when a warlock patron dies

[Torpin]

in session 0 i always tell my parties that sometimes i run other groups in the same world at the same time, and if 1 group seriously affects the world all my other groups will feel the ramifications
I have two concentric campaigns going right now, and one is trying to kill mammon, and the other newer campaign has a warlock who patron is mammon.
should the first succeed im thinking of stripping the warlock of all their warlock powers, until they get accepted by a new patron. I am unsure. i've stripped clerics and paladins of their powers in the past because of actions displeasing their gods, you know cause of things they did. I really need some help with this issue

[Unoriginal]

in session 0 i always tell my parties that sometimes i run other groups in the same world at the same time, and if 1 group seriously affects the world all my other groups will feel the ramifications
I have two concentric campaigns going right now, and one is trying to kill mammon, and the other newer campaign has a warlock who patron is mammon.
should the first succeed im thinking of stripping the warlock of all their warlock powers, until they get accepted by a new patron. I am unsure. i've stripped clerics and paladins of their powers in the past because of actions displeasing their gods, you know cause of things they did. I really need some help with this issue

The basic assumption in 5e is that a Warlock's power is unaffected by the state of the Patron. The Patron gave the Warlock their spark of power, it's a done deal, and it's up to the Warlock to grow said spark.

Some Patrons do add the clause they can take the power back, but it's an extra condition and not something inherent to Warlock-hood.

Aside from that, how likely do you consider the "killing Mammon" plan is to succeed?

[nickl_2000]

Stripping a PC of their powers without the PC doing anything to cause it or being able to stop it is kind of crappy for the player. Sure, you want to take away a Cleric's spells because they did something, fine. The PC has a reason and did something. Take it away because something happened in the world that I didn't know was happening and couldn't stop? Lousy and would make me want to toss the PC off a cliff and re-roll a new character.

[Spiritchaser]

Unless you have an unusual player who is good with this sort of thing, I would be exceptionally reluctant to strip existing powers from a character due to actions of other characters in another campaign.

The nature of the warlock fluff is there to add character depth, not to act as a lever to pry away the mechanics of their class. You have great latitude on the nature of the pact, as well as the consequences of a patron’s demise. I’d fluff that death as an explosion of power and have enough of it end up with the player (for reasons) that they could essentially be fine. They might have to find a new patron to advance further.

[Unoriginal]

Also should be noted that if Mammon dies, Asmodeus will just appoint a different Devil in his place, and said Devil will likely be more than happy to keep Mammon's deals ongoing as long as they're profitable.

Wonder who Mammon's replacement would be, though.

[1Pirate]

As other have said, once a patron gives the warlock powers, they get to keep them(a rather well-known stream played it otherwise).

And it bears repeating, taking away a player’s agency like you’re describing is a terrible thing to do. It’s even worse in this case because not only are you railroading the player, but you’re doing so by indulging the desires of a different set of players, blatantly playing favorites.

What would be a cool move though(if the Mammon plot works) is if you have another Patron immediately step in to honor the PC’s contract, but also wants them to figure out what really happened with Hell’s treasurer.

[Evaar]

Don't take away a PC's abilities unless you have a really, really good idea. Based on the way you wrote your post, it doesn't sound like you think you have a really, really good idea.

[KorvinStarmast]

Lousy and would make me want to toss the PC off a cliff and re-roll a new character. Or, go and hunt down that other party and kill them all (the characters). :smallbiggrin:

Also should be noted that if Mammon dies, Asmodeus will just appoint a different Devil in his place. Why Mammon should not die:
(In other words, DM made it too easy on that other party)

Mammon has minions. Numbers matter in the bounded accuracy system.
The action economy of half of a dozen devils of CR 8-12 also being in the fight, and some of them potentially summoning on other devils, leads me to thinking that the DM isn't fleshing out just how badazz one of the lords of hell really is.
To put it another way:
If Mammon was that easy to take down, by a party of 4-5 level (X) adventurers, the demons would have won the Blood War a long, long time ago.

Secondly: if, to use another patron as an example, The Archfey gets killed by an adventuring party, either the DM doesn't know how to run a powerful Fey, or the Eruption of Fey creatures bursting forth from the Feywild and seeking revenge might just change the nature of reality.

Yeah: think of the damage that 200 pixies can do if they get really mad.

As to stripping player characters' powers: what is your objective in doing this?

Punishment of the Player? Pointless. This is a game we play for fun.

A Divine reaction to the Character doing something way out of line in terms of what the deity the player serves calls for?
OK, now what?
Do you want the player to

roll up a new character
adventure as a commoner
go on a new quest to seek atonement?

How does all of this fit into the overall campaign? If you haven't thought that all the way through, you've most likely made a mistake.

What is the purpose of stripping the character of these powers? Using these powers is about 90% of The Whole Point Of Playing The Game.

[da newt]

If Mammon is killed anywhere but in Hell, he just get's sent home.

Is your other party really going into hell where all the devils are to take on the boss of that layer of Hell - and they might win?

[8wGremlin]

First I agree with what others have said, warlocks don't lose their powers, and don't take player agency away.

But, What if you played another way:

What if all the warlocks that mammon made deals with suddenly get a boost of power.
Mammon's essence is divided equally amongst them, and which ever warlock can hunt down and kill the others would gain their power, so only one is left and that warlock gets to take Mammon's place.

It seems a very Devilish thing to do, introduces random Warlock attacks, some plot, a simple boon to the warlock player, which they may not understand and the Plot affects both groups that play in your world.

just a thought.

Basically DM and play the game as "YES, and ..." as opposed to NO, because ..."

[micahaphone]

First I agree with what others have said, warlocks don't lose their powers, and don't take player agency away.

But, What if you played another way:

What if all the warlocks that mammon made deals with suddenly get a boost of power.
Mammon's essence is divided equally amongst them, and which ever warlock can hunt down and kill the others would gain their power, so only one is left and that warlock gets to take Mammon's place.

It seems a very Devilish thing to do, introduces random Warlock attacks, some plot, a simple boon to the warlock player, which they may not understand and the Plot affects both groups that play in your world.

just a thought.

Basically DM and play the game as "YES, and ..." as opposed to NO, because ..."


Gremlin, you're a tricksy and smart DM. If this is a world where a party below level 16 (rough guess) could kill an archdevil in its home, then such a wonky plot element and free powerup would be perfect for the world. The DM would also control the pace of these rival warlocks, so you're not handing out blatant favoritism to the warlock player. Or you could declare that each rival killed doesn't directly lead to a new full power. Like I'd give the warlock a 1 per long rest extra slot after they've defeated 3 rivals, or whatever pace you wanted.
Instead of planning out magic loot for the warlock you can have another Warlock of the patron formerly known as Mammon be the boss of a dungeon. Mammon's all about money, so him having connections to evil beings that collect loot would fit great.

[Mikal]

See I would go the opposite way that, while anyone still has a contract/bargain/connection, the patron can’t truly die.

Make it so that he becomes a part of the warlock.

[KorvinStarmast]

But, What if you played another way: Heh, brilliant. :smallbiggrin:

[Unoriginal]

Or, go and hunt down that other party and kill them all (the characters). :smallbiggrin:
Why Mammon should not die:
(In other words, DM made it too easy on that other party)

Mammon has minions. Numbers matter in the bounded accuracy system.
The action economy of half of a dozen devils of CR 8-12 also being in the fight, and some of them potentially summoning on other devils, leads me to thinking that the DM isn't fleshing out just how badazz one of the lords of hell really is.
To put it another way:
If Mammon was that easy to take down, by a party of 4-5 level (X) adventurers, the demons would have won the Blood War a long, long time ago.


Oh sure.

Mammon is the ruler of a whole layer of Hell. He can literally condense the distances in his layer to get every single Devils under his command around his palace, if he wanted to, and he could field a whole army of guys just as tough as the PCs if he called upon enough of people who have a debt with him.

Or he could just decide to increase the distance between him and the PCs, and the one between each of the PCs, so they're all hundreds of days appart from each others.


Only reason the PCs have a chance with Zariel in Descent into Avernus is because there are two to three Demon Princes and potentially one evil goddess keeping the armies busy while Zariel is interested enough in what the PCs are trying to pull to grant them a one-on-PCs confrontation. Plus Zariel's fatal flaws, her knowing perfectly her current existence sucks and being in self-sabotaging mode, Bel's machinations, angelic influences helping, and Asmodeus being interested enough in the PCs being ballsy as Hell that he allows them to try. AND the fact it's happening on Avernus, the first layer of Hell.

Meanwhile Mammon is on the fourth layer, and while he doesn't have Dispater's aversion to danger he isn't going to risk himself unless the benefits from succeeding would be beyond marvelous (like, if he could get a godhood out of it, or something).

[fbelanger]

Maybe the party who kill Mammon can become the new Patron!

[Sorinth]

First I agree with what others have said, warlocks don't lose their powers, and don't take player agency away.

But, What if you played another way:

What if all the warlocks that mammon made deals with suddenly get a boost of power.
Mammon's essence is divided equally amongst them, and which ever warlock can hunt down and kill the others would gain their power, so only one is left and that warlock gets to take Mammon's place.

It would certainly be something cool to run, but wasn't that the plot for the Baldurs Gate games?

[Edea]

Definitely do NOT strip the Warlock of their abilities unless you consult with the player out-of-character and agree to something in advance. Springing something like that on someone out-of-the-blue is peak "That DM" behavior.

I would rule that the warlock's fiendish Pact simply transfers to another powerful fiend, likely arranged in advance in a manner that the warlock already "understood" as part of the bargain forged (and the minutiae of said arrangements probably make U.S. tax codices look like children's books about Clifford the Big Red Dog).

[Snownine]

First I agree with what others have said, warlocks don't lose their powers, and don't take player agency away.

But, What if you played another way:

What if all the warlocks that mammon made deals with suddenly get a boost of power.
Mammon's essence is divided equally amongst them, and which ever warlock can hunt down and kill the others would gain their power, so only one is left and that warlock gets to take Mammon's place.

It seems a very Devilish thing to do, introduces random Warlock attacks, some plot, a simple boon to the warlock player, which they may not understand and the Plot affects both groups that play in your world.

just a thought.

Basically DM and play the game as "YES, and ..." as opposed to NO, because ..."

I am digging the Highlander warlock idea.

[Naanomi]

Lore wise, warlock pacts seem to vary a lot... some warlocks wouldn’t be effected at all, some would keep what they had but couldn’t progress without a new patron, some would be depowered

Clerics are the ones that traditionally need to worry more about their patrons dying off, especially if the usurper they gets the portfolio isn’t a friendly face to the old system

[Lord Vukodlak]

Okay first off Mammon is dead, whining about how the DM shouldn’t have allowed the PCs to do it is not only pointless, it’s arrogant, condescending and to late he’s dead.

Just say that the guy though he was in no danger and by the time he realized his mistake he couldn’t correct it without losing face and risking demotion. He’s dead end of story end of discussion.

On to the real issue, don’t take away his powers warlocks don't even work that way. If he was a cleric that be something.

[Unoriginal]

Okay first off Mammon is dead, whining about how the DM shouldn’t have allowed the PCs to do it is not only pointless, it’s arrogant, condescending and to late he’s dead.

He isn't.

OP was very clear that the PCs of one campaign are TRYING to kill Mammon. It hasn't happened yet and maybe it won't.

[Torpin]

this isnt just an adventuring party trying to kill mammon,they are amongst the leaders an army composed of denizens of the higher planes, under direct control of raziel the crusader and domiel as well , they are currently laying siege to his fortress and have barred interdimensonal travel in and out of the layer of hell. im expecting next session to be the final push into his lair, and the last session to be them fighting him. at this point with the allies they have and the artifacts they've amassed i'd be surpised if they didnt.

i really like the highlander warlock vibe, needing to kill other former mammom warlocks to maintain the power. i think that might be what i role with

[Unoriginal]

this isnt just an adventuring party trying to kill mammon,they are amongst the leaders an army composed of denizens of the higher planes, under direct control of raziel the crusader and domiel as well , they are currently laying siege to his fortress and have barred interdimensonal travel in and out of the layer of hell. im expecting next session to be the final push into his lair, and the last session to be them fighting him. at this point with the allies they have and the artifacts they've amassed i'd be surpised if they didnt.

I mean it's your setting, so if you say it's like that it's like that, but at this point your setting is so different from the standard 5e lore we can't really help you with a lore question.

[Torpin]

I mean it's your setting, so if you say it's like that it's like that, but at this point your setting is so different from the standard 5e lore we can't really help you with a lore question.

yeah, my setting is pretty homebrew, but i got the input i needed. my knee jerk was to get rid of the warlock powers cause the patron was gone and that didnt sit well with me, which is why i came here. and overwhelmingly it was called for me not to do that which i agree, and i just needed ideas to refine my own thoughts on the matter and figure out what should happen. cause i feel nothing happening is also the wrong call



What if all the warlocks that mammon made deals with suddenly get a boost of power.
Mammon's essence is divided equally amongst them, and which ever warlock can hunt down and kill the others would gain their power, so only one is left and that warlock gets to take Mammon's place.

It seems a very Devilish thing to do, introduces random Warlock attacks, some plot, a simple boon to the warlock player, which they may not understand and the Plot affects both groups that play in your world.

is the inspiration i was looking for. give a boon like eldritch blast does an extra poison damage cause of the snake thing and periodically have to fight and defeat other warlocks for power

thank you everyone

[Evaar]

And just to throw in another, pretty simple idea - when your patron is a devil with a direct superior, and that devil dies, your pact isn't just forgiven or wiped out. Your pact transfers up to the superior. In this case, Asmodeus.

[MaxWilson]

Stripping a PC of their powers without the PC doing anything to cause it or being able to stop it is kind of crappy for the player.

Therefore, if you decide that Mammon's death would strip the warlock of powers, you should probably give the player a heads-up about what's going on and give him the chance to affect events.

(Or you could decide that Mammon's death would have different effects. Might want to ask the player about that too: "What would you expect to happen to your powers if Mammon... weren't there any more? How do you think of warlock powers?")

[Witty Username]

I think the least interesting but still effective option is contracts of dead devils default to Asmodeus.

[da newt]

Does your Mammon have a will or other pact with someone to inherit their obligations / property / etc? This may be a simple solution.

But I do like the Highlander option. There can be only one ...

[Keravath]

It depends on how you run patrons in your game world.

Patrons are not deities. Characters make some sort of pact with their patron in exchange for KNOWLEDGE. The application of this knowledge results in the warlock's powers. (At least that is how I read it). Depending on the nature of the pact and the patron, the character may or may not owe the patron some service for the knowledge they have been granted (some patrons aren't even aware that there might be a warlock mooching knowledge and gaining power from them ... especially some of the possible GOO patrons ... there is a clear reference in the PHB to this).

Anyway, in your case, I absolutely would not remove the characters abilities. They made their deal, received knowledge in exchange and they don't go backward.

Depending on how you run deities in your game world, clerics could be different. Clerics receive their powers directly from the deity. If a deity was somehow killed, if that is even possible (rather than just suppressing them), then a cleric may find their abilities impacted.

However, based on the contents of the PHB, I do not run patrons that way and so would not impose penalties on a character if their patron was eliminated.

However, the character might have troubles advancing in level unless they can find an alternate patron from whom to gain knowledge of higher levels. On the other hand, this is D&D, and a patron, knowing they might be about to be killed might split and transfer as much of their essence as possible to their warlocks. This might allow the patron to continue to exist in some form, it also might allow the warlocks to continue to be pact bound to the patron with their last command being to either work toward the restoration of the patron or avenging them using the dying knowledge of the patron which was passed to the character to continue to advance as a warlock.

There are MANY ways you can take this story but the last one I would pick would be to penalize the warlock who did nothing because it contradicts the lore of how warlocks would appear to work (unless you have explicitly gone with a different method in your game) and because it would not be fun for the character involved.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think the least interesting but still effective option is contracts of dead devils default to Asmodeus. This is a fair point, if Warlocks are in the contracting mode (which isn't the default D&D 5e thing, see below). Here is what I like about this way of handling it: KISS principle. "Hi, your boss has been 'transferred to another office', I'm your new boss." :smallcool:

Patrons are not deities. Characters make some sort of pact with their patron in exchange for KNOWLEDGE. The application of this knowledge results in the warlock's powers. (At least that is how I read it). Depending on the nature of the pact and the patron, the character may or may not owe the patron some service for the knowledge they have been granted (some patrons aren't even aware that there might be a warlock mooching knowledge and gaining power from them ... especially some of the possible GOO patrons ... there is a clear reference in the PHB to this). Yeah, this fits better how the PHB is written on the Warlock class overall, and is an easier approach to manage.

One could argue that
"Warlock gets no more Warlock levels until he or she finds a new patron"
if the patron is somehow destroyed.
That can make for an interesting series of quests and RP opportunities.

[Yakk]

Metaphysically, I have warlocks being soul taps.

They agree to have a tap placed in the PCs soul. From this flows power towards the patron. That same tap fuels the warlock's magic (including EB). Even celestial warlocks work this way, which is why they are more similar to fiendish warlocks than it would otherwise seem.

With the patron gone, the tap that connected you to the patron is going to go haywire. In many this soul-stress will induce madness. In others, parts of the patron's soul will "backwash" into the warlock. In others, it will spray tasty soul-stuff randomly into the ether. In others, the warlock will be able to squeeze it shut and lose less soul-power. And in many cases, more than one of the above.

The trick of creating a warlock works very similar to becoming a warlock -- you open a channel from your soul to the creature you are imbuing. With the other end missing, these "loose warlocks" can hook up to new patrons, attach to other sources of power, or even (with some luck or skill) imbue their own warlocks to feed off of.

The "highlander" thing makes sense here too. With two compatible soul-taps, you could hook them up and suck everything out of the other warlock. Whomever has the most "patron juice" would win, and the hunger of the partial soul would drain the other partner dry. (A real patron could do this, but only on a defeated warlock connected to them and adjacent. It is generally inefficient, as the slow drip drip of dozens of warlocks is more useful than a temporary surge)

[Chauncymancer]

It sounds a little too late to consider for this campaign, but an interesting alternative would be to invite the warlock to control Mammons response to the party trying to slay him: here are Mammons resources, here's what he can't do, show down-throw down.

[Lupine]

Stripping a PC of their powers without the PC doing anything to cause it or being able to stop it is kind of crappy for the player. Sure, you want to take away a Cleric's spells because they did something, fine. The PC has a reason and did something. Take it away because something happened in the world that I didn't know was happening and couldn't stop? Lousy and would make me want to toss the PC off a cliff and re-roll a new character.

This. If you want the group one to kill a patron from group two, have patron foresee it’s own death. It suddenly talks to the player more than before. Strange things start to happen. Then, it stops suddenly. The patron doesn’t talk anymore. Everything is suspiciously normal.
Their spells start to have less “omph.” They don’t change in mechanics, but your descriptions change to a more dour, almost lackluster flavor. It should seem like what was a vibrant a living form of power is now... dying.

The players will notice, I promise. Moreover, they’ll want to find out why this is happening. The arc completes —right before mystic arcanum come into play— with the warlock and his party reviving the patron. They then level up, and the patron gives the mystic arcanum as a reward.

The trick with player arcs is to change the feel of a character’s powers without actually changing the mechanics,