I’m starting to starting think that DND alignment charts are just the political compass for people who are not into politics (or maybe the other way around?)
It sounds counterintuitive, but I think lawful and chaotic should be the other way around. Libertarians (in the sense it’s used here) tend to support freedom through fairness and consistency of the law, whereas for authoritarians the law is whatever the person in charge feels like.
Excuse me that’s clearly ARLO, the dog from Dungeons and Daddies season 3
Meanwhile I’m here as a Changeling: the Dreaming main happy with unseelie and seelie.
Lovely meme, but I was disappointed when zooming in.
Here’s an ALIGNMENT CHART ALIGNMENT CHART that I liberated from the corpos:
Ok, that’s it, for my next character I’m going to play as a Lepton Ranger.
I feel like alignment hasn’t really been a thing in DND for more than a decade, but there’s a steady supply of people who only “know” DND from memes keeping the idea alive.
I mean, have fun with it, but it’s very “how do you do fellow kids” sometimes.
plenty of folks are playing old editions or clones thereof now though
It heavily relies on the players actually being consistent with their characterization. I don’t think I’m being controversial when I say that’s being generous to the players which make memes about alignment.
WotC has all but removed it from 5e14, it’s functionally useless. But they seem afraid to remove it altogether. They even went so far as to take the obvious (and stupid) backlash for not having orcs be “always evil” any more, instead of just silently removing the alignment line from everything in 5e24.
Pathfinder did away with alignments completely though
last i checked it was in some weird limbo state sorta? but yeah i think the law/chaos axis was removed for Remastered
There are holy and unholy sanctifications, which pretty much only effect extraplanar beings and those that bargain with them (Clerics, Paladins)
*teeny tiny voice* alignment was never supposed to be for players consideration. it was only supposed to interact discretely with the spells and effects of Planar-type monsters and Detect/Smite Evil
In 3.5 a druid must be neutral on one axis. Druid spells don’t interact with alignments; a monk must be lawful
Players playing monks may have their character loose access to monk abilities if they do chaotic stuff too often
Alignment has been an important part of the game
fuck I forgot about monks and druids. okay, I guess no wonder it turned into such a big misunderstanding. that is a wider amount of people that were expected to think in terms of the alignment axis
I’m pretty sure loads of other classes have alignment restrictions - notably clerics and paladins
Early d&d had the universe constructed as interlocking planes of law, chaos, good, and evil, with the world on the intersection of all those. That was the reason for heroes and monsters - they were touched by our created from one of the planes.
The world was a battleground between the planes, and alignment was your alignment to the planes, which side of each fight you were on. It has gotten weaker each version since
In 3.5 I usually play druids and usually neutral-good as I still have that old model in my head and if I’m not going to care about one axis, it’s going to be law/chaos
I’m pretty sure loads of other classes have alignment restrictions - notably clerics and paladins
I remember my D&D 3.x DM insisting we follow RAW, so if I wanted to take levels in assassin (who else remembers prestige classes?) then I had to be evil. 3 players went along, and the druid betrayed us to the “good” guys. Had a massive brawl where we (team evil) won, thanks in part to a hail mary “I run around the corner and hide. That’s… a natural 20 for 37” the betraying druid player couldn’t beat.
Cleric alignment requesites go largely unnoticed by the player. staying within one step of diety is pretty easy, probably comes automatically to most people who would be interested in the class on the first place. Alignment gets complicated for them in considering if it’s appropriate to cast magic circle or not or holy word or not. but usually it’s safe to assume for those.
Paladin is responsible for I think almost all alignment hangups at the table. sure, there are others but not as often.
Druid probably would be because communicating the concept of neutrality is full of hangups but I think druids are pretty underplayed.
but I think druids are pretty underplayed.
Indeed, the class has a few fans like me. I don’t get why they’re so unpopular, druids are powerful and probably more
brokenbreakable than any of the basic classes (at least in 3.5)Wild shape was hard to read as a new player. Full casters are intimidating too. I love them too but they’re just hard to explain to newcommers.
There have been fan works online explaining how to be an effective druid, see also though the guide to being everything a how-to for the Master of Many Forms druid prestige class
5e druids are easier - as casters they are excellent for battlefield control, as wildshape users they are a front line thwackers almost on par with fighters
3.5e druids seem most optimised as summoners, with you controlling numerous summons, but also capable in utility, buff, and battlefield casting
In 3.5 I like to have a spreadsheet listing all the spells for each level and allowing selection of the correct number of spell slots, it’s hard to manage on paper, especially when you’re using several books
The class fantasy never appealed to me. They can be powerful, but I don’t have any real interest in being a dirt wizard or turning into animals.
More of a rogue guy, or arcane caster if I can get over spells-per-day being my anathema.
You and everyone in my d&d group :) we’re lucky enough to have one always wizard, one always rogue, one always cleric, over almost always druid, and two minmaxers
![This is what alignment does to your brain [Dungeons & Dragons/Pathfinder]](https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/pictrs/image/cea7f325-b1b7-448a-9d85-8c90b51622c4.webp){kind=link}