Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Warlock patron involvement in BG3.

Ok so we know that Wyll's patron will be fairly involved in his origin story but that's not what this is about. Larian have said that if you play as warlock you will be able to see and request advice from your patron...so probably conversation options and the sorts...but what other sort of involvement will they have? For example pacts with a fiend generally involve the warlock's soul after he/she dies and typically the fiend then might be hands off an not care about what the warlock does...but surely the fiend would feel betrayed if for example the warlock had a real chance to ascend to godhood which would essentially make the pact meaningless. I wonder if the custom character patrons will have at least some conditions...like maybe if you are too good if that might annoy the fiend, or if you find some way that would mean you essentially escape your pact or if there are any other means through which a pact might be broken. There is no paladin-like mechanic in the game where they can lose their powers or become some equivalent of oath breaker. Could we maybe face some kind of punishments from our patrons too? Could our patrons revoke a warlock's power if a pact is deemed breached? What's the deal there?

I don't think Patrons *can* revoke the powers. Though breaking your terms could result in a punishment? Like
What I wonder is if we will have some choices regarding the nature of our Patron. I mean, there is a rather hefty difference between the Archfeys. Titania has different interests then the Prince of Frost.

Though having a real punishment for breaking the pact would actually be great - though the punishment mostly means that you can no longer level up as a Warlock.

I am inclined to think we can't choose the nature of our patron beyond the species as defined by the subclass...which if we had wider choices there I'd imagine we would have heard something by now. I'm inclined to think the Archfey will behave as a mostly good aligned patron for the purpose of the game even though archfeys are really no necessarily always good in D&D an could be evil too. Great old one is basically a cosmic horror so that one I would expect mostly neutral and stays out of your business...but I'm just guessing here. Still I think they want some options there so they don't all feel like all warlocks are evil or something.

The only way I could see Warlock patrons playing a bigger role than just popping in to offer advice or support here and there is if they enact a system like the Paladin's oath where Tav is obliged to choose certain RP actions. However, instead of vague guidelines for behavior like an oath, Tav's Patron would pop into their head with very specific orders. Do as they say *or face the consequences*.

example:

NPC: Hello, I need your help with something.
Tav: Hi, what is it?
NPC: Can you go over to the ruined village and collect my family's hierlooms for me?
Fiend Patron (in Tav's mind): This dude is going to ruin my plans. Kill him. Or else.

Of course the Archfey are the Good option. They define "Good" after all. Or are you one of those weirdos that think their "deities" are actually good? They are just soul sucking monsters. I honestly advise you to join my Order of Sylvan Liberation. So that we cast down those false deities!

More seriously, I would actually prefer if GOO an Archfey would both be neutral. Both have an alien set of morals after all.


(Also, I never understood the appeal of Fiend-Pacts, that just screams "bad idea". The other ones may see you as an amusing distraction, but fiends want your soul.)

The fiend is definitely a bad idea...it generally involves selling one's soul. major nono imo.

Dude. It's a bad idea, but some people are so driven for power, they'll take the easy way. Plus, in the past, not all warlocks chose their patron.. sometimes the 'patron' chooses the warlock...

Maybe it was a parent who made the deal aja gave up theur 'first born', maybe a curse of birth, who knows.

There are several reasons why someone would make a pact with a fiend... out of desperation (prime example: Wyll), out of laziness or pure arrogance or by getting tricked into signing the pact.
And the time when the fiend claims your soul is far in the future, so plenty of time to wriggle out of the pact... or so they believe when they sign the pact.

Actually I find it far more difficult to grasp why someone would form a pact with a GOO. They are too alien to really fathom their motives, at least with a fiendish pact you know where you stand.

Notice that warlocks often use Int as a dump stat and rarely have above a 10 wisdom...

I think with a GOO you could maybe hope they forget about you or are just bored/whatever plans they have won't end up concerning a scale you really care about.

Regarding mechanics, firstly I think the archfey should focus on the chaotic, fairy logic type of approach. But I also think one way to integreate them is to have each pact provide an alternate way to get inspiration. It's less than I would like, but it's something potentially interesting.

Ugh, I hate the chaotic thing.
If you read Fairy Myth you will notice that they are *very* Lawful. The logic of their laws is just utterly alien to us. But if you find a rule out that binds them, you actually have power - because they will *never* break it.
Now, *trying* to enslave a Fae is an absolutely terrible idea, but it *is* possible.

But I am very happy that Alignment are invisible and I do not have to see the "Chaotic" label anymore.


Fairy-rant over. I think I read it before in one of the Books that most GOOs don't even know you exist. You mostly get insane because you had the bright idea to actually invade the mind of an eldritch entity.

Devils use you as agents for their schemes while waiting for your death, so that you will be another Lemur.

I am absolutely Pro-Fae, so I am probably not the best source to tell you the problematic side of making a pact with them..
Aside from them following (seemingly) nonsensical rules and partaking in court politics you can not grasp.
Thinking about it, they do seem like noble through the eyes of a peasant.

The fae are evil racists. They cannot be trusted. The existence if elves prove this.

The power you have been given can never be taken away. Even if you kill your patron and destroy the contract, your power remains.
But you need a living patron for a lot of things.

1) There are items for which you must have a living patron.
For example Pact of the Tome. You have to get that book from someone, you can't make it yourself.

2) Some of the warlock's more powerful abilities require assistance from their patron.
For example, you can ask him to restore your spells.

3) Patrons are often powerful beings with a vast store of knowledge.
It's not bad to have a direct line to someone who has more knowledge than 100 libraries put together and can give you an immediate answer.

4) Patrons sometimes give gifts to their favorites.
Sometimes they are magic items, sometimes more power.
Whether it's to gain allegiance or as a reward for performing a deed.

BUT

Depending on the wording of the contract or the verbal wording of the pact, the patron has some power over you.
There is a certain connection between you and you may be "strongly motivated" to take certain actions.
In certain ways, you give up a part of your freedom.

If it is written in the contract that:

"""""If it is required and does not exceed a reasonable risk, the recipient of the power is obliged to destroy the enemies of his patron."""""

If you refuse, you will have to face the consequences, which are also usually stated in the contract.
The usual punishment is usually something like an unbearable headache or something similar.

But even the Patrons can't force you into a suicide mission (Go kill the king).
After all, what good would power be to you if you were to die in a few days during a battle that you have no chance of winning.
(You'd have to be a VERY stupid Warlock to sign a contract that says they can demand anything from you without limits.)
So if they want something beyond your contract, they'll usually offer you something as a bribe.
For example, gold, magical item, more power, or changing some of the rules of your contract.


So a Warlock without a patron/contract is partially weakened, as he loses the ability to use/obtain certain powers and items. But he is certainly not helpless.
A warlock with a patron/contract cannot be forced to do anything, but can face nasty penalties if he goes against the contract.

But sugar is better than a whip for devils, and Warlocs are always power-hungry.
So if you really don't want to do something you should, they can motivate you to make you want to.


The dream of every Warlock is a contract that gives you power and the necessary assistance of a patron and does not require anything from you in return.
If one of the Fey Lords really likes you, then it is possible to obtain such a contract.
In the case of devils it is also possible, but there you usually pay with your soul once you die.

I wrote a big long piece on this topic yesterday. And then forum lag lost it!

Anyway, I would interpret "being able to see and talk to" your patron as "they will appear in your camp".

Now my feeling is that the might - might - work similarly to paladins. After all, that mechanic, and the oathbreaker-dude who appears in your camp, are already in the game. It's a lot easier to copy-paste an existing mechanic than do it differently each time.

Which would mean that:

* if you annoy your patron they can temporally remove most of your powers (or otherwise punish you), until you do something to appease them;

* It may be possible to change patrons without doing a full respec;

* none of the patrons will be at all benevolent. Because that would make that subclass much easier. HORRIBLE BOSS is a feature of the whole class.



If we assume that Wyll's patron is the prototype for all patrons, we can assume that the others will each get slightly less content. So it will probably be only one option per subclass. Having a big long list like clerics' would mean much less content for each option, and probably no personal appearances.

Now I am going to wildly guess that the patrons are already in the game. Raphael is the fiend, Auntie Ethel is the fey, and Daisy/Champion is the GOO.

Now this is not true. A warlock pact isn't intrinsically tied to alignment. Technically a warlock pact could be created with any entity able to grant power...more flexibility at a table but really a warlock pact could be created with entities of every alignment. Take the Raven Queen for example...while she is more neutral aligned than anything, neither good nor evil, she hates undeath and people trying to cheat death and unnaturally extend their lives...so her warlocks are mostly hired to hunt down and kill stuff like liches. A warlock pact does not have to be with a horrible being at all.

I'm not going by PnP. In PnP it's generally left to the player to play the patron, so long as the do so in a reasonable fashion. And paladins are the same in 5e PnP. There are no rules for a paladin breaking their oath - it's left to the player to role play.

But in BG3, it's a matter of game balance. If there where two horrible patrons and one nice one, everyone would play the nice one because it makes the game easier.

So, whilst benevolent warlock patrons exist, they will not be available to PCs in Baldur's Gate 3.

I actually suspect one will be more hands off, leaves you to your own devices, one will encourage good behavior, and one will encourage evil. But I also think you are looking at this all wrong...just because one encourages good does not mean all players will just flock to that one...not at all. Good is just a preference for style of play. I actually suspect that once the game is out and people start seeing reviews and such of how fun the evil path will be many will shift to that. Because let's be real here...in most games you are forced to be good and the evil paths are not fleshed out and unsatisfying. Good endings have grown tired, stale, generic, and overall just beaten to death. Press this button to receive praise and better loot, yay, you are a winner. Congratulations on knowing how to follow simple orders. Until the end of the game when it's "press this button to get nothing and die", yay victory!

Warlock patrons punishing you is largely irrelevant when you can just respec into a Sorcerer at will.

The patrons casually showing up at camp can create some odd scenarios, too. If Mizora wants Karlach dead, why doesn't she just kill her herself given the chance? Or are we supposed to believe a greater devil is afraid of a level 4 Barbarian because she's a legendary infernal general badass? Maybe we can stack up some barrels and just blow Mizora up, and Larian will have some elaborate contingency plan for that, too?

The patrons are supposed to be very powerful beings. To be able to grant Pact powers, Mizora is supposed to be on an (almost) Archdevil level, i.e. Asmodeus, Mephistopheles, godlike from a low level mortal view. I wish they kept the pact a bit more mysterious and abstract than a conversation at camp. A personal secretive connection between the Warlock and the patron. Making the patrons mundane like that won't help making Warlocks cool.

I'm guessing Archfey will tie in with the Hags of BG3. Could be Auntie Ethel's boss.

I think the standout there is the hands off one. The Evil and Good one could easily be different flavours of horrible boss, the neutral one being hands off makes them a bit too appealing, as long as its not the "no content" one.

The assumption players will flock towards evil options seems on shaky ground to me. First of all its assuming the evil options actually are well written and appealing, the way the druid grove was written in EA suggests its just stupid evil all over again. The other is that people are tired of playing as good characters, maybe you are but I'm unconvinced its universal. I think it's people who both have played enough games to get fatigued by being the hero and don't put themselves in their characters shoes or can suppress empathy for digital people. That seems intrinsically a minority of a minority.

The same is true for paladins, but the falling mechanic is still in the game.


That's an issue for the writers to resolve. I think it's very likely that Mizora will show up at camp though.


Not necessarily god-like though. There is no rule that specifies how much power a warlock patron must have, and I have seen unicorn and couatl patrons in PnP. Mizora was captured by goblins in EA, I don't think that puts her at arch devil power!


It's hinted that Auntie Ethel is much more powerful than an average hag (and aint really dead). The text for the Fathomless warlock patron (Tasha's) mentions "sea-hag covens" as potential patrons, opening up the possibility of multiple individuals being a single patron.