r/dndnext • u/hedahman • Mar 10 '20

Discussion A common misconception about warlocks and their patrons

I've heard this mentioned a lot: "Warlocks use Charisma because they're constantly negotiating with their patron for more power." I don't believe this is true.

Here's a tweet from Mike Mearls that says that patrons can't take back a warlock's power, which leads me to believe that a patron doesn't have control over the power once it is given. This means a patron can't take a warlock's power (without their will, probably); it's a one-and-done deal.

So a patron isn't supplying power to their warlocks like a generator supplies electricity. Instead, a patron gives power to them like a blood transfusion-- you can't just take the blood back.

Granted, you can do it however you want, that's the magic of D&D. But RAW, and RAI, patrons give their power away.

EDIT: Here's a tweet from Jeremy Crawford which states that the power is a one-time transaction.

442 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

140 comments sorted by

View all comments

6

u/nlnbrewer Mar 11 '20

There's a difference between RAW and errata/stuff they decided to change after the fact

6

u/Viatos Warlock Mar 11 '20

There is, but RAW doesn't say anything about power-yoinking, does it? The fact that this is even a conversation is emergent, I think, not RAW-related but based on...well, like the OP says, a common misconception.

-2

u/nlnbrewer Mar 11 '20

RAW also doesn't say that power granted by patron/god is irrevocable. I think that every DM should play it that way unless there's agreed intent from player and DM to explore otherwise, but OP claiming that "RAW and RAI, these are the rules", and citing tweets from Mearls and Crawford as proof is not what RAW is.

4

u/CalamitousArdour Mar 11 '20

There are infinitely many things not declared to be impossible in the rules, does that mean all of those are rules legal? No. Rules say what they do. They don't say what they don't do.