What is the most "special snowflake" class?

[Douche]

Obviously all classes have the capacity to be a special snowflake... But in your opinion, which the the most innately so?

[Arcangel4774]

Sorcerer. It comes across as "look I'm discovering how powerful I am"

[Ruslan]

Mechanically, Rogue. This class's skillset naturally gravitates toward "I scout ahead and have my own mini-adventure while the rest of the party twiddle their thumbs". I know not many people actually play this way, but the mechanics of the class definitely encourage that.

Flavorfully, Bard. The class's fluff has "look at me!" written all over it.

[Ghost Nappa]

I want to say either Cleric or Sorcerer - Favored Soul especially (to a lesser extent Wizards). There's so many sub-classes for each of them, giving you a lot of different ways to separate yourself from others of your own class. Being chosen by deities helps.

Mages in particular shine out more because in theory, true practitioners of magic are rare. This can easily vary between campaigns and worlds of course.

I'm not nominating Warlock because Warlocks have a greater capacity to make themselves special. Most Warlocks don't have it thrust upon them, they seek it. Wizards also have this "self-made specialness," but there's so many different sub-classes.

[Joe the Rat]

Sorcerer. It comes across as "look I'm discovering how powerful I am"
"I have strange lineage and was born awesome and might have purple eyes or scales that are actually beautiful though I think they're a curse!"

Number two on my list is Angsty McEdgington, the Warlock.
"Look at me! I've made deals with sinister dark secret things, and am haunted by the things I must do to keep my powers (that I don't actually want, but... but... backstory!). Also, I am proficient in leather trenchcoats."
Or his cousin Bishie: "I'm dating a manic pixie Summer Queen."

Cleric has a lot of potential for this: "My god likes me best."

[JellyPooga]

Mechanically, Rogue. This class's skillset naturally gravitates toward "I scout ahead and have my own mini-adventure while the rest of the party twiddle their thumbs". I know not many people actually play this way, but the mechanics of the class definitely encourage that.

I don't know...Sneak Attack is definitely a "I need some backup" sort of ability. I'd be inclined to agree for the Thief Rogue, specifically; UMD is the ultimate in "Don't need no-one" with the right magic items and nothing screams "special snowflake" like having all the best gear. Not so much the other archetypes; good solo, yes, but not a "special snowflake" so much; no inborn special powers, no outside help from Mr.Wonderful (Deity, Patron, etc.)...Rogues are typically self-made wo/men and while that can be "snowflake" material, tends not to be.


Flavorfully, Bard. The class's fluff has "look at me!" written all over it.

Bards definitely like the spotlight in the fluff, but they're the ultimate team-player mechanically.

My vote probably has to go to Sorcerer. "I'm awesome because I was born that way!" Urgh...do a days hard-graft for once. Definitely attracts far too many "child-wonder" characters, too.

[mephnick]

All charisma casters because they automatically hog more spotlight than the other classes if they so desire with no investment. Another reason I hate the gravitation towards CHA centric combat mechanics and the abandonment of INT.

[Shining Wrath]

Warlock comes to mind, as they MUST have a patron per rules.
Also, the Paladin - he's stronger than you, cuter than you, and has sworn a sacred oath.

[MeeposFire]

Traditionally paladins. While not as strong in 5e as it was in some other editions they are often the class that most dictates how the group responds to things (or arguing on how to respond to things) due to their oaths and how they may be perceived to be needed to be followed. They are also often paired with being involved with a religion (though not always) and that means it gets into the same discussion as the cleric.

Mechanically it can fight, cast spells, heals, potentially boosts the whole party just by hanging around, and while damage over the whole day may not have them coming out ahead nothing brings attention than one guy blowing his entire set of spell slots in a couple rounds especially on a crit to make really crazy damage numbers. That will stick with you even if the overall math evens out.

[Spellbreaker26]

Favoured Soul Sorcerers. Bards don't have the required fire power mechanically to be the snowflake, and are too dorky.

But Favoured Soul Sorcerers? Chosen by the gods, without having to work for it (Clerics) or give something up (Warlocks)? Snowflake alarm right there.

But honestly, any class can be annoying if played badly, or awesome if played well. It's the player that decides that.

[Fishyninja]

But honestly, any class can be annoying if played badly, or awesome if played well. It's the player that decides that.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.
I get peoples points about a 'snowflake class' but I feel there is no such thing, there are snow flake players (and on that basis characters) but the classes, I don't think so.

To reiterate the point above, it's how a character is played. Not their base class.

[kenposan]

It would be the Special Snowflake class, of course.

http://www.dmsguild.com/product/202418/The-Special-Snowflake?term=special+snowfl&test_epoch=0

[Demonslayer666]

Special snowflake: bard

Emo snowflake: warlock

[Tanarii]

Bards and Dragon Sorcerers. Bards because they want to be able to do everything ... and they can. Dragon Sorcerers because of their fluff is special snowflake on steroids.

Although I agree Edgelord Warlocks give Dragon Sorcs a run for their money.

[DragonSorcererX]

On a Non-Forgotten Realms Setting - Favored Soul (because there is so many chosens and stuff like that, that your character is just another one).

On a Non-Eberron Setting - Anything Psionic (because in Eberron, psionic power really is part of the world).


Bards and Dragon Sorcerers. Bards because they want to be able to do everything ... and they can. Dragon Sorcerers because of their fluff is special snowflake on steroids.


Although I agree Edgelord Warlocks give Dragon Sorcs a run for their money.

Dragon Sorcerers Special Snowflakes? How is that? 3.0/3.5 made us common by making dragon into perverts with a humanoid fetish and spawning an infinite variety of draconic stuff (not that I am compaining)...

[Foxhound438]

I was initially going to say warlock since I have had more than one bad experience with the "i don't need a party and can set my allies on fire with no repercussions and I hate my dad" style of RP, or rogue for its "I don't need a party to have an adventure and can spend all the time in the world sneaking around by myself" tendencies, but after seeing the "i was born with all the power that anyone else would have to work for" argument, I have to agree it's sorcerer. If nothing else because that is the essence of the most annoying trope of **** tier anime ever. "x random high school girl finds herself suddenly introduced to a secret world of godlike powerful monsters and people who have spent most of their lives trying to combat them but she is somehow stronger than all of them without even trying because she's the chosen one"...

[Tanarii]

Dragon Sorcerers Special Snowflakes? How is that? 3.0/3.5 made us common by making dragon into perverts with a humanoid fetish and spawning an infinite variety of draconic stuff (not that I am compaining)...Because dragon ancestry.

Which reminds me ... any Dragonborn or Tiefling, regardless of class. :smallbiggrin:

[Spellbreaker26]

If nothing else because that is the essence of the most annoying trope of **** tier anime ever. "x random high school girl finds herself suddenly introduced to a secret world of godlike powerful monsters and people who have spent most of their lives trying to combat them but she is somehow stronger than all of them without even trying because she's the chosen one"...

I hate the Chosen One cliche as much as anyone, but it is by no means limited to bottom tier anime...



Which reminds me ... any Dragonborn or Tiefling, regardless of class. :smallbiggrin:

People keep saying this but I can't see it. I can see those races being used for this purpose, but I think that Drow and Aasimar edge them out in the snowflake category.

[jitzul]

Because dragon ancestry.

Which reminds me ... any Dragonborn or Tiefling, regardless of class. :smallbiggrin:

If we are going with race's human's would be the true special snowflake. Let's be real you mean to tell me in a world filled with a metric button of crazy magic race's that are inherently magic. Humans Most of the time make up some of the most powerful wizards/fighters/monks/barbarians/etc in the world and are most of the time the most dominate race in the world? It is basically the trope of outsider learns the ways of the native's of a land and does it better then all of them but with a whole race.

[Tanarii]

People keep saying this but I can't see it. I can see those races being used for this purpose, but I think that Drow and Aasimar edge them out in the snowflake category.Okay, I can't argue with that. Basically any monster race in a non-monster campaign, but especially ones that are particularly 'superior' in some way.

I mean, even though it's fairly special, I don't think a Goblin PC is really what people think of when the term special snowflake is used. :smallamused:

Edit:

If we are going with race's human's would be the true special snowflake. Let's be real you mean to tell me in a world filled with a metric button of crazy magic race's that are inherently magic. Humans Most of the time make up some of the most powerful wizards/fighters/monks/barbarians/etc in the world and are most of the time the most dominate race in the world? It is basically the trope of outsider learns the ways of the native's of a land and does it better then all of them but with a whole race.Meh, a Human isn't special because they're the most common & baseline. Also because we're humans, so when we play them we're playing something that isn't an alien psychology and intelligence.

Now Variant Humans are definitely a form of power creep, to say the least. Necessarily, because other-wise all the other special snowflake races (ie non-humans) are generally chosen over the common baseline race (humans).

[Slayn82]

... after seeing the "i was born with all the power that anyone else would have to work for" argument, I have to agree it's sorcerer. If nothing else because that is the essence of the most annoying trope of **** tier anime ever. "x random high school girl finds herself suddenly introduced to a secret world of godlike powerful monsters and people who have spent most of their lives trying to combat them but she is somehow stronger than all of them without even trying because she's the chosen one"...

Funny, I always thought of Magical Girls as Warlocks. Heh, the entire genre was started with a story about a Witch inspired in Bewitched. And if you ever watch Madoka, tell me if it doesn't fit to a T.

On the actual question from the OP: Ranger. It's such a special snowflake it's always draws complaints of being released underpowered, and yet people are crazy for it.

[CantigThimble]

It would be the Special Snowflake class, of course.

http://www.dmsguild.com/product/202418/The-Special-Snowflake?term=special+snowfl&test_epoch=0

That class is beautiful.

[Spellbreaker26]

Now Variant Humans are definitely a form of power creep, to say the least. Necessarily, because other-wise all the other special snowflake races (ie non-humans) are generally chosen over the common baseline race (humans).

Vumans aren't power creep - it's just that regular humans are a nightmare in that there are very few scenarios where they're a competitive choice. If you pick a regular human you're going to be actively worse all but the worst choice for your class, purely because you can't get a +2 in a stat and, unlike the Vuman, can't compensate with a feat.

[Tanarii]

Vumans aren't power creep - it's just that regular humans are a nightmare in that there are very few scenarios where they're a competitive choice. If you pick a regular human you're going to be actively worse all but the worst choice for your class, purely because you can't get a +2 in a stat and, unlike the Vuman, can't compensate with a feat.But you will, depending on how many odd stats you rolled, get better off-checks. However, I agree that's significantly weaker than other races. Which is why, as I said, Variant Humans have to be more powerful than any other race. So people will play Humans more than any other race. Thus, power creep.

[Zakhara]

In my experience, the classes I most dread as snowflake fodder are Sorcerors and Druids.

Sorcerors, by design, are born with awesome powers. Depending on the setting they can be a curse, which gives them an X-Men vibe. In the games I've been in, the Sorceror was oft-used by players who wanted to play someone who sounded more cool and powerful on paper than in execution. To these players, Wizards are dry and one-note, and even Bards or Warlocks have to take time and energy struggling to learn music theory or make dangerous deals with patrons. Sorcerors are born awesome, and it attracted players who wanted acknowledgment over that.

Druids, on the other hand, were less active in their attempts to stand out. I think that, through a combination of being an inviting class for a beginner in our games and their concept of 'naturalist loner', a player would grow comfortable as a nature equivalent to the Rogue In the Dark Corner. They draw attention to themselves by being the quiet, neutral figure. In contrast to a Sorceror, they don't demand attention, they 'invite' it.

[bid]

Heh, the entire genre was started with a story about a Witch inspired in Bewitched.
Sally the Witch?

[Theodoxus]

I have a different take on the question... maybe I'm just old...

The most special snowflake would be wizard, as it's the only full class to use Int (and arguably EK and AT don't need as much).

When Bards and Sorcerers and Warlocks keying off Charisma are just basically the same class (especially when UA are considered) that just happen to have different ribbons and recovery mechanics... when Paladins and Fighters / Barbarians and Rangers / Monks and Rogues use the same chassis with a different power source... they can't be special - they can be niche, but can fulfill each others role with no change in attributes...

But wizard? Unique little snowflake. Not only in attribute, but even mechanics of spell learning, ritual use... Definitely wizard.

[Shining Wrath]

I have a different take on the question... maybe I'm just old...

The most special snowflake would be wizard, as it's the only full class to use Int (and arguably EK and AT don't need as much).

When Bards and Sorcerers and Warlocks keying off Charisma are just basically the same class (especially when UA are considered) that just happen to have different ribbons and recovery mechanics... when Paladins and Fighters / Barbarians and Rangers / Monks and Rogues use the same chassis with a different power source... they can't be special - they can be niche, but can fulfill each others role with no change in attributes...

But wizard? Unique little snowflake. Not only in attribute, but even mechanics of spell learning, ritual use... Definitely wizard.

Interestingly, your answer focuses on game mechanics, while most others focus on class fluff.

[DragonSorcererX]

The most special snowflake would be wizard, as it's the only full class to use Int (and arguably EK and AT don't need as much).

But wizard? Unique little snowflake. Not only in attribute, but even mechanics of spell learning, ritual use... Definitely wizard.

I think that the guy who is totally not a wizard, his powers are totally not magical, and also uses INT is more of a Special Snowflake than a Wizard...

[StorytellerHero]

If one is in a Theatre program, "Introduction to Directing" would probably be the most "special snowflake" class.

:smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin:

[Spellbreaker26]

But you will, depending on how many odd stats you rolled, get better off-checks. However, I agree that's significantly weaker than other races. Which is why, as I said, Variant Humans have to be more powerful than any other race. So people will play Humans more than any other race. Thus, power creep.

No, they're not better than other races. They're the fastest at getting a particular build up which makes them popular, but in the long term they're not more powerful.

Not to mention you're using the term "power creep" wrong. Power creep refers to things introduced later on being broken, but Vumans are in the player's handbook. If you think they're OP, then maybe they are, but either way they were introduced in core.

[JAL_1138]

We haven't really defined "special snowflake." Mechanically unique? Every class is to a degree. Spotlight hog? That's a player issue, and will depend on the campaign content as well. In a social campaign the bard will (usually) be in the spotlight since they can put Expertise into social skills, but in a combat campaign they're debuffers (and grapplers) with a bit of other casting ability (though valor bards can be pretty solid ranged DPR as well with the right build).

Race is usually the source of snowflakery. An uncommon or "edgy" race, especially a character acting against their race's typical alignment, such as a Drow or some other monstrous races, is prime snowflake fodder. Or a "race" that's special because of their ancestry, such as Aasimar or Tieflings. But that doesn't quite work, because goblins, kobolds, and half-orcs rarely get called special snowflakes.

But what makes a class a special snowflake? To me it's the idea that there's something inherently special or unique or abnormal about them--they're not a class that can ever be described as "a random schmuck who got good at something through practice and/or devotion." John or Jane McNobody can't get there, because they're not special. Sorcerer would be the only real candidate there. I'm not entirely satisfied with this definition, though—although any schmuck can sell their soul, the Warlock feels snowflakey to me too.

[CantigThimble]

I'm not entirely satisfied with this definition, though—although any schmuck can sell their soul, the Warlock feels snowflakey to me too.

Well, any schmuck COULD but most don't. I think being a special snowflake is mostly about being the exception to the rule, which warlocks and sorcerers are while bards are much more normal by comparison.

[Potato_Priest]

On the actual question from the OP: Ranger. It's such a special snowflake it's always draws complaints of being released underpowered, and yet people are crazy for it.

I agree, if we are interpreting "special snowflake" to mean a Mary Sue. In my experience, Rangers are always going on about how they're the best at hunting, killing, and sneaking, or about how good they are with animals, or how much damage they just dealt with their bow. This is probably because in fantasy they're usually depicted as the best thing since steel weapons.

If by special snowflake, we mean a class that needs others to pander to it, rogues are probably on top due to sneak attack requirements.

If by special snowflake, we mean a class that involves people just being SUPER special, then definitely sorcerer.

[RulesJD]

Gameplay wise?

Rogue because they go solo play for scouting while the rest of the party twiddles their's thumbs.

Wizards because it's a constant battle with the DM about what your spells can and cannot do.

[Rhedyn]

Wild Magic Sorcerers.

"No really, I totally deserve to be in the party even though random chance could cause me to fireball you all to death. Don't be such a meany, random stuff is fun!"

[Hawkstar]

Definitely Sorcerer.

Paladins are too cookie-cutter to be Special Snowflake, though they do tend to be a bit Gary Stuish.

[CaptainSarathai]

Warlock, hands down. Just look at their mechanics.
"My casting is different than yours, I get spells back differently"
"I make class-defining choices at First (like Cleric, Wizard, Sorc, etc) and again at Third (like Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, etc) levels"
"I get a whole page of special features (Invocations) to choose from, unlike the handful of Metamagic or Maneuvers others get)"
"I get the best blaster cantrip in the game."
"I have several options for off-turn actions, like Hellish Rebuke, Armor of Agathys, Misty Step, etc"
"Darkness. Both the spell and flavor. Also, I can see in magic darkness, if I want"
"I'm a Cha-caster, and that means Face"
"I get my own full spell list (not uncommon, just 'neat')"

Just - so much of what the Warlock does is entirely different than what any other class gets to do. It (mostly) works, at least, and it's all very fluffy, but yeah, it's just screaming "Special Snowflake."

Not to mention the RP side of the Lock. They already attract EdgeLords like fly paper. Add to that, the idea of having a Patron should be a pretty big deal; the Paladin moved away from direct, god-following loyalty, but the Warlock has jumped all-in. They don't get their spells through "the power of faith" or anything. They are on a first-name basis with their boss, who can pop in and wreck their day or force them down a certain path of they want to keep their power. What's the rest of the party doing during that convo?

[Foxhound438]

I hate the Chosen One cliche as much as anyone, but it is by no means limited to bottom tier anime...


yes, but it's the worse anime that do it so wrong that it hurts that gets to me, and frankly I generally don't trust casual TTRP'ers to always follow the better examples.


Funny, I always thought of Magical Girls as Warlocks. Heh, the entire genre was started with a story about a Witch inspired in Bewitched. And if you ever watch Madoka, tell me if it doesn't fit to a T.


while you do have a point in that the flavor of "witch" is a closer fit to warlock than sorcerer, my point is that sorcerer is more close a fit than warlock to the "I can do everything you can without having to try" flavor.

[Potato_Priest]

Warlock, hands down. Just look at their mechanics.
"My casting is different than yours, I get spells back differently"
"I make class-defining choices at First (like Cleric, Wizard, Sorc, etc) and again at Third (like Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, etc) levels"
"I get a whole page of special features (Invocations) to choose from, unlike the handful of Metamagic or Maneuvers others get)"
"I get the best blaster cantrip in the game."
"I have several options for off-turn actions, like Hellish Rebuke, Armor of Agathys, Misty Step, etc"
"Darkness. Both the spell and flavor. Also, I can see in magic darkness, if I want"
"I'm a Cha-caster, and that means Face"
"I get my own full spell list (not uncommon, just 'neat')"



A class being unique does not a special snowflake make. The rogue is a similarly very unique class, sharing only a few features with others. (Evasion, Experienced).
Here's a parody argument for the rogue:

"I deal damage with attacks and damage differently than you: Most of my damage comes not from my weapon, nor from the sheer number of attacks I make, but from whether someone is standing next to my enemies."
"I am the only class that really takes advantage of the surprise mechanic, and I'm one of the few that use the stealth mechanic a lot."
"Even though the spellcaster rogue gets the same spell list as the wizard, ONLY WE can use an invisible mage hand as a bonus action."
"The caster version of my class is an INT caster. That means I'm just going to know more than you."
"I can opt to have no magic (pretty rare among D&D classes)."
"I get THE BEST nonmagical disengaging feature not involving teleportation"

You can even make a similar argument about fighters.

"I get more multiattacks than you'll ever have"
"I have perhaps the best action economy class in the game, as the ONLY class that can take 2 unrestricted actions in a round"
"I get more feats/ASI's than anyone else"
"If I go battlemaster, I get a whole new range of special features (maneuvers) to choose from, unlike the handful of invocations or metamagics other classes get"

Uniqueness doesn't determine how special flowery you are. It's the fluff and/or playstyle that does that. I agree with you that warlocks can be pretty special flowery, particularly if they are fond of using darkness even if the party is there, or if their patron is fond of showing up, freezing time, and having a long conversation with the lock, but it's not because they're different, per se, just the way they work.

[hymer]

I'm with the people saying sorcerer. Every bored teenager's dream: Powers without working to get them, something to make you stand out so when others look down on you they're really looking down on your for being natively awesome, and the 'magical' quality of high charisma with no need to actually be persuasive or charming.

I think the mystic comes in tied with the warlock (for reasons that have been articulated already) as a close second. Psionics is the special snowflake of D&D magic.

[Spellbreaker26]

Race is usually the source of snowflakery. An uncommon or "edgy" race, especially a character acting against their race's typical alignment, such as a Drow or some other monstrous races, is prime snowflake fodder. Or a "race" that's special because of their ancestry, such as Aasimar or Tieflings. But that doesn't quite work, because goblins, kobolds, and half-orcs rarely get called special snowflakes.


The reason kobolds, goblins and half-orcs aren't snowflake material is because they're not pretty enough. That's also why I usually don't consider Dragonborn a snowflake race because they're not recognisably humanoid, unlike Tieflings, drow, and Aasimar. If, for example, Aasimar resembled traditional biblical angels with multiple heads and whatnot they would not really be snowflake material. It's not just the fluff, it's how you look as well.

[Jarlhen]

The Drow, Aasimar, and Tiefling. Like 80% sure they're more special snowflake than any class. With their special abilities I'd even argue they're more class-like than some classes!

[Dr. Cliché]

The reason kobolds, goblins and half-orcs aren't snowflake material is because they're not pretty enough. That's also why I usually don't consider Dragonborn a snowflake race because they're not recognisably humanoid, unlike Tieflings, drow, and Aasimar.

In terms of 'not pretty enough', do you think Tieflings qualify? I know that this is going to be personal preference, but virtually all the ones I've seen in 5e look like they've been severely beaten with a stick made out of frozen ugly. :smallconfused:

I guess you could count the variants in SCAG, where you're allowed Tieflings that aren't big, red devils.


Also, I am proficient in leather trenchcoats."

Can I sig this? :smallbiggrin:

[Spellbreaker26]

In terms of 'not pretty enough', do you think Tieflings qualify?

http://torment.wikia.com/wiki/Annah

Trust me... Tieflings qualify.

[Dr. Cliché]

http://torment.wikia.com/wiki/Annah

Trust me... Tieflings qualify.

But that's the thing - Annah is from 3rd edition. And back in 3rd, Tieflings basically looked like humans/elves with just a couple of demonic features (horns, red eyes, tails or such). And sure, a lot of them did look good.

However, we're talking about 5th edition - which changed Tieflings to be big, red devils with overly-large horns and fat tails.

[Spellbreaker26]

But that's the thing - Annah is from 3rd edition. And back in 3rd, Tieflings basically looked like humans/elves with just a couple of demonic features (horns, red eyes, tails or such). And sure, a lot of them did look good.

However, we're talking about 5th edition - which changed Tieflings to be big, red devils with overly-large horns and fat tails.

5th Edition Tieflings have horns, tails, sharp teeth and weird eyes. They *can* also have odd skin and hair colours, but neither are necessary. While they could end up looking like the Apostles from Berserk there's also nothing stopping them from looking pretty either.

[Tanarii]

However, we're talking about 5th edition - which changed Tieflings to be big, red devils with overly-large horns and fat tails.Yeah I'm not a fan of the default 5e Tiefling look either. Which is probably why SCAG clarified that in FR they don't look like that, but instead like 3e Tieflings. (Or possibly don't all look like that. I'm AFB.)

Edit: Wasn't this a change made in 4e, not 5e?

edit2:

No, they're not better than other races. They're the fastest at getting a particular build up which makes them popular, but in the long term they're not more powerful.Okay. I'll take that as your personal opinion on the matter. Suffice to say I disagree and my opinion is Variant Humans are (intentionally) OP compared to other races.


Not to mention you're using the term "power creep" wrong. Power creep refers to things introduced later on being broken, but Vumans are in the player's handbook. If you think they're OP, then maybe they are, but either way they were introduced in core.Yeah, nice try at redefining power creep there. They're an optional rule that DMs can introduce that creep the power of the race upwards, as a result of other things being more powerful, thus requiring them to be buffed. That's power creep.

[DragonSorcererX]

I'm with the people saying sorcerer. Every bored teenager's dream: Powers without working to get them, something to make you stand out so when others look down on you they're really looking down on your for being natively awesome, and the 'magical' quality of high charisma with no need to actually be persuasive or charming.

How is that? I can totally imagine Dragonborns having harmless and sweet mental torture sessions with Illusion and Enchantment Spells to make their children unlock their innate magical powers, and after that, the children will spend 24/7 training on a magical shooting gallery to master their explosive power, or a group of human bandits or goblins injecting themselves with all manner of magical substances mixed and dying of the side effects of potion miscibility just to have one or two of their members who were injected with the magical juice to be lucky enough to survive and develop magical powers.


I think the mystic comes in tied with the warlock (for reasons that have been articulated already) as a close second. Psionics is the special snowflake of D&D magic.

Finally someone agrees with me!

[Plaguescarred]

The bard is a real special snowflake to me :smallcool:

[Dr. Cliché]

5th Edition Tieflings have horns, tails, sharp teeth and weird eyes. They *can* also have odd skin and hair colours, but neither are necessary. While they could end up looking like the Apostles from Berserk there's also nothing stopping them from looking pretty either.

Good catch on the skin colour.

Here's the thing - it's possible that there exist pretty Tieflings in 5e, but surely there could also be pretty half-orcs?

The point I was making was that every Tiefling I've seen illustrated in 5e has been ugly as sin (no pun intended).

Incidentally, if red is indeed just one of many possible colours of skin for Tieflings, it would appear that no one bothered to tell the artists. :smallwink:


Yeah I'm not a fan of the default 5e Tiefling look either. Which is probably why SCAG clarified that in FR they don't look like that, but instead like 3e Tieflings.

Something I'm grateful for.

That said, I would be interested to actually see some alternate Tieflings depicted. As opposed to yet more of the 'big, red devil' variety.


Edit: Wasn't this a change made in 4e, not 5e?

Entirely possible.

[Spellbreaker26]

Yeah, nice try at redefining power creep there. They're an optional rule that DMs can introduce that creep the power of the race upwards, as a result of other things being more powerful, thus requiring them to be buffed. That's power creep.

I'm not redefining power creep, unless there was an alternate interpretation I was unaware of.

OP or broken means something that exceeds the regular power curve. So, someone could say "I think the Great Weapon Master feat is broken" for example, or "I think Bladesingers are broken".

Power Creep refers to how options in expansions or additional content (so it would be splatbooks in DnD's case) are sometimes OP or broken. Sometimes this is a strategy by a company to sell new expansions, by making them better than what was previously available. So the Great Weapon Master feat can be considered OP but is not an example of Power Creep, because although it is a variant rule you don't need to access additional content to get it, it's right there in the core. However Bladesingers could be considered an example of Power Creep if you think that they're OP because they're in the SCAG, not the core rulebook.

See this video for more detail on what power creep is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxszx60ZwGw

[MeeposFire]

But that's the thing - Annah is from 3rd edition. And back in 3rd, Tieflings basically looked like humans/elves with just a couple of demonic features (horns, red eyes, tails or such). And sure, a lot of them did look good.

However, we're talking about 5th edition - which changed Tieflings to be big, red devils with overly-large horns and fat tails.

Clarification Annah is from AD&D 2e. You can tell because she was in the Planescape Torment game which is in the Planescape setting for AD&D 2e.

[Dr. Cliché]

Clarification Annah is from AD&D 2e. You can tell because she was in the Planescape Torment game which is in the Planescape setting for AD&D 2e.

Yeah, for some reason I thought she was from NWN (I think I confused her with a different Tiefling). Which is weird given that I've not only played Planescape Torment but have actually had her in my party. :smalleek:

[N810]

Hmmm....

I'm gonna go with Drow Wild Scorcer/Warlock.
cause of all the emo... :smallfrown:

[Coffee_Dragon]

http://nwn.sinfar.net/portraits/45376/feyrih.jpg

This one is 4E, slightly stylized, androgynous, and doesn't show the hellish eyes, but pretty far from ugly in my opinion.

[Aelyn]

Yeah, nice try at redefining power creep there. They're an optional rule that DMs can introduce that creep the power of the race upwards, as a result of other things being more powerful, thus requiring them to be buffed. That's power creep.
That's... not what power creep means. Power creep is a phenomenon where designers want new options to be used, so make sure the options are as good or better than older options.

This is often caused by bad benchmarking - making the average power of a new set equivalent to the average power of "good" options while ignoring "bad" ones, trying to fit the same absolute amount of power in one book as was in the three before it, etc - but can also be deliberate.

This has a small, almost unnoticed effect, but means that power "creeps" up over time until eventually the average power of a new product is far higher than the originals. TCGs, TTRPGs, and games with DLC characters are particularly prone to the phenomenon.

By the standard definition, power creep in a single publication is not possible.

[Dr. Cliché]

http://nwn.sinfar.net/portraits/45376/feyrih.jpg

This one is 4E, slightly stylized, androgynous, and doesn't show the hellish eyes, but pretty far from ugly in my opinion.

She's pretty until you get to the top of her head. It looks like she's painted a couple of cream horns and glued them to her forehead.

Still one of the prettiest Tieflings I've seen, though. :smalltongue:

I also like this one, though I don't think it's an official image:

http://i.imgur.com/kybCF2F.jpg

[Shining Wrath]

I'm going to try to define "Special Snowflake", as I don't think we've really nailed the concept down.

For me - your mileage is likely to vary - the SS is the character who, in game, expects to gain an advantage in dealings with NPCs by virtue of announcing their class. And further, this is across a range of NPCs, most of whom have only a vague idea of what a class' features might be. Which is to say, an argument that the barmaid is going to know that champion fighters have better sustained damage per round than TWF rangers and therefore be more impressed by the champion is right out.

This is obviously different than the "game mechanics" arguments presented by some, where the number of different or special features define special snowflake - in which case, let me suggest that monks get lots of special class features.

I'm talking about the character that can say to the innkeeper "You should give me that room" or "You had BETTER give me that room", "for I am the X characternamus", and the value of X matters.

Can you see this working: "Give me that room, for I am the barbarian Grog"? What has the innkeeper heard about barbarians from the songs of bards? DON'T MAKE THEM MAD, that's what he's heard. It might work.
Compare to "Give me that room, for I am the Paladin Roland"? In most towns, being a Paladin gets you some respect.
Compare to "Give me that room, for I am the Rogue Robin"? Uh, probably not.

For constant character charisma, I think Paladins would win, sampled across lots of campaign settings. There's not too many where "I am a sworn martial champion of a deity or cause" doesn't impress the common folk. Warlocks would frighten them. Bards they'd want him to sing for them.

[eastmabl]

Warlock. Her spellcasting mechanic doesn't jive with every other spellcaster.

[Fishyninja]

I'm going to try to define "Special Snowflake", as I don't think we've really nailed the concept down.

For me - your mileage is likely to vary - the SS is the character who, in game, expects to gain an advantage in dealings with NPCs by virtue of announcing their class. And further, this is across a range of NPCs, most of whom have only a vague idea of what a class' features might be. Which is to say, an argument that the barmaid is going to know that champion fighters have better sustained damage per round than TWF rangers and therefore be more impressed by the champion is right out.

This is obviously different than the "game mechanics" arguments presented by some, where the number of different or special features define special snowflake - in which case, let me suggest that monks get lots of special class features.

I'm talking about the character that can say to the innkeeper "You should give me that room" or "You had BETTER give me that room", "for I am the X characternamus", and the value of X matters.

For this definition alone I would go with the:

FEAR ME FOR A I AM SORCERER MCSORCERYFACE AND I SHALL SORCER THIS PLACE INOT NEXT TUESDAY

Or

But sir/madam, this lowly bard is only looking for a room, maybe I could tell you a sotry or two or play a song and then you could take pity on this humble traveller *gags

[JAL_1138]

I'm going to try to define "Special Snowflake", as I don't think we've really nailed the concept down.

For me - your mileage is likely to vary - the SS is the character who, in game, expects to gain an advantage in dealings with NPCs by virtue of announcing their class. And further, this is across a range of NPCs, most of whom have only a vague idea of what a class' features might be. Which is to say, an argument that the barmaid is going to know that champion fighters have better sustained damage per round than TWF rangers and therefore be more impressed by the champion is right out.

This is obviously different than the "game mechanics" arguments presented by some, where the number of different or special features define special snowflake - in which case, let me suggest that monks get lots of special class features.

I'm talking about the character that can say to the innkeeper "You should give me that room" or "You had BETTER give me that room", "for I am the X characternamus", and the value of X matters.

Can you see this working: "Give me that room, for I am the barbarian Grog"? What has the innkeeper heard about barbarians from the songs of bards? DON'T MAKE THEM MAD, that's what he's heard. It might work.
Compare to "Give me that room, for I am the Paladin Roland"? In most towns, being a Paladin gets you some respect.
Compare to "Give me that room, for I am the Rogue Robin"? Uh, probably not.

For constant character charisma, I think Paladins would win, sampled across lots of campaign settings. There's not too many where "I am a sworn martial champion of a deity or cause" doesn't impress the common folk. Warlocks would frighten them. Bards they'd want him to sing for them.


I kinda see where you're going, but I'm not sure it quite works. At least not the innkeeper example, or social-fu in general.

"Give me that room, for I am Robin the Rogue. I roll to intimidate with Expertise, my bonus is +10. I got 27." Alternatively, the innkeeper might just think "Oh, crap, aren't those the Thieves' Guild thugs that'll rob me blind and might even shank me in the back with a poisoned dagger if I don't play nice? Er...of course, here's the room key."

A Fighter can pull this off too. "I am Swordy McSwordguy, Battlemaster, greatest swordsman in these lands. Me and my extremely sharp 6-foot-long greatsword named "Skullcleaver" would like a room. Now."

[hymer]

How is that? I can totally imagine Dragonborns having harmless and sweet mental torture sessions with Illusion and Enchantment Spells to make their children unlock their innate magical powers, and after that, the children will spend 24/7 training on a magical shooting gallery to master their explosive power, or a group of human bandits or goblins injecting themselves with all manner of magical substances mixed and dying of the side effects of potion miscibility just to have one or two of their members who were injected with the magical juice to be lucky enough to survive and develop magical powers.

Sure, you can imagine a non-snowflake version of the class (though to be fair, training from hell and had to be strong are tropes too, and depending on handling could be not a little... flakey). You can do that with any class. I went from the perspective of which class would be the most likely to appeal to a player who wanted to make a special snowflake.

[jitzul]

Monk if that character is made in "stranded fantasy Europe setting #9452894856"

[Temperjoke]

You know, I think I'm going to vote in an opposite direction. Barbarians are the biggest snowflakes. They rant, rampage, get blackout drunk, bully npcs, and destroy everything all in the name of being in character. They gleefully enjoy trashing polite society in a pretext of being superior for not bothering with civility and cutting to the chase. Sure, the Bard may dominate the conversation with witty banter, but at least there is a discussion.

[jitzul]

You know, I think I'm going to vote in an opposite direction. Barbarians are the biggest snowflakes. They rant, rampage, get blackout drunk, bully npcs, and destroy everything all in the name of being in character. They gleefully enjoy trashing polite society in a pretext of being superior for not bothering with civility and cutting to the chase. Sure, the Bard may dominate the conversation with witty banter, but at least there is a discussion.

It feels like there are different tiers of special snowflake. The snowflake's discussed in this thread so far are like in the teenage tier of special snowflake. Young lads and lasses with little real world experience wanting to emulate fantastical hero's that would not be out of place in a young adult novel. Then you get to the adult tier of special snowflake. Jaded and cynical to the real world this type of snowflake just wants to let loss and vent. Playing something like a half orc barbarian this snowflake just wants to say f society and play what basically amounts to a mix between the hulk and peter griffin. A beffy awful son of a gun that most of the time spouts language that would make a sailor gasp. If they are not drinking and killing what little brain cells they have left they are killing anything they think would be fun to kill and bedding every bar wench they see.

[Zene]

My vote is for warlock. So much weird with that class. Got its own whole unique set of rules for spellcasting -- heck, it got three of them, between Pact Magic, Invocations, and Mystic Arcanum. Also it's the only class (that I can think of) that needs to make two subtype decisions (pact and patron).

And between pact choice, patron choice, invocation choices, and spells known, you could probably create like 100 different warlocks that each has a distinct flavor and play style. Hard to do that --at least to that much of an extreme-- with the other classes IMO.

[Spellbreaker26]

And between pact choice, patron choice, invocation choices, and spells known, you could probably create like 100 different warlocks that each has a distinct flavor and play style. Hard to do that --at least to that much of an extreme-- with the other classes IMO.

See, I'm looking at that and wondering if that's not actually just a good design choice. I've never played a warlock but just looking from the outside they seem like a really well designed class.

[EvilAnagram]

Why does this thread exist?

The term (in reference to gaming) originated on an image board to denigrate and humiliate players who wanted to be something unusual, with the implication that wanting your character to stand out for something other than your 133t RP skillz is somehow wrong. Why would you want to participate in a thread gratifying a myopic point of view?

[JAL_1138]

It's more the fluff than the design around the 'lock that makes them snowflakey, I think. Maybe it seems a bit off somehow to have someone who sold their soul to a devil (for example) before level 1 as a base class? I can't quite put my finger on it. But I don't think it's the mechanics, strictly speaking.

[DragonSorcererX]

Sure, you can imagine a non-snowflake version of the class (though to be fair, training from hell and had to be strong are tropes too, and depending on handling could be not a little... flakey). You can do that with any class. I went from the perspective of which class would be the most likely to appeal to a player who wanted to make a special snowflake.

I have never thought before of that origin I exemplified for Wild Sorcerers, forcefully developed magical powers, that origin is really good to explain barbaric non-druid spellcasters (because Evil Druids are still... well... Druids).

[Dr. Cliché]

Why does this thread exist?

The term (in reference to gaming) originated on an image board to denigrate and humiliate players who wanted to be something unusual, with the implication that wanting your character to stand out for something other than your 133t RP skillz is somehow wrong. Why would you want to participate in a thread gratifying a myopic point of view?

I'm wondering if there's some confusion about what the term means.

My understanding was that it referred to people who want to feel special (or be treated as special), but without actually doing anything to make themselves special. In essence, they want to be treated as though they were just born special, rather than being praised for what they've actually accomplished.

With that in mind, I don't think that the special snowflakes are the people playing tiefling sorcerers or drow warlocks.

The special snowflakes are the ones playing their own special homebrew race that's a drow-assimar hybrid who also has dragon ancestry (somehow), and who has green skin, lavender eyes and bears a distinct birthmark in the shape of a demon and an angel locked in eternal battle. :smallwink:

[SethoMarkus]

Monk if that character is made in "stranded fantasy Europe setting #9452894856"

Monks are also the only class eligible for the Mark of the Chosen One!

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/i5aciMK8oOg/hqdefault.jpg

[CantigThimble]

I'm wondering if there's some confusion about what the term means.

My understanding was that it referred to people who want to feel special (or be treated as special), but without actually doing anything to make themselves special. In essence, they want to be treated as though they were just born special, rather than being praised for what they've actually accomplished.

With that in mind, I don't think that the special snowflakes are the people playing tiefling sorcerers or drow warlocks.

The special snowflakes are the ones playing their own special homebrew race that's a drow-assimar hybrid who also has dragon ancestry (somehow), and who has green skin, lavender eyes and bears a distinct birthmark in the shape of a demon and an angel locked in eternal battle. :smallwink:

I agree, people born special or with a special destiny would be the special snowflakes. Harry Potter makes a decent enough character in a book, but it would be insufferable if someone just showed up to a session of D&D with 'the chosen one' and expected the main villain to have a secret vulnerability to his character to be revealed when the time was right. Even when the DM deliberately builds the campaign from the ground up to involve a chosen one it tends to frustrate a lot of players that the chosen one exists.

[mr-mercer]

I think the classes that can be most snowflakey are, in no particular order, paladins, sorcerers and warlocks, for all of the stereotypical reasons and those that have already been expressed here. However, as has also been said, a character is only as snowflakey as the player makes them, and anything can be wonderful if written well.

[RickAllison]

I agree, people born special or with a special destiny would be the special snowflakes. Harry Potter makes a decent enough character in a book, but it would be insufferable if someone just showed up to a session of D&D with 'the chosen one' and expected the main villain to have a secret vulnerability to his character to be revealed when the time was right. Even when the DM deliberately builds the campaign from the ground up to involve a chosen one it tends to frustrate a lot of players that the chosen one exists.

I would be fine with a player doing this. And at the critical moment when it matters most, it fails him. Since his entire persona has been built around being the chosen one, I would then also inflict a madness on the PC :smallbiggrin:

[DragonSorcererX]

I have come to the conclusion that PCs are Special Snowflakes even if they don't want to be... both the PHB and the DMG explicitly say: Adventurers = Special Snowflakes... it doens't matter if you are the most plain and flavorless Folk Hero Human Fighter Champion or the Noble Gold Dragonborn Dragon Sorcerer of the Gold Dragon Heritage, you are a Special Snowflake because you are an Adventurer, you are the guy who fights Dragons, Demons, Aberrations... and on a Low Fantasy Low Magic World you are the guy who solves the intrigue or the guy who creates more intrigue, people hire you to fight for them because you are different... so, yeah... PCs are Special Snowflakes.

[Zene]

I look forward to the day we have a question thread that doesn't devolve to the rightness or wrongness of asking the question, or goes meta by questioning the motives of the responders.

One can dream...

[Joe the Rat]

Can I sig this? :smallbiggrin:By all means.


However, we're talking about 5th edition - which changed Tieflings to be big, red devils with overly-large horns and fat tails.
Hey, nothing wrong with a fat tail.

Or was that for the other thread?

[Captain Morgan]

Yeah, mechanically, Warlocks feel the most unique. They have Charisma as a key stat so they are primed to hog the spot light. They have a ton of infiltration and scouting abilities that enable them to do the solo venture thing. And they have much more incentive to dictate the pace of an adventuring day then a sorcerer, between wanting short rests, being able to use a ton of at will abilities when everyone else has been drained dry, and having lots of spells with clocks to juggle like Armor of Agathys and Hex.


And their fluff is pretty up there too. I mean, gods empower people pretty impersonally, and it doesn't matter that your great great great grandparent was a dragon if I can similar stuff just by reading a book. But having some sort of demon, fey lord, or Great Old One choose to enter into a contract with you?

That being said, I think they are probably my favorite class from a flavor perspective, and they have some neat mechanics to boot. I've always found the special snowflake complaint pretty banal.

[CaptainSarathai]

I would be fine with a player doing this. And at the critical moment when it matters most, it fails him. Since his entire persona has been built around being the chosen one, I would then also inflict a madness on the PC :smallbiggrin:

I did this as a DM when my GF took Folk Hero and her flaw was believing she had a destiny. I told her that she would be guaranteed to 1-hit kill the main badguy, but only if:
A. She was the first person to attack them during that fight
B. Only this character could do it. If she died, the next character could not have a destiny

She then told the rest of the part, one of whom made some Knowledge type check to see if her story checked out, and I replied with some classically vague prophecy from ages ago. So all game they think she's super vital to the campaign, expecting that the enemy will be some re-skinned Terrasque that's otherwise impossible to kill. This had the hilarious side effect of them discounting the actual enemy the entire time, who was just a normal human (nah, can't be him, he'd be too easy to kill!)
Final fight comes around and she's like,
"Yeah no, guys, just pass your turns. I got this"
Dink.
"Is he dead?"
"Nope!"
"Is he the badguy??"
"Yep!"
"From the prophecy?"
"Yep!"
"Shi------"
From the peanut gallery of players who have just passed their turns,
"You LYING Bi----!!"

[Potato_Priest]

I did this as a DM when my GF took Folk Hero and her flaw was believing she had a destiny. I told her that she would be guaranteed to 1-hit kill the main badguy, but only if:
A. She was the first person to attack them during that fight
B. Only this character could do it. If she died, the next character could not have a destiny

She then told the rest of the part, one of whom made some Knowledge type check to see if her story checked out, and I replied with some classically vague prophecy from ages ago. So all game they think she's super vital to the campaign, expecting that the enemy will be some re-skinned Terrasque that's otherwise impossible to kill. This had the hilarious side effect of them discounting the actual enemy the entire time, who was just a normal human (nah, can't be him, he'd be too easy to kill!)
Final fight comes around and she's like,
"Yeah no, guys, just pass your turns. I got this"
Dink.
"Is he dead?"
"Nope!"
"Is he the badguy??"
"Yep!"
"From the prophecy?"
"Yep!"
"Shi------"
From the peanut gallery of players who have just passed their turns,
"You LYING Bi----!!"

That's a great story, made me laugh :biggrin:... but why did you lie to your players? Was the Folk Hero sort of on board with it?

If the badguy was a regular human (I'm presuming commoner or noble or something mild, due to your use of the term "regular") why would the Folk hero have said "Shi-----"? Surely the human just takes a turn, maybe inflicts some pathetic amount of damage, and the whole team just ganks him next round.

[Temperjoke]

That's a great story, made me laugh :biggrin:... but why did you lie to your players? Was the Folk Hero sort of on board with it?

If the badguy was a regular human (I'm presuming commoner or noble or something mild, due to your use of the term "regular") why would the Folk hero have said "Shi-----"? Surely the human just takes a turn, maybe inflicts some pathetic amount of damage, and the whole team just ganks him next round.

Keyword was "believed", if I understand right. She believed she had a destiny, and acted it, and everyone else bought it, and it wasn't true.

[CaptainSarathai]

That's a great story, made me laugh :biggrin:... but why did you lie to your players? Was the Folk Hero sort of on board with it?

If the badguy was a regular human (I'm presuming commoner or noble or something mild, due to your use of the term "regular") why would the Folk hero have said "Shi-----"? Surely the human just takes a turn, maybe inflicts some pathetic amount of damage, and the whole team just ganks him next round.

1. "Regular Human" - wasn't a commoner or anything. Was a pretty ridiculously powerful wizard. Just, all campaign he seemed mild mannered, "hide in plain sight." The type of villain who just pulled strings in the background until the time was right for WORLD DOMINATION!

2. She was on board, but didn't know it was a lie. It's a flaw. You believe you have a destiny, you don't necessarily really have one. She was (in character) aware of the prophecy, which was something vague like,
"and it is said that the Enemy's greatest weakness, shall be the Heroes. And at their fore, the mere Peasant Girl, whos blade shall signal his End"
That kind of thing, I forget the exact wording. At no point does it say, "one hit kill." That's just how her character had the story interpreted to them, and that's the prophecy I read the party when they asked for a check, so they thought "oh, she said 1hit kill, sounds legit".
After the fight they realized the error, but her attack had technically signalled his end, as it started the fight that killed him.

3. I lie to my players a lot, they're used to it. I can't play horror campaigns with her, because she doesn't appreciate being gas-lit, but I frequently did run horror campaigns with the group before she joined, and they understand that sometimes what their characters see/hear/sense isn't necessarily what's really there. A character with a phobia of spiders light describe a spider as "gigantic, horrible and surely deadly, the size of a house!" so if the player sees that spider and nobody else does, that's how I describe it. They tell the rest of the party and they're clearly over reacting, but that's because they're horrified of spiders. The party either learns not to trust them, or busts in ready to fight Shelob, and it's just a harmless garden spider.

[Potato_Priest]

2. She was on board, but didn't know it was a lie. It's a flaw. You believe you have a destiny, you don't necessarily really have one. She was (in character) aware of the prophecy, which was something vague like,
"and it is said that the Enemy's greatest weakness, shall be the Heroes. And at their fore, the mere Peasant Girl, whos blade shall signal his End"
That kind of thing, I forget the exact wording. At no point does it say, "one hit kill." That's just how her character had the story interpreted to them, and that's the prophecy I read the party when they asked for a check, so they thought "oh, she said 1hit kill, sounds legit".
After the fight they realized the error, but her attack had technically signalled his end, as it started the fight that killed him.

3. I lie to my players a lot, they're used to it. I can't play horror campaigns with her, because she doesn't appreciate being gas-lit, but I frequently did run horror campaigns with the group before she joined, and they understand that sometimes what their characters see/hear/sense isn't necessarily what's really there. A character with a phobia of spiders light describe a spider as "gigantic, horrible and surely deadly, the size of a house!" so if the player sees that spider and nobody else does, that's how I describe it. They tell the rest of the party and they're clearly over reacting, but that's because they're horrified of spiders. The party either learns not to trust them, or busts in ready to fight Shelob, and it's just a harmless garden spider.

Sounds like a good way to lie. I should probably get around to planning ahead enough to do that sort of thing. 'Course, it would help if my players actually wrote things in the flaws, bonds, and ideals sections.

[Dr. Cliché]

I agree, people born special or with a special destiny would be the special snowflakes. Harry Potter makes a decent enough character in a book, but it would be insufferable if someone just showed up to a session of D&D with 'the chosen one' and expected the main villain to have a secret vulnerability to his character to be revealed when the time was right. Even when the DM deliberately builds the campaign from the ground up to involve a chosen one it tends to frustrate a lot of players that the chosen one exists.

Honestly, I find Harry Potter insufferable even in book form. :smalltongue:

That aside, I agree about chosen one plots generally being a bad idea in D&D. Although I'd go so far as to say that they're usually a bad idea, period.



Hey, nothing wrong with a fat tail.

Sure. So long as it's attached to a fat lizard. :smallwink:

[Armok]

Gonna have to throw my hat in the ring for Warlock. Oh no, you've made a dark and aloof character who gets their power from a dark deal... Yeah, I've totally never seen that at my table before. No no, by all means, regale me with the tragic story of how you ended up making a deal with eldritch powers after your family was killed by mysterious forces. Oh, you came up with your own patron, even though I wrote up a page and a half on patrons which exist in my setting and can fulfill any narrative purpose and put the entire player primer folder at your disposal at character creation?

The worst part is, as stupidly samey as their backstories inevitably are, 99% of warlocks at my table have effectively been the same character in play as well. Eldritch Blast all encounter every encounter, rarely if ever using their actual spell slots, never having any interest in the patron itself and treating the flavor of the class as irrelevant for its power... It's enough to make a carrion crawler vomit. Why people are so obsessed with playing the Warlock in one specific fashion here is absolutely beyond me, especially when the class has plenty of options for versatility.

Even the Warlock in my current game, who doesn't really eldritch blast and makes use of their spells in interesting ways, had to be an exotic new race and have an otherworldly background and unique out of setting patron. Even when I get a good player, there's no respite from snowflake syndrome...

[Millstone85]

Yeah, it probably is the warlock. However...


Yeah, I've totally never seen that at my table before.Which is of no concern to your player, if they have never played such a character before.


Oh, you came up with your own patron, even though I wrote up a page and a half on patrons which exist in my setting and can fulfill any narrative purpose and put the entire player primer folder at your disposal at character creation?If I wanted to select a patron from a setting pantheon, I would play a cleric.


Eldritch Blast all encounter every encounter, rarely if ever using their actual spell slots
Why people are so obsessed with playing the Warlock in one specific fashion here is absolutely beyond me, especially when the class has plenty of options for versatility.The class has plenty of options, but the eldritch blast cantrip is to a warlock as a weapon is to a fighter. A blastless warlock is probably some complicated bladelock multiclass.

[Armok]

If I wanted to select a patron from a setting pantheon, I would play a cleric.

I'm sorry, but I put a hefty chunk of work into coming up with a plethora of fiends, fey and lovecraftian horrors that have actual ties to events, history, and places in my setting. If nothing in that pool of candidates grabs a player's interest, I'm more than willing to sit down with them and work out something that ticks all their check boxes for what they want so I can write it in.

But more often than not, a warlock player at the table wants to either have 100% control over their patron with me as the DM having minimal input as to what it's like, or worse yet doesn't care at all about what that patron is and has no interest in exploring what a deal with it entails, ignoring any detail about what their patron is and focusing exclusively on its mechanical benefits.

Like I know the player gets to choose their own patron, but that dudes gotta fit into the setting somehow! It's way harder to make an interesting addition to the game if a player's not willing to work with me and let me flex my creative muscle with their whatever-the-heck-eating-the-end-of-time. Not to mention downright impossible if they don't even care about their choice beyond the mechanical side of it...

[Dr. Cliché]

The worst part is, as stupidly samey as their backstories inevitably are, 99% of warlocks at my table have effectively been the same character in play as well.

This seems like an issue with the class rather than the player.


Eldritch Blast all encounter every encounter, rarely if ever using their actual spell slots

Do you complain about fighters always using the Attack action, too?

Because what you're describing there is the warlock class, plain and simple. Eldritch Blast is what they do. In terms of spells, they have to wait till about lv11 before they get more than 2 spell slots - so surely they can't help but use them rarely?


never having any interest in the patron itself and treating the flavor of the class as irrelevant for its power...

That last part confused the hell out of me. Didn't you complain about the opposite a paragraph ago?

[Millstone85]

That last part confused the hell out of me. Didn't you complain about the opposite a paragraph ago?
But more often than not, a warlock player at the table wants to either have 100% control over their patron with me as the DM having minimal input as to what it's like, or worse yet doesn't care at all about what that patron is and has no interest in exploring what a deal with it entails, ignoring any detail about what their patron is and focusing exclusively on its mechanical benefits.These are indeed two extremes. A player being either too invested in the patron or not enough.


Like I know the player gets to choose their own patron, but that dudes gotta fit into the setting somehow!4e-to-5e Forgotten Realms. My warlock's patron is an alien hivemind known as The Veiled Star with a Thousand Wards (i.e. the fairy godmother / Shub-Niggurath). She became aware of the world of Toril when the Spellplague opened a portal between it and her corner of the Far Realm. After the Sundering (the campaign's version of it anyway), the portal became a landmark of the Order of Blue Flame where a new kind of spellscar could be acquired. Her endgame, I left to the DM.

What would be your take on that?

[Tanarii]

What would be your take on that?
That it's not one of the setting patrons, which are listed in scag?

*tries to look innocent and not trollish*

[Millstone85]

That it's not one of the setting patrons, which are listed in scag?

*tries to look innocent and not trollish*We didn't have that book when the campaign started in 4e, but now I am borrowing quite a bit from the description of Tyranthraxus.

Tyranthraxus, also called the Possessing Spirit and the Flamed One, seeks to rule the world through the bodies of others. Similar to the Earthmother, it uses magical pools as windows into the world to spread its influence.
I am just portraying it more as ecologically invasive than malevolent. A foreign nature spirit seeking to displace those of Toril.

[Tanarii]

We didn't have that book when the campaign started in 4e, but now I am borrowing quite a bit from the description of Tyranthraxus.

I am just portraying it more as ecologically invasive than malevolent. A foreign nature spirit seeking to displace those of Toril.
That's the thing that jumped out at me though, and the reason I made the scag comment. The infernal & old one warlock patrons in FR are Malevolent! Caps, italics, and exclamation point all appropriate.

Like ... no Infernal or Great Old One warlock in AL (which is set in FR) should be able to ignore the horribly evil nature of their patron, and should be facing pitchforks constantly. And any Archfey warlock should be dealing with constant prejudice and assumption they're actually serious bad guys, like the other warlocks are, from anyone who can tell the source of their power (which would include most adventurers).

Edit: this is something that players in general ignore. They want the mechanical power, with none of the built in downsides. IMO that's what makes them special snowflakes more often than not.

[Millstone85]

The infernal & old one warlock patrons in FR are Malevolent! Caps, italics, and exclamation point all appropriate.Appropriate for a fiend of the Lower Planes, a literal embodiment of sin, but missing the proper flavor of a great old one of the Far Realm, something too alien to be safely interacted with. The alignment of the latter, if it even has one, is largely irrelevant to the menace it represents.

I love to play the parallel with the nature spirits, whose alignment if any is secondary to them just being a vital aspect of the world.

My warlock, on the other hand, is squarely evil for persevering in that direction and bringing others to follow it. She didn't make the initial deal but she turned away a chance to become a regular nonmagical girl.

Edit: My warlock had a very interesting reunion with an NPC who used to be a powerful spellscarred and didn't accept the new power source. The guy is a drunk, lamenting how his life has been ruined twice, first by magic changing him then by magic leaving him.


Like ... no Infernal or Great Old One warlock in AL (which is set in FR) should be able to ignore the horribly evil nature of their patron, and should be facing pitchforks constantly.Eh, this is the world where you can announce yourself as a cleric of Bane, Cyric or some other evil deity. And as of 5e, Asmodeus himself has become the god of indulgence.

[Dr. Cliché]

Like ... no Infernal or Great Old One warlock in AL (which is set in FR) should be able to ignore the horribly evil nature of their patron, and should be facing pitchforks constantly.

I disagree. You only have to look at history to see how much evil can be justified for some perceived greater good.

In terms of facing pitchforks constantly, I guess it depends how obvious it is that he's a warlock serving an evil patron. Unless said patron demands that he enters every town wearing armour made out of baby skulls, whilst biting the heads off puppies, I imagine he can go around incognito.


Edit: this is something that players in general ignore. They want the mechanical power, with none of the built in downsides.

In fairness, this might depend on what sort of downsides the DM chooses. At the very least, I can sympathise with players not wanting to be punished for picking a basic class. :smalltongue:

[Millstone85]

In fairness, this might depend on what sort of downsides the DM chooses. At the very least, I can sympathise with players not wanting to be punished for picking a basic class. :smalltongue:I can see a difficulty scale here:
Easy: Archfey patron only. You are a witch, a practitioner of an arcane tradition with close ties to primal spirits and the fey, often considered to be to a druid what a wizard is to a cleric.
Medium: You have learned to tap into an extraplanar magic regarded by other spellcasters as an hazardous shortcut.
Hard: Dude, you sold your soul. A pact signed in blood and everything.

Something similar exists for the paladin class:
Easy: You are a deity's champion, essentially a cleric with more martial training.
Medium: You derive divine power from your commitment to your ideals, such as your alignment.
Hard: You have sworn a sacred oath and must follow both the spirit and the letter of it.

With a lawyer DM, you enter impossible mode.

[Tanarii]

Eh, this is the world where you can announce yourself as a cleric of Bane, Cyric or some other evil deity. And as of 5e, Asmodeus himself has become the god of indulgence.yeah, most places openly following evil deities will mean you're facing pitchforks too.

You can get away with it, and there are certainly safe havens for evil where they can be open about it. But in general you will get treated appropriate.


I disagree. You only have to look at history to see how much evil can be justified for some perceived greater good.Are we talking real history, FR history, or D&D history? :smallbiggrin:


In terms of facing pitchforks constantly, I guess it depends how obvious it is that he's a warlock serving an evil patron. Unless said patron demands that he enters every town wearing armour made out of baby skulls, whilst biting the heads off puppies, I imagine he can go around incognito.Yes but that's my point. Since when does a Warlcok player go incognito? I mean, your playing a class that actually is a servant of evil (either Infernal or Alien), and the players flaunt it, and expect to be able to be treated like its nothing.

And yeah, this is something Dragonborn, Tiefling often do too. To their credit, it's actually less common among servants of Evil Dieties (usually Clerics/Vengeance Paladins IMX), for some reason they tend to meppbe appropriately low key.

(Also, talking AL players specifically now.)

[EvilAnagram]

It kind of depends on the evil deity. Most people will pour libations to Umberlee in the hours that she won't down them. Plenty of soldiers will pray to Bane, evil or not.

[Dr. Cliché]

Are we talking real history, FR history, or D&D history? :smallbiggrin:


RL history.

The only D&D setting I've read a lot about is Dragonlanc, and it has some . . . uh . . . dubious ideas about morality. :smalltongue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9xj6yQIP2Q



Yes but that's my point. Since when does a Warlcok player go incognito?

Well, when I've played a warlock, I haven't kept it from the party (Eldritch Blast tend to give the game away pretty quickly :smallwink:). However, I haven't gone out of my way to make it obvious to people outside the party.


I mean, your playing a class that actually is a servant of evil (either Infernal or Alien), and the players flaunt it, and expect to be able to be treated like its nothing.

Yeah, if you actually flaunt your evil I can see it being an issue.

Although I'll confess that you've now made me want to do this. If anyone objects, I'll just show them my Skull Ring. :smallbiggrin:

[Tanarii]

Well, when I've played a warlock, I haven't kept it from the party (Eldritch Blast tend to give the game away pretty quickly :smallwink:). However, I haven't gone out of my way to make it obvious to people outside the party.
and the party just accepts that, does they? Because that seems to be the expectation, and is exactly part of what I'm talking about.

Honestly, I understand why AL didn't outright ban Archfiend and Great Old One warlocks, but they really should have. Or at least slapped the same 'must have a faction' restriction on them they did with Lawful Evil characters.

Edit: obviously none of this applies if a DM's world is intentionally structured so that warlock patrons aren't malevolent, or the group is hand waving away the fluff. I'm talking about a situation in which the fluff is expected to exist and the warlock is a servant of evil ... and players just kinda ignore that.

[Dr. Cliché]

and the party just accepts that, does they? Because that seems to be the expectation, and is exactly part of what I'm talking about.

Depends on the character and on the rest of the party. I've had a couple where they've fitted in fine (although one was more bard than warlock). I've also had one who is something of an extremist and is, at best, tolerated by the party.

[Millstone85]

While reading SCAG, I found something that was more or less what had been going on at our table.
Arcane Spellcasters
The common folk of Faerûn often make little distinction between sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards. Most mages see little point in kindling rivalries with other types of arcane spellcasters -- magic is magic, regardless of the means -- and for the most part, sorcerers, wizards, and warlocks respect each other as fellow practitioners of the Art, understanding the power it represents.Indeed, I would often present myself as "an arcanist". If pressed for details, I would mention a rare study of a preternatural plane of existence with elements not found in the inner wheel and spiritual essences not found in the outer wheel, at which point my audience would just nod at the magobabble. Wizards can tell that I don't really know what I am talking about, but neither are they interested in finding out what that "Far Realm" thingy is. As for the one who was... Well, we recently heard of a man matching his description and who had apparently gone mad. :smallamused:

[Potato_Priest]

Something similar exists for the paladin class:
Easy: You are a deity's champion, essentially a cleric with more martial training.
Medium: You derive divine power from your commitment to your ideals, such as your alignment.
Hard: You have sworn a sacred oath and must follow both the spirit and the letter of it.

With a lawyer DM, you enter impossible mode.

Darned Straight. I once lost my oath of the Ancients for having a party member step on a beautiful flower. (DM interpreted it as my failure to protect the light).

[NecroDancer]

A good source for warlock patrons are the vestiges from 3.5's tome of magic.

[Dr. Cliché]

Darned Straight. I once lost my oath of the Ancients for having a party member step on a beautiful flower. (DM interpreted it as my failure to protect the light).

And this is how a DM ends up in A&E, with the Player's Handbook lodged up his backside.

[deathadder99]

Gonna have to throw my hat in the ring for Warlock. Oh no, you've made a dark and aloof character who gets their power from a dark deal... Yeah, I've totally never seen that at my table before. No no, by all means, regale me with the tragic story of how you ended up making a deal with eldritch powers after your family was killed by mysterious forces. Oh, you came up with your own patron, even though I wrote up a page and a half on patrons which exist in my setting and can fulfill any narrative purpose and put the entire player primer folder at your disposal at character creation?

The worst part is, as stupidly samey as their backstories inevitably are, 99% of warlocks at my table have effectively been the same character in play as well. Eldritch Blast all encounter every encounter, rarely if ever using their actual spell slots, never having any interest in the patron itself and treating the flavor of the class as irrelevant for its power... It's enough to make a carrion crawler vomit. Why people are so obsessed with playing the Warlock in one specific fashion here is absolutely beyond me, especially when the class has plenty of options for versatility.

Even the Warlock in my current game, who doesn't really eldritch blast and makes use of their spells in interesting ways, had to be an exotic new race and have an otherworldly background and unique out of setting patron. Even when I get a good player, there's no respite from snowflake syndrome...

See this is why I'm really happy about my players. I have a half-elf warlock in my current campaign who's backstory is he was a wizard in training with a particularly useless mentor. Aforementioned mentor accidentally teleported both of them to Hell, and he had to make a pact with Glasya in order to escape. None of my characters are really special snowflakes, though they do tend to the tongue-in-cheek.

I have a jaded old Elf Wizard with a deathwish after his human wife died, a ranger who used to own a tavern in the woods and had it burn down and is seeking to rebuild it, the warlock mentioned above, a half-orc barbarian who's seeking the respect of her Orc tribe, a cleric who was a priest in a temple, an insane bounty hunter who was raised by raccoons in the feywild(don't ask), and a ship's captain who lost his ship.

[Spellbreaker26]

and the party just accepts that, does they? Because that seems to be the expectation, and is exactly part of what I'm talking about.

Honestly, I understand why AL didn't outright ban Archfiend and Great Old One warlocks, but they really should have. Or at least slapped the same 'must have a faction' restriction on them they did with Lawful Evil characters.

Edit: obviously none of this applies if a DM's world is intentionally structured so that warlock patrons aren't malevolent, or the group is hand waving away the fluff. I'm talking about a situation in which the fluff is expected to exist and the warlock is a servant of evil ... and players just kinda ignore that.

Yeah, sometimes I have trouble figuring out how to roll with it when I'm a Lawful Neutral cleric and I've got three warlocks in my party. Archfey isn't brilliant either since the powers they're in hock to, while not openly evil, might still have the pact maker do dubious things.

So I simply think "I guess my character has no idea what a warlock is" and I just roll from there. Sometimes I guess you just have to put up with your party being evil.

I think the worst part is that Warlock's often a pretty good multiclass choice, so it's fairly easy to end up with a lot of party members that have a few levels in it.

[Dr. Cliché]

One of my favourite ideas that I've heard for a less-traditional warlock involves a bored noble who used to host 'summoning parties' for his friends. They'd have some drinks, eat some good food and try one of the rituals in a book of made-up gods.

Except one of them wasn't made up.

Said noble wakes up, surrounded by the corpses of his friends and bound to the services of Yoth Siirgon, the Light Swallower.

So, it's either go adventuring or try to explain those corpses to the authorities.


I haven't tried this myself, but I find the idea amusing.

[Logosloki]

Special Snowflake is more than class, it is a state of being.

That being said, I'd say that the least snowflakey you could be would be NG Human Champion Fighter. Not to say you can't RP you a snowflakestorm but your entire being is a baseline for mediocrity.

Most Snowflakey in terms of attracting the snowflakes in my experience is a tie between Rogue, Wizard, Paladin, Sorcerer and Warlock. Bonus points if they are CE (LG for the Paladin, though LE gives you some good angst).

Rogues go either rogue on the party or rogue on the campaign. Wizards are batmanning or lording it. Paladins are trying to see if their deity will insert an immovable rod into their rectum. Sorcerers with the fifteen page backstory on their bloodlines. And finally, the new entry, Mr "I have a pact with literal Satan or something close to it" himself.

If you are going to allow for your players to take the mechanics they like and refluff it though warlock creeps to number one. The class allows you to make close to any protagonist you like, more so if you allow for custom invocations. Not even going to omit, I have indeed taken Warlock to play a Magical Girl, only because I couldn't stop giggling at the idea.

[Saiga]

While reading SCAG, I found something that was more or less what had been going on at our table.Indeed, I would often present myself as "an arcanist". If pressed for details, I would mention a rare study of a preternatural plane of existence with elements not found in the inner wheel and spiritual essences not found in the outer wheel, at which point my audience would just nod at the magobabble. Wizards can tell that I don't really know what I am talking about, but neither are they interested in finding out what that "Far Realm" thingy is. As for the one who was... Well, we recently heard of a man matching his description and who had apparently gone mad. :smallamused:

Well, I think the SCAG quite clearly shoots down the "torchers and pitchforks for EVERY warlock" expectation, which I'm glad for.

[Millstone85]

Darned Straight. I once lost my oath of the Ancients for having a party member step on a beautiful flower. (DM interpreted it as my failure to protect the light).Well, it is clear what class many DMs regard as the special snowflake that needs to be shut down at the first occasion. How odd that it would be the Arthurian guy before the Faustian one.


Not even going to omit, I have indeed taken Warlock to play a Magical Girl, only because I couldn't stop giggling at the idea.My main inspirations for warlocks are John Constantine, Dr. Facilier and, yes, Homura Akemi.


Well, I think the SCAG quite clearly shoots down the "torchers and pitchforks for EVERY warlock" expectation, which I'm glad for.I am glad too, obviously, although it would have made a whole lot more sense if archfey had been regarded as the most common warlock patrons in the Realms instead of fiends.

[Tanarii]

Well, I think the SCAG quite clearly shoots down the "torchers and pitchforks for EVERY warlock" expectation, which I'm glad for.
:smallconfused: Apart from feylocks, they all serve malevolent powers. And even some feylocks do that.

All it shoots down is commoners not knowing the difference between warlocks and other arcane casters off the cuff. Torches and pitchforks are MORE likely to be the order of the day in FR for warlocks once it becomes known what they actually are.

Edit: oops double negative on shoots down.

Edit2: to the degree that torches and pitchforks have a chance of doing anything, of course. FR population isn't stupid and desiring to die at the end of a Eldritch Blast.

[Spellbreaker26]

:smallconfused: Apart from feylocks, they all serve malevolent powers. And even some feylocks do that.

All it shoots down is commoners not knowing the difference between warlocks and other arcane casters off the cuff. Torches and pitchforks are MORE likely to be the order of the day in FR for warlocks once it becomes known what they actually are.

Edit: oops double negative on shoots down.

Edit2: to the degree that torches and pitchforks have a chance of doing anything, of course. FR population isn't stupid and desiring to die at the end of a Eldritch Blast.

The sprite description in the monster Manual describes Archfey as evil, so I would argue that the vast majority of Feylocks are serving malevolent powers as well.

And torches and pitchforks are considerably more dangerous in 5e than in previous editions so long as the serfs play it smart.

[Dr. Cliché]

The sprite description in the monster Manual describes Archfey as evil, so I would argue that the vast majority of Feylocks are serving malevolent powers as well.

How I imagine Archfey warlocks:

http://static5.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_small/11/113509/4383054-1630125576-39430.jpg

[Millstone85]

The sprite description in the monster Manual describes Archfey as evil, so I would argue that the vast majority of Feylocks are serving malevolent powers as well.It just says that "sprites oppose the will of evil fey and pledge to thwart evil archfey at every turn". The sprite itself is a neutral good fey and a Pact of the Chain familiar. There is bound to be quite a few decent archfey.

[Spellbreaker26]

How I imagine Archfey warlocks:

http://static5.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_small/11/113509/4383054-1630125576-39430.jpg

Appropriate with the horned helmet, though I reckon Thanatos falls more along the line of Archfiend in DnD terms.


It just says that "sprites oppose the will of evil fey and pledge to thwart evil archfey at every turn". The sprite itself is a neutral good fey and a Pact of the Chain familiar. There is bound to be quite a few decent archfey.

You are right; this is an irritating reveal. I've always thought that the idea of good Warlocks conflicts with the idea in the fluff of them being people who took the easy path to power. If you can just find an Archfey willing to make you powerful, why would anyone but a cultist choose to seek the Archfiend's power, for example?

[Tanarii]

It just says that "sprites oppose the will of evil fey and pledge to thwart evil archfey at every turn". The sprite itself is a neutral good fey and a Pact of the Chain familiar. There is bound to be quite a few decent archfey.
Yeah, there's pretty clearly evil Archfey, good Archfey, just messing with your head Archfey, I don't care about you mere mortals you're my playthings Archfey, wild hunt Archfey ...

[JAL_1138]

Something similar exists for the paladin class:
Easy: You are a deity's champion, essentially a cleric with more martial training.
Medium: You derive divine power from your commitment to your ideals, such as your alignment.
Hard: You have sworn a sacred oath and must follow both the spirit and the letter of it.

With a lawyer DM, you enter impossible mode.

An actual lawyer (as in an attorney; may or may not also be a rules lawyer) DM might be uncomfortable taking away class features without a mens rea component (perhaps out of a general philosophical objection to strict liability penalties outside certain contracts and a very narrow range of tort law), so they might never bust you for doing something inadvertently or unwillingly. They might also remember a general principle of contract law that ambiguous terms are to be construed against the drafter and/or that in the absence of a contractual definition the common usage will generally prevail (i.e., unless the contract spells it out, the drafter can't use an unstated idiosyncratic/uncommon definition of a term to claim a breach), thus tending to favor a broad or commonsense interpretation of the tenets of an oath. They may also bear in mind that changed circumstances resulting in impossibility of performance can be a defense to breach, so they'd avoid busting you for a Catch-22 where there are no possible options to take that allow you to adhere to the oath.

A lawyer would also actually read the sidebar on page 86 that indicates there is a lot of room for fallibility on the Paladin's part, and that for minor violations of the oath (including Catch-22 circumstances requiring the paladin to choose between the lesser of two evils, as mentioned previously), a rite of confession and repentance generally suffices, and that a fall is limited to situations in which a paladin willingly violates their oath and shows no signs of repentance (and even then it's still DM-discretionary whether to deem the paladin fallen--the DM can decide against it even if the paladin is utterly unrepentant).

Or at least that's how I'd do it, as an attorney and occasional DM.


Darned Straight. I once lost my oath of the Ancients for having a party member step on a beautiful flower. (DM interpreted it as my failure to protect the light).

Based on the circumstances as you've described them, in my professional legal opinion as an attorney, your DM pulled a real jerk move there.

[Dr. Cliché]

Yeah, there's pretty clearly evil Archfey, good Archfey, just messing with your head Archfey, I don't care about you mere mortals you're my playthings Archfey, wild hunt Archfey ...

Sounds like it's just pot-luck as to whether the Archfey a warlock pledges himself to will actually be good (not least because fey tend to be deceptive buggers in general).

At least the Fiend warlock knows that his patron is a bastard. :smallwink:

[Millstone85]

How I imagine Archfey warlocks:http://static5.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_small/11/113509/4383054-1630125576-39430.jpgWell, in 4e, some looked like this guy:http://timeoffire.wdfiles.com/local--files/the-lady-of-the-white-well/Lady-of-the-White-Well.jpgOkay, the picture mostly shows his patron, the Lady of the White Well, who is totally not the Lady of the Lake.

And yes, I know, evil archfey have mastered glamour too.


You are right; this is an irritating reveal. I've always thought that the idea of good Warlocks conflicts with the idea in the fluff of them being people who took the easy path to power. If you can just find an Archfey willing to make you powerful, why would anyone but a cultist choose to seek the Archfiend's power, for example?I think many archfey just fall short of being gods of the Feywild. So, if you are a brave knight of the immortal Lady Cadence of Crystal Peak, you are practically a paladin.

[Tanarii]

Sounds like it's just pot-luck as to whether the Archfey a warlock pledges himself to will actually be good (not least because fey tend to be deceptive buggers in general).

At least the Fiend warlock knows that his patron is a bastard. :smallwink:
Haha well I'd like to think the Ancient Paladin who's multiclassing into Fey Warlock would take some time to research Titania vs Oberron vs the Queen of Air and Darkness before entering into the Pact. :smallbiggrin:

[Millstone85]

On the other hand, I remember this gem:
http://s3.postimg.org/w92rifflv/motivator29ef5a20e8214b657a7afc2796b198dac262df8.j pg

http://s3.postimg.org/pk0tg5jnn/motivator50f9c206d9dc5ccac69e73f63903151dc9679b3.j pg

http://s3.postimg.org/6lb99he4j/motivatore12f4d8536a69f989f3715b9a774e7689c0b916.j pg

[Dr. Cliché]

On the other hand, I remember this gem:

Is it bad that that just makes me want to play an Archfey-patron warlock?

[Millstone85]

Is it bad that that just makes me want to play an Archfey-patron warlock?The appeal of forbidden power. It doesn't even have to be more power. :smallwink:

[Kobard]

You are right; this is an irritating reveal. I've always thought that the idea of good Warlocks conflicts with the idea in the fluff of them being people who took the easy path to power. If you can just find an Archfey willing to make you powerful, why would anyone but a cultist choose to seek the Archfiend's power, for example?Presumably the same reason that many people optimizing their warlocks by choosing the fiend patron are: powergaming for DPR.


Is it bad that that just makes me want to play an Archfey-patron warlock?Nah.

I kinda like the idea of fey kidnapping children from the Prime plane where they are raised but are then only released from the Feywild if they bind themselves to the service of a powerful archfey patron as their emissaries "for good" in the Prime world.

[Dr. Cliché]

I kinda like the idea of fey kidnapping children from the Prime plane where they are raised but are then only released from the Feywild if they bind themselves to the service of a powerful archfey patron as their emissaries "for good" in the Prime world.

Can I steal this?

[Spellbreaker26]

On the other hand, I remember this gem:

What the....
What even is that Archfey picture from? It looks... unsettling.

[Kobard]

Can I steal this?Please do. Other considerations. Maybe your warlock does not want to return to the mortal world? Maybe they bargained for the promise of returning to the court of the archfey as their immortal champions? Maybe the archfey agreed but also stole something from your warlock as a "payment" or form of insurance? A valuable locket? Or maybe your memories? Perhaps memories of your life before the time in the Feywild or even memory of the agreement itself! How long were you even in the Feywild? Perhaps time moves differently there, so the political landscape has changed entirely. (Mat Cauthon's bargaining with the Aelfinn and Eelfinn in the Wheel of Time are a great potential source of inspiration.)

[Millstone85]

What the....
What even is that Archfey picture from? It looks... unsettling.Sorry, I have no idea.

[Dr. Cliché]

Please do. Other considerations. Maybe your warlock does not want to return to the mortal world? Maybe they bargained for the promise of returning to the court of the archfey as their immortal champions? Maybe the archfey agreed but also stole something from your warlock as a "payment" or form of insurance? A valuable locket? Or maybe your memories? Perhaps memories of your life before the time in the Feywild or even memory of the agreement itself! How long were you even in the Feywild? Perhaps time moves differently there, so the political landscape has changed entirely. (Mat Cauthon's bargaining with the Aelfinn and Eelfinn in the Wheel of Time are a great potential source of inspiration.)

Some really splendid ideas there. Thank you. :smallsmile:

[Captain Morgan]

I think there are a lot of ways to justify a Warlock doing good deeds. Assuming the patron doesn't simply demand CE behavior sowing destruction and death in his name everywhere the lock goes. You just need a patron willing to play the long game. Perhaps by eliminating various evil powers you are paving the road for the Fiend to place his own servants in the vacuum in a decade. These creatures are immortal and may have a way to gaze into the future. If the Warlock saves some children along the way, who cares? It just means more people to enslave later.

Or perhaps while the patron bestows a spark of power on the Warlock, they aren't particularly useful until they've fanned it into a flame through the hardships of adventuring. Most campaigns don't reach level 20, so while playing the lock can just be any kind of adventurer while the patron plans on turning them into an omega weapon in a decade.

A fey could be fickle enough to decide to create a hero, just for amusement after centuries of the same old evil thing. A Great Old One is inscrutable, there's no reason to think it's desires will even be understood, much less clearly fall into any sort of alignment.

That being said, actually roll playing these can present a lot of challenges. A Warlock may or may not be aware of a master's evil desires. They may not have a reason to reveal this to their party. The DM may not want the extra work of incorporating a complex behind the scenes big bad patron, especially if it requires scenes the party can't participate in. If the DM is just trying to run a script without incorporating PC backgrounds (which itself can be a road to disappointment when players miss games and such) then there might be no reason why a Warlock's patron would ever enter into the game proper.

[EvilAnagram]

I played a very naive warlock who thought he'd been chosen by a divine being. He brushed aside all the comments about how his sucking the life out of people didn't seem terribly angelic. And of course his powers weren't producing a sulfurous smell: Angels don't smell like sulfur, so it's clearly all just in your heads. Duh.

[Dr. Cliché]

He brushed aside all the comments about how his sucking the life out of people didn't seem terribly angelic.

Obviously he was cleansing their souls by sucking the evil out of them. :smallbiggrin:

[Saiga]

You are right; this is an irritating reveal. I've always thought that the idea of good Warlocks conflicts with the idea in the fluff of them being people who took the easy path to power. If you can just find an Archfey willing to make you powerful, why would anyone but a cultist choose to seek the Archfiend's power, for example?

But CAN you just find an Archfey willing to make you powerful? How common are they in comparison to the fiends, how willing are they to make pacts, how easy are they to deal with and do they actively seek out patrons? There are many ways an evil fiend could edge out a good Archfey even to a good Patron: desperation, lack of options, overconfidence (devils are lawful, I can handle them!), distrust (how many people really understand the fey?) etc.

Personally, I think that an Archfey would be rare/mysterious/otherworldly enough that they wouldn't be an obvious option for most Warlocks.

[Millstone85]

Haha well I'd like to think the Ancient Paladin who's multiclassing into Fey Warlock would take some time to research Titania vs Oberron vs the Queen of Air and Darkness before entering into the Pact. :smallbiggrin:I think this might be the most special snowflake multiclass. It has got both the mechanical synergy of the palalock and the perfect fluff for a good-aligned fey knight. It is also totally Link from The Legend of Zelda, frequenting both temples and fairy fountains. Too bad you can't have both Pact of the Blade of Evil's Bane and Pact of the Know-It-All Sprite.

[JAL_1138]

I think this might be the most special snowflake multiclass. It has got both the mechanical synergy of the palalock and the perfect fluff for a good-aligned fey knight. It is also totally Link from The Legend of Zelda, frequenting both temples and fairy fountains. Too bad you can't have both Pact of the Blade of Evil's Bane and Pact of the Know-It-All Sprite.

Pick up a Holy Avenger (+3 weapon, Legendary, 10ft aura of advantage on saves, +2d10 radiant damage to fiends and undead—although the art for the Vorpal Sword looks a lot like the lvl-3 red-bladed version of the Master Sword from ALttP...) and go Pact of the Chain for a Sprite familiar ("HEY! LISTEN!").

EDIT: Also, I doubt Link is a Bladelock. He loses or breaks his swords way too often.

[Ninja-Radish]

For me it has to be Sorcerer: "My dad can beat up your dad, cause mine is a dragon!"

[JAL_1138]

For me it has to be Sorcerer: "My dad can beat up your dad, cause mine is a dragon!"

That's definitely a marker of snowflakery to me. It's not what they do thst makes them special; it's what they are. Like I said in an earlier post, any random schmuck with no noteworthy ancestry or circumstances of birth that works hard at it can become a wizard or a bard. Pick up a lute and practice until your fingers are flayed raw and bleeding against the strings, day after day, year after year, pouring your heart and soul into song, until one day you you find the precise tones that let you create the smallest flicker of light. Pore over dusty books and ancient scrolls for months on end, wracking your brains over piles of rare components, going weeks without seeing the sun, until at last after a decade spent in studious effort you begin to grasp the most basic of arcane principles, and conjure up a puff of wind that barely snuffs out the lamp you've studied by all these long years. Sorcerers, though, are born with their affinity for magic. They can replicate what it took a wizard years to learn by the mere fortuitousness of their ancestry.

[Newtonsolo313]

That's definitely a marker of snowflakery to me. It's not what they do thst makes them special; it's what they are. Like I said in an earlier post, any random schmuck with no noteworthy ancestry or circumstances of birth that works hard at it can become a wizard or a bard. Pick up a lute and practice until your fingers are flayed raw and bleeding against the strings, day after day, year after year, pouring your heart and soul into song, until one day you you find the precise tones that let you create the smallest flicker of light. Pore over dusty books and ancient scrolls for months on end, wracking your brains over piles of rare components, going weeks without seeing the sun, until at last after a decade spent in studious effort you begin to grasp the most basic of arcane principles, and conjure up a puff of wind that barely snuffs out the lamp you've studied by all these long years. Sorcerers, though, are born with their affinity for magic. They can replicate what it took a wizard years to learn by the mere fortuitousness of their ancestry.
Huh you have a different idea of how long it takes to learn basic magic then me.
i kinda imagined that in these sort of worlds you could learn a cantrip or two over the course of an evening with instruction from a mage. i also envision the reason why mages come out of mage college or whatever only to cast first level spells is because the classes are all like purely theoretical or they teach the concepts but don't teach the actual spells.

[CantigThimble]

Huh you have a different idea of how long it takes to learn basic magic then me.
i kinda imagined that in these sort of worlds you could learn a cantrip or two over the course of an evening with instruction from a mage. i also envision the reason why mages come out of mage college or whatever only to cast first level spells is because the classes are all like purely theoretical or they teach the concepts but don't teach the actual spells.

That doesn't make a ton of sense to me unless a significant portion of the population knows magic in your world. I mean, really, who wouldn't pay for an afternoon with a mage to learn prestidigitation and mending?

I've always thought that it would take years to learn how to use even the timiest bit of magic, but after that it's not nearly as difficult to advance your skills.

[JAL_1138]

From the class spell tables, it seems to take several levels to learn a cantrip, taking more time the more cantrips are already known. You typically have to multiclass, take a feat, or use a Magical Secret to learn extras over what your class progression doles out over several levels. They may not take spell slots, but apparently they're even trickier than leveled spells to figure out. An Eldritch Knight takes ten levels to learn a third one.

[RickAllison]

That doesn't make a ton of sense to me unless a significant portion of the population knows magic in your world. I mean, really, who wouldn't pay for an afternoon with a mage to learn prestidigitation and mending?

I've always thought that it would take years to learn how to use even the timiest bit of magic, but after that it's not nearly as difficult to advance your skills.

I kind of saw Magic Initiate as essentially taking night classes for a year or two. A layperson performing custodial duties for a chapel in exchange for getting to sit in on the cleric rites, a hunter who studies the Druids at work, or the Mage College's janitor who sits in on lectures when he isn't needed. I kind of want to make a magic janitor now...

[Spellbreaker26]

This brings up an interesting point. We know why Wizards hate Sorcs - Sorcs can do it naturally, but sloppily, which drives Wizards nuts.

But what do Clerics think of Warlocks? (Including non-evil Warlocks?) They are both empowered, but has the Warlock chosen an easy path to power in a similar way and would a cleric find that distasteful?

[Newtonsolo313]

From the class spell tables, it seems to take several levels to learn a cantrip, taking more time the more cantrips are already known. You typically have to multiclass, take a feat, or use a Magical Secret to learn extras over what your class progression doles out over several levels. They may not take spell slots, but apparently they're even trickier than leveled spells to figure out. An Eldritch Knight takes ten levels to learn a third one.
... why would anyone be a spellcaster then because martial characters don't take nearly as long.

This brings up an interesting point. We know why Wizards hate Sorcs - Sorcs can do it naturally, but sloppily, which drives Wizards nuts.

But what do Clerics think of Warlocks? (Including non-evil Warlocks?) They are both empowered, but has the Warlock chosen an easy path to power in a similar way and would a cleric find that distasteful?
Clerics probably hate warlocks guts not out of jealousy but because they are warlocks, they are literally dealing with the devil

I kind of saw Magic Initiate as essentially taking night classes for a year or two. A layperson performing custodial duties for a chapel in exchange for getting to sit in on the cleric rites, a hunter who studies the Druids at work, or the Mage College's janitor who sits in on lectures when he isn't needed. I kind of want to make a magic janitor now...
i could see that. spell book is a few bits of crumpled paper that hes got stuck in his back pocket, brooms got a handle made from a wizards staff that no one wanted, got the spell components in his jacket pocket

That doesn't make a ton of sense to me unless a significant portion of the population knows magic in your world. I mean, really, who wouldn't pay for an afternoon with a mage to learn prestidigitation and mending?

I've always thought that it would take years to learn how to use even the timiest bit of magic, but after that it's not nearly as difficult to advance your skills.
maybe magic is like a trade secret where you might be able to find someone to teach you but its difficult and a way to get attention from mages who don't want you edging into their territory or whatever
:smallsigh:
honestly i do not get or like the "magic takes forever to learn" concept its the sort of thing that makes a setting feel unfair, where there are these guys who can kill you with a mere thought, you wanna be like them well sucks to be you. it also sets the setting up for quadratic wizards and linear fighters where you start off with one guy who cant do jack and another guy who can murder dudes with swords. some settings even manage to make it work with wizardry being easy to learn. i mean for gods sake your just waving your hands around how hard can it be. i mean maybe its just that i prefer a certain type of high magic setting but i guess that sort of setting is harder to do in d&d where even cantrips can turn the tide of a battle. i mean its possible to reliably scale the effect a spell will have in a game in some systems without being a genius in that sort of thing, d&d not so much.

[CantigThimble]

i mean for gods sake your just waving your hands around how hard can it be

I've always thought that the hand movements and incantations were just the visual part, the far more important part is mental and that's the part you need to train for. If it was just waving your hands and saying a word or two then there would be very little room for skill differences between mages. This is why I don't like Harry Potter, dueling makes basically no sense. The Kingkiller chronicles have a much better magic system. Overtly it just involves saying a short phrase, but there are elaborate mental gymnastics and lots of willpower required to make the words actually do anything.

[Newtonsolo313]

I've always thought that the hand movements and incantations were just the visual part, the far more important part is mental and that's the part you need to train for. If it was just waving your hands and saying a word or two then there would be very little room for skill differences between mages. This is why I don't like Harry Potter, dueling makes basically no sense. The Kingkiller chronicles have a much better magic system. Overtly it just involves saying a short phrase, but there are elaborate mental gymnastics and lots of willpower required to make the words actually do anything.
so... essentially how shouts work for everybody else in skyrim
but yeah there are a myriad of different ways you can make a magic system work, harry potter magic though does contain a bit of fridge logic(why doesn't every duel just start with one trying to disarm the other, why don't they have like a strap)

[JAL_1138]

IRL it takes years of training to be good with most medieval/renaissance weapons. Longbow archers have to train for strength for quite a long time just to be able to draw the bow properly. Learning sword techniques takes quite a lot of practice for each fighting style (saber, longsword, backsword, etc. all have multiple manuals and each takes considerable study). So the amount of study (not all of it may be formal study, but I'm counting practice and/or other experiences such as military service or a life of crime) for martial characters to be experts at what they do isn't massively different than for a spellcaster; a Monk or Fighter may have started training as early as what we might call middle-school age to get where they are when they start their adventuring career.

Getting good at something takes time. Whether it's being good at stabbing people with a pointy metal implement or setting them on fire with magic, it takes training and practice.

Except for the Warlock, who went down to the crossroads and sold their soul in exchange for ability, and for the Sorcerer, who had the right genetics.

[Newtonsolo313]

IRL it takes years of training to be good with most medieval/renaissance weapons. Longbow archers have to train for strength for quite a long time just to be able to draw the bow properly. Learning sword techniques takes quite a lot of practice for each fighting style (saber, longsword, backsword, etc. all have multiple manuals and each takes considerable study). So the amount of study (not all of it may be formal study, but I'm counting practice and/or other experiences such as military service or a life of crime) for martial characters to be experts at what they do isn't massively different than for a spellcaster; a Monk or Fighter may have started training as early as what we might call middle-school age to get where they are when they start their adventuring career.

Getting good at something takes time. Whether it's being good at stabbing people with a pointy metal implement or setting them on fire with magic, it takes training and practice.

Except for the Warlock, who went down to the crossroads and sold their soul in exchange for ability, and for the Sorcerer, who had the right genetics.

but level one characters aren't actually good at stuff they die to tripping over an exposed wire and other **** like that.

[JAL_1138]

but level one characters aren't actually good at stuff they die to tripping over an exposed wire and other **** like that.

They're good enough to have a class and level instead of an NPC statblock, and a background such as a career criminal, a grizzled military veteran, an experienced mercenary, or a respected sage. Level 1 adventurers already have more training/experience and ability than most people.

[Kane0]

Warlocks.

Just look at their mechanics. They get the best damage cantrip, they are the only caster class that gets short rest casting, their spellcasting isn't like anyone else's, they get two subclass-esque options (pact and boon) plus they get invocations to boot, on top of d8 HP and the same weapons/armor choices as the bard! They get their choice of better-than-anyone ritual casting, better-than-anyone familiar or free gish bits just in case all his regular awesome casting fails him and he has to stoop to the low low depths of swinging a pointy thing at a nasty. Then add to that their main stat is charisma and they have fantastic dippability so of course they're going to be hogging the spotlight. Even bards and sorcerers that would otherwise compete often take warlock dips, as well as some paladins!

But what about the fluff? Well, they get their choice of vanilla or edgelord flavors. They can copy the sorcerer's 'my great grandpappy did X / was Y' shtick while also having the choice of annoying all wizards everywhere with the 'I didn't want to sit in the library so I sold my immortal soul for magicks' option. They get the full range of options, even being able to ignore the patron thing almost entirely if you feel that it would get in the way of your specialness!

[Tanarii]

I think this might be the most special snowflake multiclass. It has got both the mechanical synergy of the palalock and the perfect fluff for a good-aligned fey knight. It is also totally Link from The Legend of Zelda, frequenting both temples and fairy fountains. Too bad you can't have both Pact of the Blade of Evil's Bane and Pact of the Know-It-All Sprite.

I always think of Ancients Paladin / Feylock as a Summer Knight, a la Dresden. Whereas a (typical) Winter Knight would probably be more straight Pact of the Blade Feylock. (Obviously Dresden is atypical.)

Edit: so yeah ... lots of special snowflake in both cases. :smallbiggrin:

[Squiddish]

Just a note for the people who argue that warlocks would be shunned:
The book specifically states that you don't serve the GOO. It might not even know you exist.

[Arkhios]

Answering to the OP: Warlock is hands down the most special snowflake in my opinion.

Every other class (at least those which cast spells; which, OTOH, means every class except barbarian if you count sub-classes) have otherwise a mutual resemblance. But Warlock is just so emo that they just have to have unique snowflake spell slot system so that they don't even combine well with others.

Not saying Warlocks were bad though. Just so obviously different.

[Millstone85]

The book specifically states that you don't serve the GOO. It might not even know you exist.That's supposed to make the GOO scarier. What sort of entity grants a class' worth of magical power without even noticing? What happens when it eventually does? The warlock is the guy carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back, if the thing ran on Gozerian sweat.

I will repeat my view of the goolock as an antidruid. If the Far Realm was made of moral evil, it would have a place among the Lower Planes and in the cosmic balance. Instead, it is made of "things Man was not meant to know" and things that make the very fabric of reality go "greatwheel.exe has stopped working". This gives me an idea for "wings and faces for days" styled angels that would sit at the very edge of the Positive Energy Plane and the Far Realm, full of benevolence and wisdom but unable to directly intervene in the other planes without their mere touch or voice derstroying everything.

Also, funny thing. The 4e PHB described your infernal patron as having been annihilated by Asmodeus, meaning you technically didn't have a patron and your pact was mostly a curse on the lord of the Nine Hells. Way to have a clean conscience, aside from infernal power being inherently evil. Meanwhile, the star pact was much as the GOO is now, leaving only the fey for a conventional patron.

[Dr. Cliché]

Just a note for the people who argue that warlocks would be shunned:
The book specifically states that you don't serve the GOO. It might not even know you exist.

I'm sure it'll come as great comfort to the peasants that you only released the eldritch monstrosities accidentally, rather than because you were actively serving them. :smallwink:

[Millstone85]

I'm sure it'll come as great comfort to the peasants that you only released the eldritch monstrosities accidentally, rather than because you were actively serving them. :smallwink:No, the real comfort is that the eldritch monstrosities themselves probably don't mean any harm and are just taking pictures, asking for directions and/or throwing peanuts at you. Too bad it makes you taste the color sol and grow tentacles.

Edit: Mulling over my idea for weird angels, I have a newfound interest in the Undying Light from UA.

[KorvinStarmast]

Why does this thread exist?

Why would you want to participate in a thread gratifying a myopic point of view? Two words: Drizzt Do'Urden.

Gonna have to throw my hat in the ring for Warlock. Oh no, you've made a dark and aloof character who gets their power from a dark deal...
Made a half elf arch fey warlock, pact of the chain, pixie familiar. Background was performer (as I was thinking about MC to bard later) and I ended up with party face. Raised by elven mother but run out of the village by the elven elders due to the obviousness of my human blood. (So I ran away to join the circus, first invocation choice was speak with animals) and so on.

Nothing dark and emo about it. Fun. Was party face in a few situations, in a few others hung back and let the Paladin handle party face.

And then the campaign ended due to the DM going back to college.

[Giegue]

People are saying sorcerer for being born with their powers and warlocks for being edgelord, but remember warlocks still need to seek out their patrons usually. So why not combine the best of both worlds and go with a shadow sorcerer? Think about it? Your basicly the ultimate special snowflake and have an excuse to be the ultimate edgelord.

You where born with the power to command shadow, marked from birth as a champion of darkness and evil. Society shuned and abused you due to this, so you turned on them and made them know your pain. In a blind rage you unleashed your sorcererous powers for the first time, slaughtering your village, your parrents, friends and at least one cute puppy in a bloody mass murder. With nowhere left to turn you now adventure, haunted yet empowered by your history of violence and dark potential. Consumed by despair and rage, you vow to show this unfair world the meaning of pain and the power of the dark!

See, Shadow Sorcerers really have the best of both worlds...Specialness and EDGE.