D&D 5E WotC's Jeremy Crawford Talks D&D Alignment Changes

Jeremy Crawford has spoken about changes to the way alignment will be referred to in future D&D books. It starts with a reminder that no rule in D&D dictates your alignment.

align.png

Data from D&D Beyond in June 2019

(Note that in the transcript below, the questions in quotes were his own words but presumably refer to questions he's seen asked previously).

Friendly reminder: no rule in D&D mandates your character's alignment, and no class is restricted to certain alignments. You determine your character's moral compass. I see discussions that refer to such rules, yet they don't exist in 5th edition D&D.

Your character's alignment in D&D doesn't prescribe their behavior. Alignment describes inclinations. It's a roleplaying tool, like flaws, bonds, and ideals. If any of those tools don't serve your group's bliss, don't use them. The game's system doesn't rely on those tools.

D&D has general rules and exceptions to those rules. For example, you choose whatever alignment you want for your character at creation (general rule). There are a few magic items and other transformative effects that might affect a character's alignment (exceptions).

Want a benevolent green dragon in your D&D campaign or a sweet werewolf candlemaker? Do it. The rule in the Monster Manual is that the DM determines a monster's alignment. The DM plays that monster. The DM decides who that monster is in play.

Regarding a D&D monster's alignment, here's the general rule from the Monster Manual: "The alignment specified in a monster's stat block is the default. Feel free to depart from it and change a monster's alignment to suit the needs of your campaign."

"What about the Oathbreaker? It says you have to be evil." The Oathbreaker is a paladin subclass (not a class) designed for NPCs. If your DM lets you use it, you're already being experimental, so if you want to play a kindhearted Oathbreaker, follow your bliss!

"Why are player characters punished for changing their alignment?" There is no general system in 5th-edition D&D for changing your alignment and there are no punishments or rewards in the core rules for changing it. You can just change it. Older editions had such rules.

Even though the rules of 5th-edition D&D state that players and DMs determine alignment, the suggested alignments in our books have undeniably caused confusion. That's why future books will ditch such suggestions for player characters and reframe such things for the DM.

"What about the werewolf's curse of lycanthropy? It makes you evil like the werewolf." The DM determines the alignment of the werewolf. For example, the werewolf you face might be a sweetheart. The alignment in a stat block is a suggestion to the DM, nothing more.

"What about demons, devils, and angels in D&D? Their alignments can't change." They can change. The default story makes the mythological assumptions we expect, but the Monster Manual tells the DM to change any monster's alignment without hesitation to serve the campaign.

"You've reminded us that alignment is a suggestion. Does that mean you're not changing anything about D&D peoples after all?" We are working to remove racist tropes from D&D. Alignment is only one part of that work, and alignment will be treated differently in the future.

"Why are you telling us to ignore the alignment rules in D&D?" I'm not. I'm sharing what the alignment rules have been in the Player's Handbook & Monster Manual since 2014. We know that those rules are insufficient and have changes coming in future products.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Not really, you give the descriptions once in about half and page and then it applies to the whole system of thousands of monsters, gods, NPCs, sentient items, communities, planes etc etc etc.

Why would you want to keep repeating this stuff.
But it doesn't. Not every person or creature of same alignment behaves similarly. Oofta may play his Chaotic Neutral Barbarian as a hones person who keeps their word and I might play my Chaotic Neutral Rogue as untrustworthy scoundrel. They have same alignment yet they behave completely differently. Again, the alignment doesn't provide useful information here. Hell, 'untrustworthy scoundrel' is a two-word description, and it already gives much more useful information than alignment would.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

/snip

Anyway, nobody I've actually played with in real life has ever had much of a problem with it.

Well, I'm very happy for you.

I've had all sorts of rows about alignment. Both as a player and a DM. From new players, experienced players, young and old. Doesn't matter. Heck, had one just recently when we played the Dragon Heist module. I informed the players that one law in Waterdeep is that if you kill someone, you go to jail. Waterdeep does not have a self-defense law. If you kill, you go to jail. Full stop. This exploded into a practically weekly bout of players bitching about how could a lawful city possibly have such laws.

The fact that real world countries, like the one I live in in Japan don't have allowances for killing in self defense, apparently fell on deaf ears. Or, Canadian laws which are MUCH stricter about what constitutes self defense than American laws also apparently weren't good enough examples. Given that Greenwood liked to base a lot of Waterdeep on Toronto, I imagine that's largely where that law comes from.

So, yeah, @Oofta, bully for you for never having a problem with alignment. For me, it's been nothing but a constant headache and I, for one, welcome it's excision from the rules. One could only hope.
 

Well, I'm very happy for you.

I've had all sorts of rows about alignment. Both as a player and a DM. From new players, experienced players, young and old. Doesn't matter. Heck, had one just recently when we played the Dragon Heist module. I informed the players that one law in Waterdeep is that if you kill someone, you go to jail. Waterdeep does not have a self-defense law. If you kill, you go to jail. Full stop. This exploded into a practically weekly bout of players bitching about how could a lawful city possibly have such laws.

The fact that real world countries, like the one I live in in Japan don't have allowances for killing in self defense, apparently fell on deaf ears. Or, Canadian laws which are MUCH stricter about what constitutes self defense than American laws also apparently weren't good enough examples. Given that Greenwood liked to base a lot of Waterdeep on Toronto, I imagine that's largely where that law comes from.

So, yeah, @Oofta, bully for you for never having a problem with alignment. For me, it's been nothing but a constant headache and I, for one, welcome it's excision from the rules. One could only hope.

Sounds incredibly Lawful to me. It's so Lawful it allows no exceptions. Waterdeep gets my stamp of approval in that regard.

Perhaps the law doesn't fit many of our definitions of justice, but who every said the cosmic force of LAW was synonymous with justice?
 

Well, I'm very happy for you.

I've had all sorts of rows about alignment. Both as a player and a DM. From new players, experienced players, young and old. Doesn't matter. Heck, had one just recently when we played the Dragon Heist module. I informed the players that one law in Waterdeep is that if you kill someone, you go to jail. Waterdeep does not have a self-defense law. If you kill, you go to jail. Full stop. This exploded into a practically weekly bout of players bitching about how could a lawful city possibly have such laws.

The fact that real world countries, like the one I live in in Japan don't have allowances for killing in self defense, apparently fell on deaf ears. Or, Canadian laws which are MUCH stricter about what constitutes self defense than American laws also apparently weren't good enough examples. Given that Greenwood liked to base a lot of Waterdeep on Toronto, I imagine that's largely where that law comes from.

So, yeah, @Oofta, bully for you for never having a problem with alignment. For me, it's been nothing but a constant headache and I, for one, welcome it's excision from the rules. One could only hope.
Can I ask what Waterdeep’s lack of a defense of self defense has to do with the alignment system? It sounds like a problem with how you’ve chosen to implement their code of laws.
 

But it doesn't. Not every person or creature of same alignment behaves similarly. Oofta may play his Chaotic Neutral Barbarian as a hones person who keeps their word and I might play my Chaotic Neutral Rogue as untrustworthy scoundrel. They have same alignment yet they behave completely differently. Again, the alignment doesn't provide useful information here. Hell, 'untrustworthy scoundrel' is a two-word description, and it already gives much more useful information than alignment would.
You’re confusing PC autonomy with NPC role playing advice... they’re totally different things.
 

Well, I'm very happy for you.

I've had all sorts of rows about alignment. Both as a player and a DM. From new players, experienced players, young and old. Doesn't matter. Heck, had one just recently when we played the Dragon Heist module. I informed the players that one law in Waterdeep is that if you kill someone, you go to jail. Waterdeep does not have a self-defense law. If you kill, you go to jail. Full stop. This exploded into a practically weekly bout of players bitching about how could a lawful city possibly have such laws.

The fact that real world countries, like the one I live in in Japan don't have allowances for killing in self defense, apparently fell on deaf ears. Or, Canadian laws which are MUCH stricter about what constitutes self defense than American laws also apparently weren't good enough examples. Given that Greenwood liked to base a lot of Waterdeep on Toronto, I imagine that's largely where that law comes from.

So, yeah, @Oofta, bully for you for never having a problem with alignment. For me, it's been nothing but a constant headache and I, for one, welcome it's excision from the rules. One could only hope.

If you have very strict definition of alignment, elevate it's importance beyond what the book does and expect everyone else to adhere to your personal interpretation to the letter I could see how it could be an issue.

I've played the game since it's inception. Because I've moved too many times, I've had over 50 people in home games. I've also been heavily involved in playing/running public games. With 1 exception it's never been a major issue. Then again, when it comes to PCs I pay little or no attention to it. For me it's useful for starting character concepts and monsters.

If in all those years of play with that many people if I've never had an issue maybe the problem is staring back at you in the mirror.
 

Paladins falling (not relevant anymore)

Is animated the dead/summoning devils an evil act? (Both corner cases)

Am I missing any other major alignment debates that affect players?
 

You’re confusing PC autonomy with NPC role playing advice... they’re totally different things.
The same issue applies to NPCs as well. We just covered this. Knowing NPCs does not let us know whether they would keep their word. They could be chaotic yet behave like Oofta's barbarian. Or they could be lawful, but would break their word because they were interested in upholding actual laws of the country instead of being personally trustworthy.

Alignment is not an useful descriptor or predictor of behaviour or values. I really don't understand how anyone can look all these debates of what constitutes what aliment and justifications of any behaviour under any alignment and disagree with that.
 

I've played the game since it's inception. Because I've moved too many times, I've had over 50 people in home games. I've also been heavily involved in playing/running public games. With 1 exception it's never been a major issue. Then again, when it comes to PCs I pay little or no attention to it.
Yes, ignoring the existence of a mechanic is indeed an excellent way to avoid the issues with said mechanic. This is what I've always done as well. But that one needs to do that indicates to me that it is bad or at a best an useless mechanic.
 

The same issue applies to NPCs as well. We just covered this. Knowing NPCs does not let us know whether they would keep their word. They could be chaotic yet behave like Oofta's barbarian. Or they could be lawful, but would break their word because they were interested in upholding actual laws of the country instead of being personally trustworthy.

Alignment is not an useful descriptor or predictor of behaviour or values. I really don't understand how anyone can look all these debates of what constitutes what aliment and justifications of any behaviour under any alignment and disagree with that.

There are exceptions to every rule, including this one. Alignment is not a cookie cutter that dictates all aspects of personality, that doesn't mean it's not useful is. I know what a dog is whether it's a St Bernard or a Chihauha even though they are obviously different. That doesn't make the word "dog" meaningless.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top