So a player of mine is planning on playing a Hex Blade

[Trey Bright]

I'm planning a game for this summer, its my first game so I want time to prepare, and a player of mine had an...exotic idea for a character. He loves anime and wanted an ichigo/naruto stylized character. I thought that the path of the Hex Blade is the best decision for what he wanted with the Warlock. He want's a character that has a tie to a creature or beast that is bound to him. He also wants the ability to manifest a weapon from his very essence/his soul. I thought that the blade pact warlock with hex blade patron would be the best way to handle this. Have the sword be "bound to him" because the creature or being that is making the weapon sentient is tied to him. Use that as a reason for his ability to make his pact weapon just appear and disappear at will. My only issue with this is now I need a creature or monster that I can say is bound to the blade that he'll have a chance to befriend. My original idea was a monster I'd been planning on hombrewing up for a while. It was going to be another warlock that sought supreme power. He concocted a ritual that would allow him to take the bodies of two different creatures, and combine them in to one being, then place himself in to that body and control it. It was going to be the body of a Oni and Rakshasa. My only problem with this is this character is very very very power hungry and there is no chance that this being could be placated by the puny mortal that he has to rely on temporarily until he's strong enough to break the bonds that bind him and free himself.

Now my player has expressed interest in becoming a lycanthrope as well. He said he'd like to be a weretiger. Should I just say that he has a rakshasa bound to him (i'm not telling him what the creature is) or what should I do?

Backstory: this being/monster rampaged through player's hometown and basically leveled it. for the sake of the story, I'm going to say he killed everyone except for the player and placed a portion of his power/soul in to the player as a child to make him a psuedo phylactery in case something ever happened to him. He was later stopped by a group of paladins...kinda. He was powerful enough that they only managed to bind him to a sword before dying, leaving him trapped inside of this blade. One way or another, the kid, now young man, and the blade are reunited. The creature/being/monster/person/sword recognized his missing power/soul/spirit inside the young man and formed a patron:warlock bond with him as a hexblade:pact of the blade. Now the young man adventures around trying as hard as he can to be a hero to protect others from suffering the same fate that he did. (he is going to be CG though so he's not going to be a real goody two shoes, if he feels the need of many out weigh the few, he'll leave the few to their fate) the issue is the original beasty I had cooked up to be the being/monster in the sword is not the type of being to be placated and just lie back and be fine with being sealed away until the player dies. He's the type of being who's going to want to escape and be free to do as he pleases again.

Now is there any kind of monster or creature that I could use that feels like they would fit in to this equation? Something that would be uruly at first but then possibly be willing to wait out the players life span before trying to break free of it's binding? Something that would have the power to rampage through a town and mortally wound a group of paladins before being put down?

Or should I try and work out with the player a way he and this creature that I've already cooked up could get along? Oh, and if anyone is curious, the reason for the rampage is the warlock just finished his fusion ritual and was curious as to how strong he had become. He was testing his power and a group of paladins (and clerics, maybe a wizard as well) happened to be nearby and rode to the rescue.

We are waiting for XGtE to officially come out before actually building a character sheet, but this is just what I know from the UA and the video put out on the D&D Beyond YouTube channel.

[RedMage125]

I think Lycanthropy is too powerful an option. Weretiger are traditionally one of the most powerful variants, as well.

BUT, the rakshasa thing...I like the cut of your jib. If it's the "man-tiger" aesthetic he's looking for, you could let him be a tabaxi (Volo's Guide), and the flavor could be that he used to be human, but the result of the pact with this bound rakshasa left a permanent influence on him that changed him into a cat-like humanoid. If it's the transformation he's looking for, it could be that he still looks human when not in combat, but when fighting/fleeing/enraged (basically whenever his adrenaline is up), the feline features spring forth, whether he wants them to or not. Don't worry about stat modifiers if you go this route, just state that the more salient feline features (like claws) don't function in "human" form. I'd say just have him be always in full cat-mode for simplicity's sake, but you want to make the game fun for your player, so give him the option, I guess.

I think your Hexblade idea works great, so I have nothing to add on that note.

[Trey Bright]

I like that! Thanks so much!

[Malifice]

Dude.

Youre overthinking it. The Patron can be as involved or not as you feel like. Just wing it.

As for lycanthrope, yeah nah. Not a chance in hell. Dont do it.

He wants to go Tiger person, he can go a bloody Tabaxi (with some minor refluffing). As a Warlock he has access to Mask of Many faces, so can assume Human form at will.

And I think you're confusing the player and the character who 'wants power'. Its the Player that wants it, not the character.

Dont entertain him.

[Quoz]

Power with a price.

It doesn't sound like the warlock and patron have the same goals. Think about how the Patron benefits from the relationship - and how it will try to influence its host as the bond between them grows stronger. you could eventually come to a crisis point when the patron gets free.

As for the race, there were several varieties of shifter in the Ebberon UA that would fit.

[Honest Tiefling]

It's your first game, so I'd go the Tabaxi route. Perhaps you could give him an at-will ability to change between a few forms which are basically him in varying degrees of tigerish with no mechanical benefit but look really monstrous.

If your player objects, tell him that you are worried about the balance of the game and that you need him to do something simple. Most players will be understanding of that.

[Malifice]

It's your first game, so I'd go the Tabaxi route. Perhaps you could give him an at-will ability to change between a few forms which are basically him in varying degrees of tigerish with no mechanical benefit but look really monstrous.

PC is a warlock. He gets Mask of Many faces [Alter Self] at will at 2nd level.

Ive been thinking, instead of a Tabaxi there are also Shifters from Eberron UA that would work a treat.

He really wants to [shape of: a Tiger!] point him to the Moon Druid class.

Only needs two levels in Druid to do it 2/ short rest.

Special Snowflake
Shifter (Razorclaw)
Druid (Moon) 2/ Hexblade - Pact of the ???? (X)
S 8
D 14
C 13
I 10
W 14
Ch 15

Works perfectly fine. He cant turn into a full blown Tiger at 1st level, and can only assume Half tiger form (Shifter racial shifting trait).

After a level or two in Hexblade, he jumps over to Druid for 2 levels and masters his inner beast, being finally able to turn in a Tiger.

[alchahest]

I like Shifter as an option

Also a shifter barbarian can totem tiger (out of SCAG) and get tigery features both by race and by class, including having the ability to tiger out (gaining resistances and new options for combat)

[Trey Bright]

Power with a price.

It doesn't sound like the warlock and patron have the same goals. Think about how the Patron benefits from the relationship - and how it will try to influence its host as the bond between them grows stronger. you could eventually come to a crisis point when the patron gets free.

As for the race, there were several varieties of shifter in the Ebberon UA that would fit.

The shifter idea is good! I might also try the tebaxi one. Thanks!

My only issuse with the whole crisis between patron and warlock is if the patron does achive his goal and leaves, then my player is left w/o a class. He kinda can't do anything anymore...

[Trey Bright]

PC is a warlock. He gets Mask of Many faces [Alter Self] at will at 2nd level.

Ive been thinking, instead of a Tabaxi there are also Shifters from Eberron UA that would work a treat.

He really wants to [shape of: a Tiger!] point him to the Moon Druid class.

Only needs two levels in Druid to do it 2/ short rest.

Special Snowflake
Shifter (Razorclaw)
Druid (Moon) 2/ Hexblade - Pact of the ???? (X)
S 8
D 14
C 13
I 10
W 14
Ch 15

Works perfectly fine. He cant turn into a full blown Tiger at 1st level, and can only assume Half tiger form (Shifter racial shifting trait).

After a level or two in Hexblade, he jumps over to Druid for 2 levels and masters his inner beast, being finally able to turn in a Tiger.


I like Shifter as an option

Also a shifter barbarian can totem tiger (out of SCAG) and get tigery features both by race and by class, including having the ability to tiger out (gaining resistances and new options for combat)


It's your first game, so I'd go the Tabaxi route. Perhaps you could give him an at-will ability to change between a few forms which are basically him in varying degrees of tigerish with no mechanical benefit but look really monstrous.

If your player objects, tell him that you are worried about the balance of the game and that you need him to do something simple. Most players will be understanding of that.

Thank you so much! I'll have to recheck the shifter from UA and weight it against the tebaxi. We're planning the game for either spring or summer break depending on how much I can get nailed down for the campaign while I'm in school. Y'all are a very helpful bunch! Thanks :D

[Malifice]

My only issuse with the whole crisis between patron and warlock is if the patron does achive his goal and leaves, then my player is left w/o a class. He kinda can't do anything anymore...

Look, I'd approach it a different way.

How about: The PC siphons power from the Patron, without the patrons consent, or ability to stop him. Conversely the Patron hates the PC, but is bound to him, and if the PC dies, so does the Patron.

Link them inexoriably, even if they hate one another. Think the relationship between Elric and Stormbringer (perfect for a Hexblade).

Im sure there are other examples of literarly creatures that hate each other but are bound together.

[Geodude6]

My only issuse [sic] with the whole crisis between patron and warlock is if the patron does achive [sic] his goal and leaves, then my player is left w/o a class. He kinda can't do anything anymore...

I'm not entirely sure warlocks work that way (they definitely don't work that way in my setting). In previous editions, warlocks were an arcane class like wizards or sorcerers. They didn't draw power directly from their patron; the patron imparted "forbidden knowledge" onto the warlock, which let them advance in class levels. A warlock who has fallen out of favor with his patron still retains the warlock class abilities he already had, he just can't gain more levels in warlock. This is opposed to a cleric, who draws power directly from their deity, and loses most if not all of their cleric class abilities if they fall out of favor.

At least that's my understanding.

[Trey Bright]

Look, I'd approach it a different way.

How about: The PC siphons power from the Patron, without the patrons consent, or ability to stop him. Conversely the Patron hates the PC, but is bound to him, and if the PC dies, so does the Patron.

Link them inexoriably, even if they hate one another. Think the relationship between Elric and Stormbringer (perfect for a Hexblade).

Im sure there are other examples of literarly creatures that hate each other but are bound together.

That's kinda what he wanted. His goal was a Naruto-Kurama type bond between him and his patron. He's going hexblade-pact blade so that the sword can be summoned or dismissed at will and he'll draw power from the blade. He also wants the reason for the sword being bound to him is because hes tied to his patron by some form of force, power, or energy or something. Very similar to what you were proposing. I suppose my only hang up is if he is in such a hateful relationship with his patron, I'm not sure I see a way for him and his patron to ever come to an understanding...though, I suppose I'll just have to play that out in game and see how they interact.


I'm not entirely sure warlocks work that way (they definitely don't work that way in my setting). In previous editions, warlocks were an arcane class like wizards or sorcerers. They didn't draw power directly from their patron; the patron imparted "forbidden knowledge" onto the warlock, which let them advance in class levels. A warlock who has fallen out of favor with his patron still retains the warlock class abilities he already had, he just can't gain more levels in warlock. This is opposed to a cleric, who draws power directly from their deity, and loses most if not all of their cleric class abilities if they fall out of favor.

At least that's my understanding.

Hmm. Interesting. I may have to rework my way that this player and his patron interact then. So Warlocks (in your world) are a mix of a cleric/wizard? They gain some knowledge and power from their patron and use that to further their own abilities and studies?

[Malifice]

That's kinda what he wanted. His goal was a Naruto-Kurama type bond between him and his patron. He's going hexblade-pact blade so that the sword can be summoned or dismissed at will and he'll draw power from the blade. He also wants the reason for the sword being bound to him is because hes tied to his patron by some form of force, power, or energy or something. Very similar to what you were proposing. I suppose my only hang up is if he is in such a hateful relationship with his patron, I'm not sure I see a way for him and his patron to ever come to an understanding...though, I suppose I'll just have to play that out in game and see how they interact.

Elric hated Stormbringer as well. And it hated him (driving him to do evil things like kill those he loved).

But the two were co-dependent. Stormbringer needed Elric because he was the eternal champion. Elric needed Stormbriner because he was too weak and anemic without it, and it gave him strength to achieve his goals.

And those two are expressly one of the primary inspirations for the archetype.

[RedMage125]

I'm not entirely sure warlocks work that way (they definitely don't work that way in my setting). In previous editions, warlocks were an arcane class like wizards or sorcerers. They didn't draw power directly from their patron; the patron imparted "forbidden knowledge" onto the warlock, which let them advance in class levels. A warlock who has fallen out of favor with his patron still retains the warlock class abilities he already had, he just can't gain more levels in warlock. This is opposed to a cleric, who draws power directly from their deity, and loses most if not all of their cleric class abilities if they fall out of favor.

At least that's my understanding.

Minor side note, the edition to introduce Warlocks as we now know them, (with variations based off patron) was 4e. And in that same edition, Clerics and Paladins (and Avengers, the Divine Striker) got their powers from the rituals that invested them as Clerics/Paladins/Avengers. They did NOT lose power for "falling out of favor" in that edition. Any repurcussions from "falling out of favor" would have to be in-game consequences (such as being excommunicated from the organization, braded a heretic, etc.), and NOT a loss of class abilities. Invokers (the Divine Controller class) got their power directly from the deity, but there were likewise no rules about "falling from favor" for them, either.

[Trey Bright]

Elric hated Stormbringer as well. And it hated him (driving him to do evil things like kill those he loved).

But the two were co-dependent. Stormbringer needed Elric because he was the eternal champion. Elric needed Stormbriner because he was too weak and anemic without it, and it gave him strength to achieve his goals.

And those two are expressly one of the primary inspirations for the archetype.

Okay, I'll have to do a little research on these two then. Thanks. Let's see...yeah. There's actually a wiki page on Stormbriner. Looks like I got a bit of late night reading to do later on.


Minor side note, the edition to introduce Warlocks as we now know them, (with variations based off patron) was 4e. And in that same edition, Clerics and Paladins (and Avengers, the Divine Striker) got their powers from the rituals that invested them as Clerics/Paladins/Avengers. They did NOT lose power for "falling out of favor" in that edition. Any repurcussions from "falling out of favor" would have to be in-game consequences (such as being excommunicated from the organization, braded a heretic, etc.), and NOT a loss of class abilities. Invokers (the Divine Controller class) got their power directly from the deity, but there were likewise no rules about "falling from favor" for them, either.
Good to know! Thanks :D

[Vaz]

The patron might want to leave but by that stage the warlock is able to exert their own will, binding them to the Warlock. There was a class back in 3.5 who proftied by being able to change up each day what aspect they wished to take by binding aparticular 'fragment' of a creature or deity called a vestige. Perhaps apply the same thing, either having him latch hold and just don't let go, but have the patron occasionally 'take control' (perhaps encouraging certain actions it wouldn't otherwise take), or have it flee, but the warlock able to bind other similar souls to it, and giving story mode of 'lets **** this thingy over now it ****ed me over' : either binding it back or killing it and meeping with the ability to bind different aspects.