• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

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. 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...

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

TheSword

Legend
I find alignment useful for my PC (along with other traits, bonds and backstory) because sometimes I want to step out of my own shoes and see the world from a different perspective. Alignment helps me think about how do that.

I find it kind of baffling that an CN can be honest is "proof" that alignment is useless. It seems to go back to very old school definitions.

As far as the alignments of my player's PCs. No clue.

Just a reminder about what the MM has to say about alignment:
A monster’s alignment provides a clue to its disposition and how it behaves in a roleplaying or combat situation. For example, a chaotic evil monster might be difficult to reason with and might attack characters on sight, whereas a neutral monster might be willing to negotiate.​
Next paragraph goes on to say that the alignment listed is just a default and do what makes sense.

So a clue to a monster's disposition that might be useful. A default value you can change if you want. Sounds about right to me.
Absolutely. I will often aim to play a good character but find myself acting in a way that’s more and more mercenary. The alignment helps me to pull back. Occasionally the DM will remind me. It’s all voluntary, it’s not a cudgel to be beaten with, just a nudge. It helps me keep true to the character concept.

I once had a lawful neutral summoner character who kept a book with every evil deed in it and he crossed them off as he did equally good deeds. He was fun to play.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Is it? Can you reference that please for mind flayers. A quote from the MM saying that they work in concert to solve problems in the absence of an elder brain. Do you know how many mind flayers have featured in D&D products over the years... lots? Do you know how many elder brains have featured in products... not many.

have you read many 5e books. Several hundred monsters have been added in the appendixes of campaign books and most have a lore section of a few lines.
"Conjoined by a collective consciousness, the illithids hatch plots as far-reaching and evil as their fathomless minds
can conceive."

"When an illithid meets strong resistance, it avoids initial combat as it orders its thralls to attack. Like physical extensions of the illithid's thoughts, these thralls interpose themselves between the mind fiayer and its foes, sacrificing their lives so that their master can escape."


This tells you actually about how they act. If lore section is insufficient, that is unfortunate, but the alignment doesn't help you there. Any conclusions you draw from being 'lawful' are just arbitrary conjectures. From lawful I'd conduce that the Mind Flayers respect local laws, dutifully pay their taxes to the human kings whose lands they have infiltrated etc. (Though they use all possible loop holes to make sure they pay as little as possible as they're evil.) Do you think this is a correct conclusion? That's definitely description of lawful behaviour.

At the best you know how Mind Flayers behave based on other sources, then rationalise afterwards how that reflects their alignment.
 

Absolutely. I will often aim to play a good character but find myself acting in a way that’s more and more mercenary. The alignment helps me to pull back. Occasionally the DM will remind me. It’s all voluntary, it’s not a cudgel to be beaten with, just a nudge. It helps me keep true to the character concept.

I once had a lawful neutral summoner character who kept a book with every evil deed in it and he crossed them off as he did equally good deeds. He was fun to play.
Do you think that people who do not use alignment do not come up with coherent personalities for their characters? Of course they do, they just do not use such puerile and arbitrary classification.
 

TheSword

Legend
"Conjoined by a collective consciousness, the illithids hatch plots as far-reaching and evil as their fathomless minds
can conceive."

"When an illithid meets strong resistance, it avoids initial combat as it orders its thralls to attack. Like physical extensions of the illithid's thoughts, these thralls interpose themselves between the mind fiayer and its foes, sacrificing their lives so that their master can escape."


This tells you actually about how they act. If lore section is insufficient, that is unfortunate, but the alignment doesn't help you there. Any conclusions you draw from being 'lawful' are just arbitrary conjectures. From lawful I'd conduce that the Mind Flayers respect local laws, dutifully pay their taxes to the human kings whose lands they have infiltrated etc. (Though they use all possible loop holes to make sure they pay as little as possible as they're evil.) Do you think this is a correct conclusion? That's definitely description of lawful behaviour.

At the best you know how Mind Flayers behave based on other sources, then rationalise afterwards how that reflects their alignment.
No, Lawful tells me that they see the value of working with other Mindflayers, even in the absence of the elder brain that acts as their collective conscious. That just happens to coincide with the last 30 years of their use.
 

No, Lawful tells me that they see the value of working with other Mindflayers, even in the absence of the elder brain that acts as their collective conscious. That just happens to coincide with the last 30 years of their use.
So only lawful creatures work together then? Orcs for example are solitary creatures that do not work together?
 

TheSword

Legend
Do you think that people who do not use alignment do not come up with coherent personalities for their characters? Of course they do, they just do not use such puerile and arbitrary classification.
You can call the system puerile. I get that you don’t like it, using insulting terms for it doesn’t persuade me that you’re right. Arbitrary is funny... it’s arbitrary to you because don’t/can’t/won’t use it sensibly.

I think people can come up with personality without the alignment system. I can come up with traits, bonds, flaws and ideals without the PHB but they’re there so 🤷🏻‍♂️. Incidentally they based on Alignment too, do you use these?

So only lawful creatures work together then? Orcs for example are solitary creatures that do not work together?
Nope. Lots of creatures congregate and see safety in numbers. Mind flayers actively work with others though in an ordered and organized way. They also work together because it is the most logical way to proceed rather than because they are scared of more powerful chiefs (orcs) or because they respect strength.
 

Oofta

Legend
James Bond villain about to kill off 007
  • LE: "Sorry Mr Bond, but unfortunately you violated the rules of the contract when you ordered you're martini shaken not stirred. You really should have read Appendix 3 section 4.C more closely."
  • NE: "Nothing personal but I really have no choice considering how circumstances have changed."
  • CE: "Yeah, I know I promised. I lied."
 

You can call the system puerile. I get that you don’t like it, using insulting terms for it doesn’t persuade me that you’re right. Arbitrary is funny... it’s arbitrary to you because don’t/can’t/won’t use it sensibly.

I think people can come up with personality without the alignment system. I can come up with traits, bonds, flaws and ideals without the PHB but they’re there so 🤷🏻‍♂️. Incidentally they based on Alignment too, do you use these?
They are not 'based on' alignment, the alignment is briefly alluded to in the text. But yes, these are actually useful things to ponder when thinking about characters personality and unlike alignment may be helpful for new players who might have trouble coming up with these things otherwise.

Nope. Lots of creatures congregate and see safety in numbers. Mind flayers actively work with others though in an ordered and organized way. They also work together because it is the most logical way to proceed rather than because they are scared of more powerful chiefs (orcs) or because they respect strength.
And Green Dragons must live in packs and coordinate with each other, instead of being territorial creatures that often clash with other dragons considering that they're lawful?
 

Eric V

Hero
James Bond villain about to kill off 007
  • LE: "Sorry Mr Bond, but unfortunately you violated the rules of the contract when you ordered you're martini shaken not stirred. You really should have read Appendix 3 section 4.C more closely."
  • NE: "Nothing personal but I really have no choice considering how circumstances have changed."
  • CE: "Yeah, I know I promised. I lied."
Am I to understand from this example that the LE guy actually wouldn't have killed Bond if he hadn't ordered his martini shaken, not stirred?
 

TheSword

Legend
I recommend people go and play Planescape Torment. It resolved issues of alignment decades ago.

Chaotic Good Succubi, Lawful Neutral Cornugons, a city sliding into Carceri because the citizens selfishness increased to the point of evil. Anarchists, Archivists and a fighter so lawful he couldn’t stop fighting even after death.

Play it then tell me that Alignment has no place in D&D.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top