D&D General Alignment experiment


To go along with both the current alignment mechanical discussion and bring it back to the experiment in the OP, I think there is a lot of potential in alignment restricted prestige classes. I always thought the Paladin should have been a PC, though I know the popular take is that Paladin is generic and not specific. Though, if base classes were stripped out of alignment it allows for an alignment free game, while giving PCs a way to bring it back mechanically. The bonus is that going alignment restricted is now a choice the character makes later in their adventuring career instead of a beginning default.

log in or register to remove this ad


In the spirit of if you can't say something nice. ;)

I appreciated the Book of Vile Darkness for having Demon Lords and Archdevils.

I appreciated the Book of Exalted Deeds for having more celestials, some discussion of Celestial Lords, and some interesting Exalted Feats (an option for poverty concept characters was a good idea).

From what I heard of Magic of Incarnum it sounded neat. Soulmelds tying into Chakra magic concepts tying into magic item slots and mechanical alignment ideas. Flexible powers that could change in between fights or in the middle of a fight.

Tome of Magic was great flavor for me. I felt Truename magic tied into the flavor of a Wizard of Earthsea and for a PC in one of my games I was able to house rule the magic system into being based off of target CR and class level rather than skills which took care of a lot of the scaling problem of the skill system mechanics. I loved vestiges as a narrative thing and binders were a decent concept even.


Morkus from Orkus
Eh, Incarnum had solid ideas with poor execution and WAY too much insistence that everything be blue themed for some reason.
I'll give you that one. I liked a lot of the Incarnum concept, but couldn't get one shred of use out of it. In fact, I liked the concept so much that I periodically pull it out to look at and see if I might have been wrong and there might be a diamond hidden somewhere. Nope! :)
The closest runner up IME was Tome of Magic purely for introducing a class that gets less capable as it levels as a Now Shut Up to people who wanted a skill caster.
I'll have to take a look at that. I don't think anyone in my group ever even looked the classes there.


Shaper of Worlds
This thread, and some of the hottest takes in it and others on this forum, made me decide to take Alignment in Sins of the Scorpion Age in a different direction...

Instead of Law and Chaos, Good or Evil, PCs are meant to be blanketly heroic and then have as their alignment axes Nobility and Urbanity.

Noble: Forthright, honest, fairness, etc.
Ignoble: Deceitful, underhanded, unfair, etc.

You can be an Ignoble hero, like Jack Sparrow, or a Noble one like Will Turner.

Urbane: Polite, refined, at home in cities, etc.
Arcadian: Blunt, unconcerned, at home in nature, etc.

So you can be a noble arcadian hero who is honest, forthright, blunt, and wild, who has issues wearing formal clothes and doesn't care which fork he's using... Or a noble urbane hero who is honest, forthright, polite, and civilized, who spends his time in the wild whining about biting flies and a lack of comfortable bedding.

And then instead of "Neutral" we'll use "Indifferent". Someone who is Noble Indifferent can put on feigned polity or discard it based on circumstances and not care either way.

Problem Solved!
Last edited:

Jacob Lewis

Ye Olde GM


It feels funny how people don’t think of alignment as “descriptive”.

It shows how much effort they put into writing a character versus actually playing it.


People just need to understand they can be the ones to determine what Good/Evil/Law/Chaos mean, and run with it, or not. Its not as if Alignment is mechanically dense in 5e.

It truly is not as complicated as people make it around here.

Level Up!

An Advertisement