you can't.
There are two things I could think of. One is psychological, like a souped-up version of a geas spell. Something that makes it so that even though the character technically could get a warlock patron, they are personally unable to for their own reasons.
Another is some kind of generalized telepathy blocker, that blocks all telepathic communication to and from the person. That might make them unable to communicate with this and any future patrons.
Both of these are tricky because the patrons are basically gods, they're incredibly powerful beings. Anything a PC can do, one of these patrons is probably powerful enough to undo.
Yeah, that was the main issue I was having when trying to think up ideas on my own. As the DM, I know I could just say that the entity doesn't care enough to undo the effect, or some other hand-wavy thing like that. But that feels really lame, and I want it to be at least somewhat plausible.
Hm, going off the idea of the geas spell, an upcasted Modify Memory spell might work as well. Or even a combination of the two spells. One to make them forget they are a Warlock and have a patron, and the other to prevent them from being able to make another pact.
One idea I had was some kind of ancient artifact or something that blocked communication with really powerful beings, and another one that forcibly separated certain classes from the source of their power (Clerics from their gods, Warlocks from their patrons, Paladins from their Oaths, and even Sorcerers and Wizards from the weave).
They would have to be incredibly powerful items in order to do that though. Which again, is where the issue seems to lie. who but another deity would be able to create such items? If created by another deity, why would they create something that could potentially be used against them? But if it was created by mortals, how were they able to do so?
Within the narrative, you've basically hit the nail on the head. If a Patron agrees to a pact, there is very little any mortal can do about it.
However, there is a mechanical quirk to consider. In order to multi-class, a character has to meet the minimum attribute score for both classes. In the case of a Warlock, that attribute is Charisma. Now, 5e doesn't technically require a minimum score for a primary class (because what would be the point of that?), but it could easily be rationalized that if you fall beneath that threshold in some permanent way, you also lose your ability to activate those class abilities.
Your villain could find a way to drain the warlock of Charisma until they lose the ability to channel their patron. It wouldn't technically separate them from their patron, but would render them impotent.
Patrons bestow gifts to their Warlocks as part of a contractual agreement, and aren't necessarily willing to go any further than that without a quid pro quo. Losing the ability to channel could be seen as a failing on the Warlock's end of the agreement, and the Patron would have no incentive to invest any more energy into a failed contract.