D&D (2024) I have the DMG. AMA!

[Emerikol]

With alignment I like to use the K.I.S.S(keep it simple stupid) philosophy. Adding in Meyers Briggs would overly complicate(at least for me) running the simple NPCs, and the important ones I've already detailed out things for.

Yeah Meyers Briggs is not ideal I just used it as an example. I just think a few extra characters that give the DM a personalty type. It would be handy when detailing out a large city and generating some of the NPCs.

 

[Emerikol]

But the goal isn't to make the character atone. The point you seem to be glossing over is that the player putting his character in this position is not making a mistake.

He is not making a player mistake but in the eyes of his Deity he is making a character mistake.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It should be a change, not a consequence, is the point I want to make. A consequence is something you inflict because someone did something wrong. A mechanical consequence for leaving their god is punishing the player for trying to make the character interesting.

Not true. Consequence as a concept is neutral (practically Neutonian in fact). There's no malice here.

 

[Maxperson]

I will say it again. The rule looks intended to manage toxic DMs while protecting toxic players.

Then that rule has failed on its face. There hasn't been an RPG rule published that can manage a toxic DM, nor protect a toxic player.

You leave(DM) or get rid of(player) toxicity. That's the only effective solution.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

But the goal isn't to make the character atone. The point you seem to be glossing over is that the player putting his character in this position is not making a mistake.

Indeed. You can't have heresy or religious schism if the one initiating the movement become a glorified commoner the moment he takes an unorthodox path!

 

[Emerikol]

Then that rule has failed on its face. There hasn't been an RPG rule published that can manage a toxic DM, nor protect a toxic player.

You leave(DM) or get rid of(player) toxicity. That's the only effective solution.

I agree. Designing a game to thwart bad DMs will just ruin the fun for everyone and the bad DMs will still prevail at being bad.

 

[TwoSix]

He is not making a player mistake but in the eyes of his Deity he is making a character mistake.

And thus you should challenge the character narratively but not mechanically.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Easily also turned around to be DM entitlement.

Not in this case. The new default clearly gives players the upper hand in this situation.

 

[TiQuinn]

It's relevant as it pertains to the motivation for these changes in the official rules.

He makes it sound like it's one singular person's fault rather than a shift in what their customers want.

 

[Xenolith234]

Not in this case. The new default clearly gives players the upper hand in this situation.

In almost every situation…