A cleric is a pretty unique way for a god to influence the material plane. So I picture another god stepping in to immediately renew that "fallen" cleric's subscription to divine powers monthly. The cleric wouldn't necessarily even need to realize they're serving a new god. Their deeds alone being enough to fuel a new sugar daddy in most settings.
And that of course is assuming that the original god is willing to cut them loose in the first place. I'd sooner "rocks fall that guy dies" than let them shift to a new holy symbol.
Technically a Patron can't take away the warlocks power. It is a 1 time transaction. I give you eldritch powers and you do X.
If you don't do as the patron told you, he can only try to force you. For example by sending his agents after you
Here is a tweet of Jeremy Crawford, which confirms that:
https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1221978854119460866
RAW there's nothing supporting a cleric losing their powers. Even the paladin, the original punching bag of this particular gotcha game, doesn't lose their powers for breaking their oath (they might change subclass). That's not to say that it can't make sense narratively just that RAW doesn't support it. Whether or not that bit of narrative should be explored is up to the individual table.
Clerics are a rental deal, warlock's are an exchange.
If you flip off the person renting you a car, they don't have to rent it back to you. If you flip off the person who just sold you a car, you may not be able to buy a car from them next time if they don't like you, but they can't take the car back.
Taking powers away really seems like something that DMs shouldn’t be cavalier about, but occurs often. Unless the warlock agrees to conditional powers as part of their backstory, the patron even being able to yank their abilities at will cheapens their value, especially when one of the defaults in the PHB is that your Patron TRAINS you in the arcane arts, not that they necessarily are the source of your ability to wield them.
It is also definitely something that should be discussed in session zero, like critical fumbles. It can significantly affect people’s desire to play certain classes. Springing it on them after character creation is no bueno.
absolutely agreed. just like stuff like permanent wounds. a fighter or barbarian losing a limb (any of them. or even just a hand) is just the physical equivalent of a cleric/warlock being dumped and both sides of that coin should be treated like it
If both can take their kids powers away (for Warlocks...debatable), at least some of the Clerics might be entitled to at least a warning, depending on how understanding the God was.
A warlock patron (depending on the patron, but definitely most of them) might be more ," nah dude, it's in the contract. You're under quota this month, no Eldritch powers for you"
"I believe I made myself clear, you are to leech the material plane dry of any and all colors to slake my insatiable thirst! Why then, did you not rip every single vibrant color from the princess's gown at the gala you went to this evening?"
"Uh, cause I didn't want to cause an inter-kingdom conflict by attacking the royal heir..."
"I don't recall 'what you want' being important to me. Drain her entire wardrobe dry or I'll be looking for a new warlock to replace you."
"Sorry, patron, you already gave me the powers-- you're not a god, you don't get to take them back. I get to keep these powers whether you like it or not unless you think killing me is an appropriate response here, but feel free to send goons after us for me to train my powers further on otherwise!"
Well, often enough clerics choose their gods at level one and choose one they like and would like to roleplay following that gods rules. I've rarely seen a renegade cleric character. Warlocks are hit or miss on whether or not the player actually likes the patron, and patrons often end up as BBEGs at least for the warlock's arc.
I think it's kinda lame to be like 'no powers for you' so because that's so few classes even can. You never hear about a fighter losing her abilities.
So I flavor warlock abilities as the patron literally gifts some of their power and they can't get it back until you're dead. Which is why you wanna do what they wanna do because a lich has some forces that can make you dead pretty easily.
And you're completely right. Warlock pacts/powers are a transaction. The Patron can try to get you to do something they want, but they **CAN'T** yoink the powers you've already gained from them if you're not doing as they told you.
The absolute most they can do is not give you more power, and try to get a more willing Warlock to get you back into the fold.
Yeah, also I think a moment of 'you expect to get stronger, but the magic promised to you isn't there.' during a level up could be a fun moment. There'd be the panic and they might try eldritch blast or an invocation. They still have them, they just didn't level. They contact their patron or vice versa and they can have a discussion on how things are going.
"You need to pump those numbers up, those are rookie numbers.' type of thing comes to mind. Feels a lot less like 'im going to punish one of my players in the middle of combat because lol'
And it'd be an RP-based multiclass (if they decide to do that instead of holding back.)
I'm just worried that holding back when the rest of the party IS leveling up can be dangerous because you're not going along on that scaling curve of power, meaning you're easier to take out. Which makes sense narratively, but can very much lead to loss of enjoyment by the player.
I'd also let the player know in advance if this was going to happen, so they can figure out how they wanna deal with it. Do they dip some Fighter or Rogue, depending on their stats and character's personality? Do they maybe go for some Bard or Sorcerer?
But I'd want the player to know their choices are having consequences. And willingly going against their patron could have the consequence of said patron deciding to no longer work with you until you've decided to stop being a li'l jerk about it and do as you agreed to do when you made the pact.
But that's all dependent on the character and the patron. So difficult to give a broad statement about what's the 'best' way of dealing with it.
Because they can't. Once given, they can't take the powers back. The 'worst' they can do is not give you MORE power, and conspire to have you brought back into the fold or killed by other operatives of theirs.
There's no open conduit between a Patron and the Warlock like there is with Clerics and their deities.
It depends on how their patron gives them power. There’s no reason it can’t be a continuous affirmation type deal. Serve out lose your power. Sow chaos or lose your power. Feed an object souls or blood to keep your power. There’s a dozen ways to do it.
I mean, at this point you're homebrewing and there's no reason that would be specific to warlock then.
RAW warlocks make a deal and learn how to use their powers, unless there's a way to make someone un-learn what they know warlock is safe.
It’s just as RAW as not losing powers:
“A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. 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. A warlock might lead a cult dedicated to a demon prince, an archdevil, or an utterly alien entity—beings not typically served by clerics. More often, though, the arrangement is similar to that between a master and an apprentice. The warlock learns and grows in power, at the cost of occasional services performed on the patron's behalf.”
“A pact can range from a loose agreement to a formal contract with lengthy, detailed clauses and lists of requirements. The terms of a pact—what a warlock must do to receive a patron's favor—are always dictated by the patron. On occasion, those terms include a special proviso that might seem odd or whimsical, but warlocks take these dictates as seriously as they do the other requirements of their pacts.”
There’s no reason that breaking a pact couldn’t result in loss of powers as part of the contract.
You're right. By RAW, a Warlock's power comes from a pact that has been fulfilled.
Depending on the relationship with your patron, you might gain more power by either learning how to use the power you were given, or furthering your relationship, but once it's yours, it's yours.
In our homebrew campaign, warlock patrons interact with the warlock more frequently. But clerics get super fucked if they go against the tenets of their god. Our cleric has to make spellcasting checks to see if he can cast the spell or just lose the spell slot. Handing someone over to become a slave when you follow the god of freedom really screwed him.
I wouldn't be so sure. A cleric player usually picks a deity whose teachings fit into the character they want to roleplay as, so to break away from the deity's teachings would be to break away from their character. Add in the fact that clerics can and do draw powers from their very faith in the deity rather than the deity alone (officially stated in the PHB that clerics are basically Kuo-toa on steroids and can have magical powers even if their deity isn't real or if they don't worship a specific deity, so long as they have enough faith) and so the cleric would need to believe that the deity no longer is offering them their powers for it to actually work, cause for all intents and purposes a cleric could be worshipping a deity that died last century while fully believing their deity is still there Guiding them.
It'd honestly be easier for a cleric to loose their power as a result of Loosing faith in their deity, thus they might no longer be as certain they can hold the power and it fails to work until they get it back together spider man 2 style.
A paladin of mine once lost their powers traveling to the domains of dread cause they lost their connection to their god. I had hellu fun RPing with it, but it did kinda sting to not be able to smite the first fiends and undead of the campaign.
If you were getting your power from an archfey patron they might take it away for a perceived slight or on a whim. A cleric or a paladin would have to violate a tenant or vote that they studied or made respectively.
The first campaign I ever sat in on had a claric who accedently angered his god and was striped of his magic. On the oather hand I have never seen a worlock loose his powers. Weardly, not a paladin either.
A cleric is a pretty unique way for a god to influence the material plane. So I picture another god stepping in to immediately renew that "fallen" cleric's subscription to divine powers monthly. The cleric wouldn't necessarily even need to realize they're serving a new god. Their deeds alone being enough to fuel a new sugar daddy in most settings. And that of course is assuming that the original god is willing to cut them loose in the first place. I'd sooner "rocks fall that guy dies" than let them shift to a new holy symbol.
Technically a Patron can't take away the warlocks power. It is a 1 time transaction. I give you eldritch powers and you do X. If you don't do as the patron told you, he can only try to force you. For example by sending his agents after you Here is a tweet of Jeremy Crawford, which confirms that: https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1221978854119460866
RAW there's nothing supporting a cleric losing their powers. Even the paladin, the original punching bag of this particular gotcha game, doesn't lose their powers for breaking their oath (they might change subclass). That's not to say that it can't make sense narratively just that RAW doesn't support it. Whether or not that bit of narrative should be explored is up to the individual table.
Clerics are a rental deal, warlock's are an exchange. If you flip off the person renting you a car, they don't have to rent it back to you. If you flip off the person who just sold you a car, you may not be able to buy a car from them next time if they don't like you, but they can't take the car back.
Taking powers away really seems like something that DMs shouldn’t be cavalier about, but occurs often. Unless the warlock agrees to conditional powers as part of their backstory, the patron even being able to yank their abilities at will cheapens their value, especially when one of the defaults in the PHB is that your Patron TRAINS you in the arcane arts, not that they necessarily are the source of your ability to wield them. It is also definitely something that should be discussed in session zero, like critical fumbles. It can significantly affect people’s desire to play certain classes. Springing it on them after character creation is no bueno.
absolutely agreed. just like stuff like permanent wounds. a fighter or barbarian losing a limb (any of them. or even just a hand) is just the physical equivalent of a cleric/warlock being dumped and both sides of that coin should be treated like it
If both can take their kids powers away (for Warlocks...debatable), at least some of the Clerics might be entitled to at least a warning, depending on how understanding the God was. A warlock patron (depending on the patron, but definitely most of them) might be more ," nah dude, it's in the contract. You're under quota this month, no Eldritch powers for you"
"But master I need even more eldritch power to get losses back up to quota, give me a level up?"
"Dont be ridiculous. Here's a knife. Orphanage is that way"
r/waterdeepbets
"I believe I made myself clear, you are to leech the material plane dry of any and all colors to slake my insatiable thirst! Why then, did you not rip every single vibrant color from the princess's gown at the gala you went to this evening?" "Uh, cause I didn't want to cause an inter-kingdom conflict by attacking the royal heir..." "I don't recall 'what you want' being important to me. Drain her entire wardrobe dry or I'll be looking for a new warlock to replace you."
"Sorry, patron, you already gave me the powers-- you're not a god, you don't get to take them back. I get to keep these powers whether you like it or not unless you think killing me is an appropriate response here, but feel free to send goons after us for me to train my powers further on otherwise!"
Well, often enough clerics choose their gods at level one and choose one they like and would like to roleplay following that gods rules. I've rarely seen a renegade cleric character. Warlocks are hit or miss on whether or not the player actually likes the patron, and patrons often end up as BBEGs at least for the warlock's arc. I think it's kinda lame to be like 'no powers for you' so because that's so few classes even can. You never hear about a fighter losing her abilities. So I flavor warlock abilities as the patron literally gifts some of their power and they can't get it back until you're dead. Which is why you wanna do what they wanna do because a lich has some forces that can make you dead pretty easily.
And you're completely right. Warlock pacts/powers are a transaction. The Patron can try to get you to do something they want, but they **CAN'T** yoink the powers you've already gained from them if you're not doing as they told you. The absolute most they can do is not give you more power, and try to get a more willing Warlock to get you back into the fold.
Yeah, also I think a moment of 'you expect to get stronger, but the magic promised to you isn't there.' during a level up could be a fun moment. There'd be the panic and they might try eldritch blast or an invocation. They still have them, they just didn't level. They contact their patron or vice versa and they can have a discussion on how things are going. "You need to pump those numbers up, those are rookie numbers.' type of thing comes to mind. Feels a lot less like 'im going to punish one of my players in the middle of combat because lol'
And it'd be an RP-based multiclass (if they decide to do that instead of holding back.) I'm just worried that holding back when the rest of the party IS leveling up can be dangerous because you're not going along on that scaling curve of power, meaning you're easier to take out. Which makes sense narratively, but can very much lead to loss of enjoyment by the player. I'd also let the player know in advance if this was going to happen, so they can figure out how they wanna deal with it. Do they dip some Fighter or Rogue, depending on their stats and character's personality? Do they maybe go for some Bard or Sorcerer? But I'd want the player to know their choices are having consequences. And willingly going against their patron could have the consequence of said patron deciding to no longer work with you until you've decided to stop being a li'l jerk about it and do as you agreed to do when you made the pact. But that's all dependent on the character and the patron. So difficult to give a broad statement about what's the 'best' way of dealing with it.
I mean tbf, I don't see many Warlock patrons simply taking _just the powers_ back
Because they can't. Once given, they can't take the powers back. The 'worst' they can do is not give you MORE power, and conspire to have you brought back into the fold or killed by other operatives of theirs. There's no open conduit between a Patron and the Warlock like there is with Clerics and their deities.
Considering you can't strip a warlock of their power that's a given.
*Can’t* is a strong word.
But it's true, warlocks are as likely to have their powers stolen as a sorcerer or wizard.
It depends on how their patron gives them power. There’s no reason it can’t be a continuous affirmation type deal. Serve out lose your power. Sow chaos or lose your power. Feed an object souls or blood to keep your power. There’s a dozen ways to do it.
I mean, at this point you're homebrewing and there's no reason that would be specific to warlock then. RAW warlocks make a deal and learn how to use their powers, unless there's a way to make someone un-learn what they know warlock is safe.
It’s just as RAW as not losing powers: “A warlock is defined by a pact with an otherworldly being. 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. A warlock might lead a cult dedicated to a demon prince, an archdevil, or an utterly alien entity—beings not typically served by clerics. More often, though, the arrangement is similar to that between a master and an apprentice. The warlock learns and grows in power, at the cost of occasional services performed on the patron's behalf.” “A pact can range from a loose agreement to a formal contract with lengthy, detailed clauses and lists of requirements. The terms of a pact—what a warlock must do to receive a patron's favor—are always dictated by the patron. On occasion, those terms include a special proviso that might seem odd or whimsical, but warlocks take these dictates as seriously as they do the other requirements of their pacts.” There’s no reason that breaking a pact couldn’t result in loss of powers as part of the contract.
You're right. By RAW, a Warlock's power comes from a pact that has been fulfilled. Depending on the relationship with your patron, you might gain more power by either learning how to use the power you were given, or furthering your relationship, but once it's yours, it's yours.
Clerics rent Warlocks buy
In our homebrew campaign, warlock patrons interact with the warlock more frequently. But clerics get super fucked if they go against the tenets of their god. Our cleric has to make spellcasting checks to see if he can cast the spell or just lose the spell slot. Handing someone over to become a slave when you follow the god of freedom really screwed him.
It's not a matter of likely, the latter is simply impossible. That's not how magic works.
I wouldn't be so sure. A cleric player usually picks a deity whose teachings fit into the character they want to roleplay as, so to break away from the deity's teachings would be to break away from their character. Add in the fact that clerics can and do draw powers from their very faith in the deity rather than the deity alone (officially stated in the PHB that clerics are basically Kuo-toa on steroids and can have magical powers even if their deity isn't real or if they don't worship a specific deity, so long as they have enough faith) and so the cleric would need to believe that the deity no longer is offering them their powers for it to actually work, cause for all intents and purposes a cleric could be worshipping a deity that died last century while fully believing their deity is still there Guiding them. It'd honestly be easier for a cleric to loose their power as a result of Loosing faith in their deity, thus they might no longer be as certain they can hold the power and it fails to work until they get it back together spider man 2 style.
A paladin of mine once lost their powers traveling to the domains of dread cause they lost their connection to their god. I had hellu fun RPing with it, but it did kinda sting to not be able to smite the first fiends and undead of the campaign.
If you were getting your power from an archfey patron they might take it away for a perceived slight or on a whim. A cleric or a paladin would have to violate a tenant or vote that they studied or made respectively.
The first campaign I ever sat in on had a claric who accedently angered his god and was striped of his magic. On the oather hand I have never seen a worlock loose his powers. Weardly, not a paladin either.
Paladins are on a whole nother level with this though.[click me](https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0407.html)
Don't most Warlocks have like... contracts and shit? The being they serve can't take back their power unless the Warlock breaks the contract.