D&D General A friend of mine has joined A 5E Dnd Group, has decided to play A Robin Hood Style character and wants to know what people think of his character

[Charlaquin]

Sadly my mate thinking is that even laws that are both completely biased and totally corrupt are still laws and that even someone that only breaks such laws in order to give the poor the things they need to survive would still be of Lawful Evil Alignment

What?? That corrupt laws are still laws is literally the reason lawful/chaotic and good/evil are on separate axis. A character who breaks corrupt laws is likely chaotic good.

 

[ad_hoc]

Lawful doesn't mean following the laws of wherever you happen to be.

It means following codes.

Rob from the rich and give to the poor is such a code so I agree with lawful.

Evil is definitely not it though for Robinhood.

The Sheriff of Nottingham is Lawful Evil.

 

[Stalker0]

Is it possible that in some situations, like this 1, theirs no right or wrong Alignment to assign a Pc or Npc,?

There is a very good reason that Dnd has steadily moved away from alignment as having any mechanical impact to your character.... because no one agrees on alignment, this thread just being another great example.

Alignment is a role playing aid only, if it helps you get to the character you want to play great, but its really no longer a straight jacket or "reward/penalty" for playing a certain way.

As to the character, my only note is this seems more like the "personal adventurer" Robin Hood and not the "leader of men" version. Though you have persuasion your charisma is just average. If your going for more of a "leader of men, inspirer of the people" theme, I would bump up the charisma.

 

[Stalker0]

Ok so that said, since everyone has to have their two cents on alignment, this is how the book defines them:

Lawful Good. (LG) creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society. Gold dragons and paladins are typically lawful good.

Neutral Good. (NG) folk do the best they can to help others according to their needs. Many celestials are neutral good.

Chaotic Good. (CG) creatures act as their conscience directs, with little regard for what others expect. Copper dragons and unicorns are typically chaotic good.

Lawful Neutral. (LN) individuals act in accordance with law, tradition, or personal codes. Modrons and many wizards and monks are lawful neutral.

Neutral. (N) is the alignment of those who prefer to steer clear of moral questions and don’t take sides, doing what seems best at the time. Druids are traditionally neutral, as are typical townsfolk.

Chaotic Neutral. (CN) creatures follow their whims, holding their personal freedom above all else. Many rogues and bards are chaotic neutral.

Lawful Evil. (LE) creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order. Devils and blue dragons are typically lawful evil.

Neutral Evil. (NE) is the alignment of those who do whatever they can get away with, without compassion or qualms. Yugoloths are typically neutral evil.

Chaotic Evil. (CE) creatures act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust. Demons and red dragons are typically chaotic evil.



Based on this, the typical "Robin Hood" character would be Chaotic Good, maybe Neutral Good.

 

[jerryrice4949]

My mate choose Lawful Evil alignment for 3 reasons

The 1st is because of the whole rob the rich to feed the poor thing

The 2nd is that despite the fact that most laws are both completely biased and totally corrupt they are still laws

The 3rd is that despite the fact that almost all law enforcement officials are corrupt and those that aren't are too scared of the power and influence that the 1's that are have their still law enforcement officials

I don’t use alignment in my games but this would be chaotic or neutral good not lawful evil.

 

[Charlaquin]

I've just thought of something

Is it possible that in some situations, like this 1, theirs no right or wrong Alignment to assign a Pc or Npc,? it just comes down to a individuals opinion and different people could have different opinions on what alignment the same Pc or Npc should be

I mean, yes, but at that point alignment is meaningless anyway, so why even have it.

 

[Charlaquin]

Lawful Evil. (LE) creatures methodically take what they want, within the limits of a code of tradition, loyalty, or order. Devils and blue dragons are typically lawful evil.

Amusingly, under that definition you could have a reasonable argument for lawful evil Robin Hood. He takes what he wants, within the limits of his code that says he must take it from the rich, and give it to the poor.

 

[ad_hoc]

Amusingly, under that definition you could have a reasonable argument for lawful evil Robin Hood. He takes what he wants, within the limits of his code that says he must take it from the rich, and give it to the poor.

I think that is why there are examples given to clarify the meaning.

A devil isn't helping the poor out of goodness.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Robin Hood is like Archetypical Chaotic or Neutral Good.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

If it were up to me the alignment I'd assign him would depend on what source he's based on

If he's based on Robin Hood as he is in The Disney Animated Movie I'd class him as Lawful Good

If he's based on how Robin Hood is in the books I'd class him as Lawful Evil

If he's based on how Robin Hood is in the TV Show from roughly a decade ago I'd say Lawful Evil in Series 1, Neutral Evil in Series 2 and Chaotic Good in series 3

If he's based on how Robin Hood is in the films I'd say Neutral Good

How do you ever class him as Evil period?

 

[Charlaquin]

How do you ever class him as Evil period?

By being unable to conceive of lawbreaking as a good action.

 

[Tonguez]

How do you ever class him as Evil period?

If you take the Sheriff of Notingham to have held legitimate authority under the King (John) then Robin and his outlaw gang are in open rebellion.
Sure the taxes might be harsh and the Sheriff a lecherous tyrant but does that justify Robin attacking innocent nobles and tax collectors who are just doing their job?

And who are these ‘poor’ he’s helping? More bandits and rebels who refuse to support the Kings war with the French?

 

[JMISBEST]

My helpful comment - alignment sucks just ignore it. Robin Hood however is not evil, so if you must make him Neutral

For your stats I’d put Wis higher than Int

And Centaur language? I dunno if Robin Hood had that many conversations with Centaurs

My mates thinking was Robin Hood never speaks with Centaurs but Robin Hood spend the majority of his time in Sherwood Forest, in A Dnd Campaign set in A Version of England were Robin Hood is real the ability to speak with other sentient forest dwelling races would occasionally get Robin Hood allies and because even the most remote of Wood Elf communities have at least 1 member that can speak the common language The Centaur Language was the obvious choice

PS my mate didn't roll the dice then assign them as he wanted like you normally do in 5E Dnd he simply decided to roll for each stat like you did in 1E and hope for the best, luckily he got a fairly powerful character

 

[haakon1]

Dragon Magazine did a good campaign look at Sherwood and the Robin Hood game, I think back in 3e days.

Yes. Dungeon #82, Sep-Oct 2000, “Dark Times in Sherwood“ by Ian Malcomson. Dungeon #82 was the first issue in 3e rules.

 

[JMISBEST]

How do you ever class him as Evil period?

In the case of The TV Show its how I judge his actions and morale, which over the course of the tv show go down hill at roughly the same rate as his life, meaning always at least once a season and usually at least twice a season

For example in the season 1 finale he believes Marian killed by Guisborns hands and in his anger this is the 1st time he kills, and no its not merely the 1st time the viewers see Robin kill, it actually is the 1st time Robin kills

This shocks even The Sherif who says, and I quote, "this isn't right, Hood doesn't kill", and when the shows main villain admits that this isn't right because his enemy/the hero, doesn't kill and that something isn't right then even people who prior to the season 1 finale hadn't watched a single episode will know that whatevers happened its very bad

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Amusingly, under that definition you could have a reasonable argument for lawful evil Robin Hood. He takes what he wants, within the limits of his code that says he must take it from the rich, and give it to the poor.

It says a code of "tradition, loyalty, or order". It is neither traditional nor legal to rob the rich, and Robin is not acting under orders from someone else.

 

[Immeril]

If you take the Sheriff of Notingham to have held legitimate authority under the King (John) then Robin and his outlaw gang are in open rebellion.
Sure the taxes might be harsh and the Sheriff a lecherous tyrant but does that justify Robin attacking innocent nobles and tax collectors who are just doing their job?

And who are these ‘poor’ he’s helping? More bandits and rebels who refuse to support the Kings war with the French?

Disregarding the Sheriff's legitimate authority isn't in itself evil, it's chaotic.
Robin Hood is willing to follow the law as long as it is just. He's loyal to king Richard. But during prince John's regency, he rebelled against the lawful (albeit evil, self-serving) regime.

 

[JMISBEST]

Disregarding the Sheriff's legitimate authority isn't in itself evil, it's chaotic.
Robin Hood is willing to follow the law as long as it is just. He's loyal to king Richard. But during prince John's regency, he rebelled against the lawful (albeit evil, self-serving) regime.

I guessed someone would say this eventually so to ensure that I was prepared for when someone did say this I asked my mate well in advance, as in almost 6 hours in advance. Below is what he said. Your thoughts

My mate's answer is that in his opinion Robin Hood has decided that Prince Johns action count as seizing the throne, which is treason, and laws passed by a traitor that has seized the throne, even if prior to his treason he was running the country on behalf of the rightful king, aren't legal, and anyone that tries to enforce them, which includes The Sheriff, is a criminal, which means that he/Robin, isn't a criminal, the law enforcement people are

 

[MonsterEnvy]

If you take the Sheriff of Notingham to have held legitimate authority under the King (John) then Robin and his outlaw gang are in open rebellion.
Sure the taxes might be harsh and the Sheriff a lecherous tyrant but does that justify Robin attacking innocent nobles and tax collectors who are just doing their job?

And who are these ‘poor’ he’s helping? More bandits and rebels who refuse to support the Kings war with the French?

Pretty sure that counts as Chaotic not evil.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I guessed someone would say this eventually so to ensure that I was prepared for when someone did say this I asked my mate well in advance, as in almost 6 hours in advance. Below is what he said. Your thoughts

My mate's answer is that in his opinion Robin Hood has decided that Prince Johns action count as seizing the throne, which is treason, and laws passed by a traitor that has seized the throne, even if prior to his treason he was running the country on behalf of the rightful king, aren't legal, and anyone that tries to enforce them, which includes The Sheriff, is a criminal, which means that he/Robin, isn't a criminal, the law enforcement people are

Refusing to accept Legitimate Authority is generally Chaotic.