What Type of Entity is a Hexblade Patron?

[Thunderous Mojo]

Why is a random Pit Fiend a valid warlock patron? How can he grant powers that he himself does not possess? What are the terms of the pact? What is the patron getting out of the Pact anyway? What penalties exist if the Warlock doesn't pay up? If the patron dies, what happens to the power? What are the externalities/extended consequences to everyone else for the warlock taking this Pact?

I find this more a feature rather then a bug. Not the hand waving away the need for details, but rather, that so much is left for the player and DM to decide.

All classes in 5e, have some component like this, but as you rightfully point out, MaxWilson....an exceptional amount of Warlock details are blank.

It also doesn't work with Hexblade unless the DM is actually willing to both (1) give you Blackrazor a.k.a Stormbringer at first level (or first warlock level anyway), and (2) make all your warlock powers vanish if you lose Blackrazor or neglect to feed it.

Fundamentally, the warlock class just isn't the right way to model a relationship with Stormbringer or most other Faustian bargains. On the other hand, "here's 50,000 bonus XP and +4 to a stat of your choice and +2 to your proficiency bonus, but all these benefits go away permanently if ever go 48 hours without killing a sentient creature who isn't expecting death... Now THAT'S a Faustian bargain! Looks manageable at first, no apparent perma-strings attached, but designed to mess with player psychology.

Levels 1 through 2 Elric is the young Prince, still reliant upon the mystical drugs to keep him hale in body.

After a palace coup and other adventures Elric finds Stormbringer, and no longer needs the drugs, and is 3rd level.

To me, this seems entirely in the bailiwick of the Hexblade.

Faust's corruption was gradual. This is something that I think is better represented by a 20 level progression, instead of the sudden boost of a powerful item.
Of course, a DM is on their own, creatively on how to bring this Faustian agreement to life.

One other aspect, is most players seemingly don't want to make Faustian bargains.
Players want to make Al's Discount Stereos type deals...the type of deals where for the low down payment of 2 levels....you get Force spell attacks that push any creature, with no saving throw.

My personal experience, is the more the Warlock Patron has a presence,(not necessarily a literal presence) in the campaign....the more levels in the class the player takes.

Out of curiosity, doesn't DM's Guild have Warlock Patron product prepackaged that can fill in the answers to the questions the Warlocks class posses, but does not answer?

[MaxWilson]

I find this more a feature rather then a bug. Not the hand waving away the need for details, but rather, that so much is left for the player and DM to decide.

All classes in 5e, have some component like this, but as you rightfully point out, MaxWilson....an exceptional amount of Warlock details are blank.

Well if so, then Hexblade is extra-featureful.

I just don't get why someone would complain about the Hexblade's lack of flavor while being fine with every other warlock. I don't think you're one of the Hexblade complainers so this probably doesn't apply to you.

Levels 1 through 2 Elric is the young Prince, still reliant upon the mystical drugs to keep him hale in body.

And yet he already has warlock powers and a special dedicated weapon that he can use to attack with Charisma, and a Hexblade's Curse. All of his major powers and abilities are up and running at 1st level, and he hasn't found Stormbringer yet.

After a palace coup and other adventures Elric finds Stormbringer, and no longer needs the drugs, and is 3rd level.

To me, this seems entirely in the bailiwick of the Hexblade.

It seems quite wrong to me for Stormbringer's discover to have so little impact. Now he gets 2nd level spells and a Pact Boon--how does that model Stormbringer's impact? And BTW in this scenario does Elric actually get Blackrazor as a magic item, or is Stormbringer just an offscreen explanation for Elric's powers? Does he even wield Stormbringer at all?

Faust's corruption was gradual. This is something that I think is better represented by a 20 level progression, instead of the sudden boost of a powerful item.

That's why I like giving an immediate power boost, and then gradual corruption happens as loss aversion tempts you to do things to keep it.

One other aspect, is most players seemingly don't want to make Faustian bargains.
Players want to make Al's Discount Stereos type deals...the type of deals where for the low down payment of 2 levels....you get Force spell attacks that push any creature, with no saving throw.

Players don't want to give up agency. The trick is to make it a Faustian bargain which doesn't seem to constrain their options. E.g. "here's a vampire ally who can help you fight the bad guys by making enemies into vampire spawns." There's no way that could possibly go wrong, right? And yet some players will gladly accept that Faustian bargain, even if they have reason to suspect that the vampire's ultimate goals do not align with their own.

My personal experience, is the more the Warlock Patron has a presence,(not necessarily a literal presence) in the campaign....the more levels in the class the player takes.

That's the thing about Stormbringer though: IMO the fiction doesn't work unless Stormbringer is a literal presence, and even then the fiction doesn't match the Hexblade's pacing or mechanics.

[Thunderous Mojo]

The trick is to make it a Faustian bargain which doesn't seem to constrain their options. E.g. "here's a vampire ally who can help you fight the bad guys by making enemies into vampire spawns." There's no way that could possibly go wrong, right? And yet some players will gladly accept that Faustian bargain, even if they have reason to suspect that the vampire's ultimate goals do not align with their own.

We call those players "Fools", up in my neck of the woods, but we are all fools one time or another. 😀

D&D, rarely can exactly match a work of fiction. Generally, just because a lot of fantasy fiction does not operate from a premise of 4-5 coequal participants.
Elric is a solo game.

That said, I agree completely regarding player agency. The flip side to the players not wanting to give up agency, is that DMs also are afraid in actually following through with sufficiently sized Faustian carrots.

You have to be willing to let players freely use Stormbringer, before Stormbringer can corrupt them, and many DMs are just not willing to go there.

Which I can completely empathize with, releasing Artifacts can, should, and generally does change games.

[Unoriginal]

Faust's corruption was gradual. This is something that I think is better represented by a 20 level progression, instead of the sudden boost of a powerful item.

Depends of the version and the interpretation, but generally this is not the case. Faust isn't a tale of corruption, but of the corrupt, in the sense that Faust either was already corrupt to be in the mindset to make the pact, or was corrupted the moment he agreed to it.

[MaxWilson]

(A) We call those players "Fools", up in my neck of the woods, but we are all fools one time or another. 😀

D&D, rarely can exactly match a work of fiction. Generally, just because a lot of fantasy fiction does not operate from a premise of 4-5 coequal participants.
Elric is a solo game.

That said, I agree completely regarding player agency. The flip side to the players not wanting to give up agency, is that DMs also are afraid in actually following through with (B) sufficiently sized Faustian carrots.

You have to be willing to let players freely use Stormbringer, before Stormbringer can corrupt them, and many DMs are just not willing to go there.

Which I can completely empathize with, releasing Artifacts can, should, and generally does change games.

(A) One of my great amusements as a DM is tempting the players. Ideally I want things to go disastrously wrong in a way that was completely predictable to the players, so that they are both (1) kicking themselves for giving in to temptation (vs. blaming an unfair DM), and yet (2) still going to bite the next hook I give them, instead of permanently learning a lesson.

Like, I want them sticking their heads down dark holes, even if 10% of the time that head gets whacked off, because 30% of the time they get some cool treasure or something and 10% of the time they get a cool new ability (like an extra pair of hands or blindsense from Xixchil biomodifications). I want them to be as afraid of missing out as they are of death, but still afraid of both.

So, I have zero problems with the idea of actually (B) handing out Blackrazor early on in a campaign and letting Blackrazor be... itself. With all the complications that come with it. Or Nightblood, or Farslayer, or Shieldbreaker.

If your 2nd level PC defeats a Purple Worm with Nightblood (because Nightblood disintegrates whatever it wounds, on a failed DC 20 Con save), I'm not going to get upset. I'll just say "Congratulations" and then give you recognition, rewards, and responsibilities appropriate to someone who can kill a Purple Worm. You'll grow into them pretty quick (thanks to XP) or you won't, and all the while Nightblood is going to be cheerfully inviting you to slay all the "evil" it interacts with, appropriately or not.

[Thunderous Mojo]

(A)
So, I have zero problems with the idea of actually (B) handing out Blackrazor early on in a campaign and letting Blackrazor be... itself. With all the complications that come with it. Or Nightblood, or Farslayer, or Shieldbreaker.

MaxWilson...I agree with every word you posted.
"In a different reality I could have called you friend" 🖖


The campaign I started to inaugurate the official release of the 5e ruleset is something I've wanted to run for 20 years....a Sword of Power campaign.
The group is working on tracking Farslayer down, right now.

Active Gods, Numerous Active Artifacts, Active Wars...the campaign has been a blast, and having a major artifact is like possessing a suitcase nuke.....you just attracted the attention of dangerous creatures.

[Azuresun]

Eh, it's not much worse than any other patron explanation. Why is a random Pit Fiend a valid warlock patron? How can he grant powers that he himself does not possess? What are the terms of the pact? What is the patron getting out of the Pact anyway? What penalties exist if the Warlock doesn't pay up? If the patron dies, what happens to the power? What are the externalities/extended consequences to everyone else for the warlock taking this Pact? 5E essentially just treats the patron as a giant offscreen handwave (or a requirement for the DM to make a bunch of stuff up)

This makes me think of Savage Species in 3e, which gave a 10-level prestige class so that a monster like a sphinx or naga could make prophetic utterances if petitioners could solve its riddles. Whereas in 5e, I don't need to fool around with backing up every possible monster ability with specialised PRC's or whatever, I can just say they do it and not sweat the details. It's so refreshing.

Warlock pacts are very personal things with an unlimited number of permutations and possible stories, so....yes, the DM makes stuff up and talks to the player to come up with something they're both going to enjoy. This, for me, is why they're so cool.

[Unoriginal]

Campaign idea: all of the PCs start with a Legendary/Artifact weapon. And have to handle the consequences.

[Evaar]

Campaign idea: all of the PCs start with a Legendary/Artifact weapon. And have to handle the consequences.

Sure, sounds like a cool idea for a campaign.

But if it involves a Hexblade specifically using that weapon, then RAW that artifact cannot be their pact weapon. Which locks them out of all the Pact of the Blade invocations that would bring them up to baseline martial capability.

You can transform one magic weapon into your pact weapon by performing a special ritual while you hold the weapon. You perform the ritual over the course of 1 hour, which can be done during a short rest. You can then dismiss the weapon, shunting it into an extradimensional space, and it appears whenever you create your pact weapon thereafter. You can't affect an artifact or a sentient weapon in this way.

The mechanics of Pact of the Blade run directly counter to the flavor of the Hexblade subclass.

[MaxWilson]

The campaign I started to inaugurate the official release of the 5e ruleset is something I've wanted to run for 20 years....a Sword of Power campaign.
The group is working on tracking Farslayer down, right now.

Hahahaha! Farslayer? That's going to end well for the players.

For anyone who isn't in on the joke: Farslayer is a sword that, when thrown, can kill anyone, anywhere in the world. The problem is, whoever you just killed, there's now a sword sticking out of his chest that can kill... anyone, anywhere in the world, including you. Lots of Montagues-and-Capulets/Hatfields-and-McCoys killing tends to be the result.

That sounds like a fun campaign. :)

[Thunderous Mojo]

The mechanics of Pact of the Blade run directly counter to the flavor of the Hexblade subclass.

I always forget that Pact of the Blade, explicitly excludes making Artifacts or Sentient weapons your Pactblade. Probably, because it is a rule not worth remembering.

I absolutely would handwave that rule away. A PC Warlock trying to find a way to convince a sentient magic item to work with themself and their Patron, seems like a fun scenario to me.

One Patron scenario I imagine is a Ryu, where the Master is a sentient Magic Sword.
The Master seeks to train the Perfect Warrior, whom The Master will then allow to wield them, in a battle of destiny, long foretold.

I envision a foul mouthed Dancing Sword, with a Meredith Burgess like Demeanor from Rocky. Now Imagine a cult devoted to it.

[Evaar]

I always forget that Pact of the Blade, explicitly excludes making Artifacts or Sentient weapons your Pactblade. Probably, because it is a rule not worth remembering.

I just find it absolutely chef's kiss perfect that they would design a subclass around the flavor of sentient weapons, and that it would be designed to combo with a class feature that specifically excludes the use of sentient weapons.

There's a whole lot I really like about 5e, but that's a perfect example of the sort of baffling sloppiness that it often exhibits.

[Unoriginal]

Hahahaha! Farslayer? That's going to end well for the players.

For anyone who isn't in on the joke: Farslayer is a sword that, when thrown, can kill anyone, anywhere in the world. The problem is, whoever you just killed, there's now a sword sticking out of his chest that can kill... anyone, anywhere in the world, including you. Lots of Montagues-and-Capulets/Hatfields-and-McCoys killing tends to be the result.

That sounds like a fun campaign. :)

Doesn't that just mean you're fine as long as you select targets close enough for you to take back the sword right after the killing?

Like, for example, anything within longbow range?

Sure, sounds like a cool idea for a campaign.

Which weapons would work best for it, though?

I'm endeared by the idea of a noob with the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, but beyond that...

[MaxWilson]

Doesn't that just mean you're fine as long as you select targets close enough for you to take back the sword right after the killing?

Like, for example, anything within longbow range?

Well, maybe. Even longbow range would be a little dicey unless you absolutely know for sure that no one is around but you.

Only using it at close range is a prudent way to use it, but I predict that's not how it's going to work out for Thunderous Mojo's players. Eventually something will come along that needs a long-range kill and they're going to have to decide whether and how to use it or face the consequences of not using it. E.g. killing a lich even semi-permanently is normally incredibly difficult, but Farslayer could kill its phylactery no matter where it's hidden.

[Evaar]

Which weapons would work best for it, though?

I'm endeared by the idea of a noob with the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, but beyond that...

Well, I'd probably try to go all Lord of the Rings and make it something the players absolutely do not want to use unless they have no other options whatsoever. And set some things after them.

So something like the Sword of Kas. Cults of Vecna are mobilizing to bring the dark god back bodily into the world. One of the steps involves an assault on a keep where the sword rests. Protecting the keep is a lost cause, it's undermanned because no one wants the job of guarding an evil sword that tries to corrupt you. So before the keep falls, the characters are given the sword and told to get it to X, who's a great enough hero that they can wield it without succumbing to its corruption and put down Vecna.

And of course when they get there X is either dead or corrupted or missing, and ultimately it ends up being one of the characters who has to use the sword.

That's off the top of my head, anyway. Might not be a very accurate representation of what the Sword of Kas does, as I'm going from memory.

[JoeJ]

I just find it absolutely chef's kiss perfect that they would design a subclass around the flavor of sentient weapons, and that it would be designed to combo with a class feature that specifically excludes the use of sentient weapons.

There's a whole lot I really like about 5e, but that's a perfect example of the sort of baffling sloppiness that it often exhibits.

If your patron is envisioned as a powerful sentient weapon, it kind of fits that it wouldn't allow you to make an alliance with a different sentient weapon than itself.

[Evaar]

If your patron is envisioned as a powerful sentient weapon, it kind of fits that it wouldn't allow you to make an alliance with a different sentient weapon than itself.

That’s not what the patron is. Read above. It’s a shadowfell entity that creates and/or manifests as sentient weapons. So you might expect that, as a weapon specialist making a pact with a being whose only known hobby is making sentient weapons, you might be able to use a sentient weapon.

[Edea]

Netherese shades that have long passed into mere shadowstuff, possessed of immense power but now barely sapient? Maybe forming pacts with mortals and becoming hexblade weapons is the only way for such beings to experience physical reality again.

[TyGuy]

"You had the power in you all along kid! Seriously, I think you might be infected or something. You should get that checked out..."

The Hexblade works great as an incorporeal entity that has latched on to the PC as a means to grow in power.

I described my idea to a buddy and he let me know what I effectively created without realizing, Shadow-Venom.

But it works so well imo. It's why the seemingly week 10 strength 14 Dexterity PC can swing a greatsword in combat.

[QuintonBeck]

A Hexblade idea I'm really excited about is essentially an abandoned Death Star in a Spelljammer campaign. This space super weapon, "The Dragonblade", was forged through the stripping and fusing of powerful dragon souls to create a weapon platform capable of killing Witchlight Marauders during the Second Unhuman War. After UWII ended the Elves didn't want to be reminded/let others know what they had done in their most desperate hour and hurled the Dragonblade out into an extremely dangerous Crystal Sphere and threw up "Do Not Enter" signs around the entrance to the sphere. Whatever remains of the dragons' spirits have congealed into a consciousness and this is the PC's patron.

[Joe the Rat]

Hahahaha! Farslayer? That's going to end well for the players.

For anyone who isn't in on the joke: Farslayer is a sword that, when thrown, can kill anyone, anywhere in the world. The problem is, whoever you just killed, there's now a sword sticking out of his chest that can kill... anyone, anywhere in the world, including you. Lots of Montagues-and-Capulets/Hatfields-and-McCoys killing tends to be the result.

That sounds like a fun campaign. :)

Eldritch Knight says "As a bonus action...".

Warlock fluff is downright terrible across the board.

There's a fair bit of vaguery in the pacts, but that can work in the service of the game - the exact nature of the contract, the status of the deal, if it is about power or knowledge, or even whether or not one or more sides is aware of the deal lets you shape it to your needs. Maybe your plot is about your job. Maybe that's all backstory, and your entire relationship with your patron is as an employment reference. "You sold your soul and still have to work for entity X" is the same lazy assumption as "Grandma was a freak" is for sorcerers.

But the other patrons generally point to a specific type of entity (an entity of the lower planes, and entity of the upper planes, damn faeries, Lovecraftian Elder Combo Platter) with matching patron features. Hexblade is just kind of... <vague handwave>.

Pure awesomeness

D&D has a tendency to fall into the Old Fantasy tropes - gods have humanoid bodies, and exist "over there somewhere", moving between planes is basically gateway teleporting to alternate more or less normal realities. We need to re-inject this sort of hyperdimensionality... which can still result in "wielding a god-weapon that looks like a weird sword." I don't know if this is canonical, but I remember seeing a take on Stormbringer not being "evil sentient soul-sucking weapon" but "hyperdimensional demonic entity that expresses in 3+1 dimensions as a black blade." A little blending and you have the greater entity-weapon feeding you power through your noospheric aspect, and occasionally extruding into 3space as a pact weapon (but with nowhere near the full potency, as that tends to break space).