Lorewise, what are the Raven Queen Warlocks?

[Marcloure]

The Raven Queen is a god, she has clerics, not warlocks. No? As far as I can understand, when someone pledge service to a god, he become his cleric or paladin (faith or oath). Only when someone forges with a powerful entity a pact, contract or arrangement, he becomes a warlock.
So, what am I missing here? How can someone gain a power from a god that is not divine, not through service and faith, but through a pact? Ok, they could make a contract with a god. But then, why the heck would the Raven Queen not want clerics and paladins, but warlocks that can just run away with the powers she gave them? Why would she accept doing contracts, and not requiring faithful devotion?

[lunaticfringe]

I always thought the Raven Queen was Wee Jas. Most of her power got lost when she died & was reborn.

The 4e lore is that she was a Greater Power(or at least more powerful) died, resurrected, and her true name was wiped from multiverse.

Maybe she doesn't have the juice for that many Clerics anymore. Warlocks are the next best thing, I think. Maybe if you prove yourself as a Lock you get the option for Cleric Magic?

[Millstone85]

The Raven Queen is a goddess in the 4e default setting, Nentir Vale.

I am not sure what sort of lore they are now creating for 5e core books. In this version, the Raven Queen might just be "a mysterious being who rules the Shadowfell from a palace of ice deep within that dread realm".

And I still think no patron should be named after a specific character, especially when it would be so easy to call this one "the Reaper".

[JackPhoenix]

Lorewise, what are the Raven Queen Warlocks?

A mistake.

[Mjolnirbear]

Just because a god typically requires service to provide spells, does not mean he won't grant some knowledge to a creature he finds interesting.

Warlock patrons are typically non-gods probably to distinguish them from clerics but there's no overt rule that this must be the case. Great Old Ones are certainly strong enough to be deities. Lloth is both a deity and a demon. And Mab, Queen of Air and Darkness, or Titania, Queen of the Summer Court, should be gods and would be if it weren't for Faerun's ridiculous lore.

There is no reason the Raven Queen can't be both god and patron both. It's certainly more logical than an intelligent weapon.

[Spore]

Classes are mechanical constructs that don't exist ingame. As for Raven Queen Warlocks, I feel they are just devout to her with a more fitting spell list. Spells like Hex and Armor of Agathys feel fitting with her which accelerate the inevitable death or enforce her cold theming than Spells like Sanctuary, Cure Wounds or Sacred Flame which protect, heal and peruse fire.

[Kuulvheysoon]

RAW, the Undying Court of Eberron can be both a Clerical god and a Warlock Patron (see the PHB for the former, SCAG for the latter).

[Unoriginal]

The Raven Queen is a god, she has clerics, not warlocks. No? As far as I can understand, when someone pledge service to a god, he become his cleric or paladin (faith or oath). Only when someone forges with a powerful entity a pact, contract or arrangement, he becomes a warlock.
So, what am I missing here? How can someone gain a power from a god that is not divine, not through service and faith, but through a pact? Ok, they could make a contract with a god. But then, why the heck would the Raven Queen not want clerics and paladins, but warlocks that can just run away with the powers she gave them? Why would she accept doing contracts, and not requiring faithful devotion?


A being can be both a deity and a Warlock's patron. Asmodeus is both, for exemple.

Also, no, pledging service to a god does not make you a Cleric, let alone a Paladin, in 5e.

You become a Cleric when the deity in question select you as their chosen one. Most of a god's clergy is not composed of Clerics.

And Paladins do not get their powers from gods, in this edition.

[Millstone85]

But assuming they are transferring the shadow goddess mostly unchanged from 4e Nentir Vale lore, only now she is lawful neutral as per the 5e DMG... It is possible she would prefer a contract to devotion. More rules, less feelings. Teaching/infusing the power might also turn the person into a creature of shadow, more than a divine connection would.

Browsing Heroes of Shadow, I see some interesting things. First, there is the plot device called the Raven Queen's whisper.
When a creature under the Raven Queen's watch faces mortal peril, she sometimes reaches forth and offers to delay its death. This offer is made only out of self-interest. A creature that accepts the Raven Queen's offer of assistance is bound to her will, at least for a time. The debt is irrevocable and undeniable. That's a very patron-like thing to do. Then, there is the paragon path called ravenkin.
From time to time, the Raven Queen's gaze lingers on a mortal soul whose courage and devotion sparks her cold heart. To these mortals she sends a special boon--a raven-shaped shadow whose appearance is a sign of her favor. This raven works a lot like the one from UA, and might be the direct inspiration. Interestingly, this is just the opposite of what I said earlier about rules and feelings. With this fluff, you are like a favored soul, or Susan Sto Helit from Discworld. You are making the reaper care for the harvest, aww.

[DracoKnight]

You are making the reaper care for the harvest, aww.

Actually...f*ck...I like that.

[Chunkosaurus]

I just think of it as someone with a desire to fight the undead without the proper tools, so the Raven Queen would be very interested in giving her power to such a person. Why not a cleric? Not all are suited to the life of a cleric.

[Dudewithknives]

Mike Mearls' Mary Sue project...

[KorvinStarmast]

A mistake. That got me chuckling.

Mike Mearls' Mary Sue project... *Snort*
You guys need to take this show on the road. :smallbiggrin:

[DracoKnight]

Mike Mearls' Mary Sue project...

How does the Raven Queen make for Mary Sues?

[Temperjoke]

One thing to consider when you're talking about warlocks and their "pacts" (which don't actually have to be pacts, according to PHB on GOO warlocks), is that there is usually a reason that the powerful being is willing to make a deal with the petitioning warlock. Isn't the Raven Queen usually represented as not acting like the other gods, not managing a portfolio like other gods, but over a certain circumstance? That difference could actually be why she doesn't have normal clerics, since she doesn't have a portfolio she's not allowed by the rules that bind deities. So instead she makes pacts with individuals who purposes and desires align with her goals.

I mean, this is all speculation, since the Raven Queen isn't officially in 5e yet.

[Dudewithknives]

How does the Raven Queen make for Mary Sues?

The entire Raven Queen concept was MM 4th edition Mary Sue project.

[alchahest]

The entire Raven Queen concept was MM 4th edition Mary Sue project.

Can you please be more specific? A lot of people like the flavour of a neutral or even caring god of death, what is Mary Sue about a class feature like this? Is it more, or less mary sue than giving wizards things like wish where they can literally do or be whatever they want?

[KorvinStarmast]

One thing to consider when you're talking about warlocks and their "pacts" (which don't actually have to be pacts, according to PHB on GOO warlocks), is that there is usually a reason that the powerful being is willing to make a deal with the petitioning warlock. Isn't the Raven Queen usually represented as not acting like the other gods, not managing a portfolio like other gods, but over a certain circumstance? That difference could actually be why she doesn't have normal clerics, since she doesn't have a portfolio she's not allowed by the rules that bind deities. So instead she makes pacts with individuals who purposes and desires align with her goals.

I mean, this is all speculation, since the Raven Queen isn't officially in 5e yet. I like how you put that together, and hope something like this is her final form. Crawford was just on a tweet last week about the new book where he states clearly that he was always wanting to put more "fey" stuff into the game. Druid Circle of Dreams was one of his talking points, but I suspect that Raven Queen likewise got extra love.

[Regitnui]

I was going to say something about her not necessarily being a goddess, but...


With this fluff, you are like a favored soul, or Susan Sto Helit from Discworld. You are making the reaper care for the harvest, aww.

This is pretty much my opinion. The Raven Queen is, to me, like Death of the Endless; a caretaker of souls who pass on. The Raven Queen is a spirit or being that keeps the peace of death. Those who would take dead souls, extend their own lives, or practice necromancy attract her anger,.and that's why she empowers warlocks.


How does the Raven Queen make for Mary Sues?

The Raven Queen is a Mary Sue, I think. That's what I understand anyway.

[Unoriginal]

How is the Raven Queen a Mary Sue?

"Edgy" maybe, but she's neither ubber-powerful to the point of eclipsing everything else when she's involved, not impossible to foil, nor presented as flawless and Always Right (TM).

[Regitnui]

How is the Raven Queen a Mary Sue?

"Edgy" maybe, but she's neither ubber-powerful to the point of eclipsing everything else when she's involved, not impossible to foil, nor presented as flawless and Always Right (TM).

I don't have the same opinion. She's one of the few things I like in 4e.

[alchahest]

I think I must have missed some of the lore in 4e, I didn't think it was edgy at all? unless like, wearing black and having a raven familiar counts as edgy, but I mean Odin had TWO ravens and even performed self mutilation. If the raven queen is edgy, Odin's far edgier.

[Unoriginal]

I don't have the same opinion. She's one of the few things I like in 4e.


If you like her, why are you insulting her?



I think I must have missed some of the lore in 4e, I didn't think it was edgy at all? unless like, wearing black and having a raven familiar counts as edgy, but I mean Odin had TWO ravens and even performed self mutilation. If the raven queen is edgy, Odin's far edgier.

Yes? No one is claiming the contrary.

Also notice how my post had edgy between " ", to imply a degree of irony.

[alchahest]

okay bad example, haha.

but I just a: don't see where the raven queen is "edgy" and b: don't really see a problem with "edginess" as a concept (though I don't think it applies to the Raven Queen)

[RickAllison]

It has been a while since I read up on RQ, but I seem to remember her having killed a god to usurp his position, but she was relegated by the other gods to only protecting the boundary of life and death so she couldn't continue amassing power. That could be reason for her being a Mary Sue or edgy.

[Regitnui]

If you like her, why are you insulting her?

I was trying to explain what the other poster said. I did say I like her, and directly compared her to Death of the Endless, one of my favourite DC comic characters.

[Unoriginal]

okay bad example, haha.

but I just a: don't see where the raven queen is "edgy"

Dark colors, ravens, crusading against undeath while granting some undead-related powers. It's not much, and mostly meant as parody, but I'm sure you've heard about the stereotype of the dude who wants to play Dark McDarkblood, the tortured brooding dark anti-hero cursed with dark powers and who darkly murder people.



and b: don't really see a problem with "edginess" as a concept (though I don't think it applies to the Raven Queen)

Depends how you go about it, but generally when you call something "edgy" you're implying the guy is trying way too hard to have an ultra-dark-and-amoral character because it's "cool".

That's why there is a difference between Batman and, say, Coldsteel the Hedgehog.


I was trying to explain what the other poster said. I did say I like her, and directly compared her to Death of the Endless, one of my favourite DC comic characters.

I'm not sure I get it, sorry. Just to make sure, you are aware that Mary Sue is an insult, right?

So if you say that you think the RQ is a Mary Sue, it means you think of her in derogatory terms.

[Regitnui]

Dark colors, ravens, crusading against undeath while granting some undead-related powers. It's not much, and mostly meant as parody, but I'm sure you've heard about the stereotype of the dude who wants to play Dark McDarkblood, the tortured brooding dark anti-hero cursed with dark powers and who darkly murder people.

It's OK. You can say "Drizzt-clone" here.


I'm not sure I get it, sorry. Just to make sure, you are aware that Mary Sue is an insult, right?

So if you say that you think the RQ is a Mary Sue, it means you think of her in derogatory terms.

I don't think the Raven Queen is a Mary Sue.

Right, now that that's cleared up, I'm going to restate that I was trying to explain a previous poster's opinion while holding the opposite one. I was trying to understand the opposing opinion. Make sense?

[Rebonack]

The entire Raven Queen concept was MM 4th edition Mary Sue project.

At least it isn't as bad as Elminster and Mystra.

[Millstone85]

I do not have strong feelings about the character, but I would welcome the reintroduction of the concept that most souls are first drawn to the Shadowfell before they get to journey toward the Outer Planes.

Right now, the 5e Shadowfell seems to be just made of grey reflections of places in the Material, plus the Domains of Dread. Ravenloft campaigns probably ignore the former, and other tables might not use this Shadowfell at all.

But a proper land of the dead, doubling as a purgatory of sort... Adventurers could come across long ghostly processions. They could find a house that functions like a miniature domain of dread, a family tragedy being replayed over and over. They could meet an NPC who is like Tim Burton's take on Charon.

If this is done through Raven Queen lore, then cool.

[Llama513]

The Raven Queen is a god, she has clerics, not warlocks. No? As far as I can understand, when someone pledge service to a god, he become his cleric or paladin (faith or oath). Only when someone forges with a powerful entity a pact, contract or arrangement, he becomes a warlock.
So, what am I missing here? How can someone gain a power from a god that is not divine, not through service and faith, but through a pact? Ok, they could make a contract with a god. But then, why the heck would the Raven Queen not want clerics and paladins, but warlocks that can just run away with the powers she gave them? Why would she accept doing contracts, and not requiring faithful devotion?

It never says she doesn't require faithful devotion, she does, it just that the powers she grants don't usually manifest as those of a cleric since they are drawn from a very different source then the usual planes where the gods live, its the same as having a pact of the fiend warlock with Asmodeus, he is a god but his granted power can manifest in a very different way to the usual method of other gods, you can still play as a cleric of the Raven Queen its just that this is not the usual way her granted power manifests

[Regitnui]

I do not have strong feelings about the character, but I would welcome the reintroduction of the concept that most souls are first drawn to the Shadowfell before they get to journey toward the Outer Planes.

Right now, the 5e Shadowfell seems to be just made of grey reflections of places in the Material, plus the Domains of Dread. Ravenloft campaigns probably ignore the former, and other tables might not use this Shadowfell at all.

But a proper land of the dead, doubling as a purgatory of sort... Adventurers could come across long ghostly processions. They could find a house that functions like a miniature domain of dread, a family tragedy being replayed over and over. They could meet an NPC who is like Tim Burton's take on Charon.

If this is done through Raven Queen lore, then cool.

Sounds like you want Dolurrh. It is not a reward. It is not a punishment. It just is. All souls go there, then gradually fade into shades and then disappear entirely. Mortals who go there risk the same fate. Some creatures who protect the dead and others who prey on the dead live there, but it's mostly just grey, barren wasteland filled with endless shuffling shades on their way to whatever happens after, whether it's an afterlife, reincarnation, or oblivion.

[imanidiot]

Classes are mechanical constructs that don't exist ingame. As for Raven Queen Warlocks, I feel they are just devout to her with a more fitting spell list. Spells like Hex and Armor of Agathys feel fitting with her which accelerate the inevitable death or enforce her cold theming than Spells like Sanctuary, Cure Wounds or Sacred Flame which protect, heal and peruse fire.

Clerics are devoted followers of the Raven Queen. Warlocks aren't necessarily, they've just entered into a bargain to gain power. Clerics are loyal folloers, warlocks are mercenaries.

[Unoriginal]

They could meet an NPC who is like Tim Burton's take on Charon.

Please no, Charon got enough botched portrayals already.

Tim Burton would make him some kind of disapproving anti-"character who is different" figure or some kind of one-joke comedic relief.


Clerics are devoted followers of the Raven Queen. Warlocks aren't necessarily, they've just entered into a bargain to gain power. Clerics are loyal folloers, warlocks are mercenaries.

Clerics are chosen ones, warlocks are custommers.

[Temperjoke]

I was trying to understand the opposing opinion. Make sense?

pfft, on this forum? :smallbiggrin:

[Millstone85]

Sounds like you want Dolurrh.For better or worse, the 4e Eberron Campaign Guide was very clear on which plane of the setting corresponded to which plane of the edition's default cosmology: "the Astral Sea, also called the Sea of Siberys", "Dolurrh, also called the Shadowfell", "Thelanis, also called the Feywild", "the Elemental Chaos, also called the Chaos of Khyber", "Eberron's Far Realm is called Xoriat" (p261-263).

As far as I can tell, it was actually a pretty good match. The book just had to explain that the Astral Sea and the Elemental Chaos were more closely connected to the mortal world, respectively through the planet's ring and underdark. That and...
whatever happens after, whether it's an afterlife, reincarnation, or oblivion. was a lot more hypothetical than in default 4e lore.

Meanwhile, the 4e Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide would describe how the goddess Shar made her own version of Toril from what was left of the Plane of Shadow and the Negative Energy Plane, and that was the Shadowfell. Also yeah, it would compete for souls with the Fugue Plane of Kelemvor, whatever.

Now that didn't capture the Nentir Vale flavor at all. Alas, neither does the description of the Shadowfell in 5e. The place is the darkest black, a sickly white or a sad grey, and that's pretty much all there is about it.

[Regitnui]

Now that didn't capture the Nentir Vale flavor at all. Alas, neither does the description of the Shadowfell in 5e. The place is the darkest black, a sickly white or a sad grey, and that's pretty much all there is about it.

That's why I say that any planes book should handle multiple models of the planes. Give the inevitable Forgotten Realms section the Great Wheel/Elemental Planes (which also works for Athas and every other 2e setting), then a section on the World Axis/Tree taking Nentir Vale, as the only campaign setting to use it, as default, and then Orbiting Planes with Eberron as their default flavour for that chapter.

They can even have it written in-game by a Sigil native who visited the campaign worlds in question to see these different planes. It would also (finally) open up the (adjective redacted) Adventurer's League to somewhere other than Fantasy-default Realms and start showing off the variety D&D can handle. Imagine getting not one but three different interpretations. And three different interpretations, not "Hey, time for another adventure on Toril! Oh, you Eberron/Greyhawk/Dark Sun peasants can adapt it like this."

[Arkhios]

A being can be both a deity and a Warlock's patron. Asmodeus is both, for exemple.

Also, no, pledging service to a god does not make you a Cleric, let alone a Paladin, in 5e.

You become a Cleric when the deity in question select you as their chosen one. Most of a god's clergy is not composed of Clerics.

And Paladins do not get their powers from gods, in this edition.

Paladins (except for 4e) have never gained their powers from gods. The misunderstanding may be due to (Not-so-)Forgotten Realms being so common and well known, because the setting has traditionally had more strict rules about worship than most other settings.

But yes. Worshipping a god does not make one a cleric (or paladin). A cleric is the chosen servant with special connection to a god/-dess.

Actually, a good example of this could be inadvertently(?) Cadderly Bonaduce. He's a chosen of Deneir, and repeatedly referred to as a miracle-worker. If I'm not entirely mistaken from the other books prior, other priests have had a bit questionable powers (if any) while Cadderly really can make miracles happen unlike most priests in his community - and elsewhere.

In 5th edition, Cadderly would clearly be a Cleric while the other priests only Acolytes (background only) at best.

[Regitnui]

Essentially:
Cleric - Power from faith
Warlock - Power from theft/loan
Paladin - power from oath
Druid - power from nature
Wizard - power from studying
Bard - power from performance
Sorcerer - power from lucky genetics

[Arkhios]

Essentially:
Cleric - Power from faith
Warlock - Power from theft/loan
Paladin - power from oath conviction
Druid - power from nature
Wizard - power from studying
Bard - power from performance
Sorcerer - power from lucky genetics

A good summary; just a minor nitpick. Oath is made after gaining those powers. Paladin gains his powers from conviction (also backed by RAW).

[Millstone85]

Essentially:
Cleric - Power from faith
Warlock - Power from theft/loan
Paladin - power from oath
Druid - power from nature
Wizard - power from studying
Bard - power from performance
Sorcerer - power from lucky geneticsI would say...

Power from faith:
* in a deity - cleric
* in a cause - paladin
* in nature - druid, ranger

Power from practice:
* of the craft - wizard
* of the art - bard
* of a quirk - sorcerer
* of a loan - warlock

But that loan, or theft, is the most difficult to understand. Your power comes from another being, yet you are explicitly an arcane spellcaster. Is it all about secrets, like forbidden wizardry? Have you been infused with something, like transplanted sorcery? A little of both?

[Arkhios]

I would say...

Power from faith:
* in a deity - cleric
* in a cause - paladin
* in nature - druid, ranger

Power from practice:
* of the craft - wizard
* of the art - bard
* of a quirk - sorcerer
* of a loan - warlock

But that loan, or theft, is the most difficult to understand. Your power comes from another being, yet you are explicitly an arcane spellcaster. Is it all about secrets, like forbidden wizardry? Have you been infused with something, like transplanted sorcery? A little of both?

That's a better summary!

I think I would change loan/theft with a bind. It's a bit more universal while the end result is the same. Your powers aren't your own and are bound to the source in one way or another.

Ok, sorry. I've posted about things slightly unrelated to the topic so here goes:

Mechanically Raven Queen Warlocks are Odins! (What's with the obsession with ravens; also, relations to the afterlife such as Valhalla)

[Forrestfire]

Paladins (except for 4e) have never gained their powers from gods. The misunderstanding may be due to (Not-so-)Forgotten Realms being so common and well known, because the setting has traditionally had more strict rules about worship than most other settings.

Minor nitpick, but even in 4e, paladins didn't gain their powers from gods. In fact, Nentyr Vale, while they did follow gods, they were actually much more like warlocks:


Paladins are not granted their powers directly by their deity, but instead through various rites performed when they first become paladins. Most of these rites involve days of prayer, vigils, tests and trials, and ritual purification followed by a knighting ceremony, but each faith has its own methods. This ceremony of investiture gives a paladin the ability to wield divine powers. Once initiated, the paladin is a paladin forevermore. How justly, honorably, or compassionately the paladin wields those powers from that day forward is up to him, and paladins who stray too far from the tenets of their faith are punished by other members of the faithful.

Clerics as well, actually, were similar:


As a cleric, your deity does not directly grant you powers. Instead, your ordination or investiture as a cleric grants you the ability to wield divine powers. Clerics are usually formally ordained by existing clerics who perform a special ritual to do so, but on rare occasions a deity moves to directly ordain a worthy worshiper without any sort of priestly hierarchy involved. What you do with your powers once you are ordained is up to you, although if you flagrantly and openly defy your deity's tenets, you quickly earn the enmity of the faithful.

It's something important to note here; 4e divine classes drew their power from their ordination, instead of getting packets of spells or power each day from their deity. A "chosen one" was simply a god stepping in to directly ordain someone—but even then, like a warlock, the power was very much "no takesies-backsies" for the god, and the mortal was not supernaturally beholden to them. I personally enjoyed that concept quite a bit, though it is decidedly different from the clerics of other editions.

Regardless, though, it makes a lot of sense to me that the 5e Raven Queen favors warlocks. It's the same sort of empowerment she did in 4e, after all. One-and-done, and then they follow her by their own will, rather than for the promise of greater gifts.

[Arkhios]

Minor nitpick, but even in 4e, paladins didn't gain their powers from gods. In fact, Nentyr Vale, while they did follow gods, they were actually much more like warlocks.

Ok, I was mistaken about 4th edition paladins. 4e wasn't really my thing anyway even though I played it (only as a warlord, fighter, ranger, or rogue iirc) in the absence of a better game (and because at the time, the only people I knew who played D&D was me and a few friends of mine, one of which was - and still is - the dedicated DM who wanted to play 4e and the other three had no opinions). Fortunately, Pathfinder came out soon enough.

My point was though, as you inadvertently(?) clarified, that Paladins never gained their powers from gods.

[QuintonBeck]

Others have covered some of my thoughts on this but for me it seems like the Raven Queen, as the goddess strictly over the transitory state of death, doesn't have much to offer a clergy both in ways of divine power and in regards to any sort of decent afterlife. She just isn't drawing in the devout as easily as, say, the god of harvest and bounty who all the peasants and nobles love. She's got to get her mortal agents by offering deals and bending the rules within her domain, sparing a mortal in exchange for their service. People aren't lining up to sign up as servants of the Raven Queen but people are dying every day and she can on occasion manage to talk one of these powerful/promising dying mortals into a pact.

That isn't to say she doesn't have any clergy or devout followers but she just doesn't have the branding to reach prime godhood worship and so augments her power with pact-making. Essentially she isn't something a lot of people probably like to think about but then, all of a sudden, she's the only thing you're thinking about.