Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Arguments and assumptions against multi classing
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 7488625" data-attributes="member: 6775031"><p>They're only conspicuous by absence if you put them in the wrong context. If you look at the AD&D rules and compare them to the 5E rules, then you might draw the conclusion that paladins could fall in AD&D and can't fall in 5E.</p><p></p><p>But AD&D rules aren't 5E rules, and it would be wrong to take them into consideration here. Just by what it says in the PHB, about how the game works, the DM is already fully expected to role-play the gods to the best of their ability. We might reasonably disagree about whether any given action is something that a particular deity could or should do, but both perspectives are equally RAW, as long as both of our opinions are based on what it actually says in the book.</p><p></p><p>My own best guess is that they took out the specific rules for falling, because they didn't want to seem like they were encouraging that as the only option. I've heard stories of bad DMs who would contrive moral dilemmas that were nearly guaranteed to make a paladin fall, because they read those rules in the book and assumed that's the sort of thing they were supposed to do. By not explicitly calling out the possibility, it leaves the DM free to address egregious cases, but it doesn't encourage them to pull the rug out under a well-intentioned player.</p><p>There are players who intentionally make a mockery of the setting, by playing to the letter of the rule rather than its underlying intent, and banking on the expectation that the DM won't call them out for it. That sort of thing happens all the time. </p><p></p><p>In my experience, jerk players are significantly more common than jerk DMs. If I have one message for anyone reading this, it's that the DM needs to stand up for themselves and their game. Don't let a player use the rules to bully you, because nobody at the table will have any fun if the DM isn't having fun.The DM is the only one who could possibly know with certainty what makes sense in their own world. If their immediate reaction is to assume the player is up to something with such a suggestion, then that makes sense, because it is likely to be the case most of the time. If the DM has a reason to believe that the players is well-intentioned, then they may choose to look further into the matter, and then make a decision. </p><p></p><p>It is unreasonable of a player to bring such a character to the DM with the expectation that it will be allowed. That's just pure player entitlement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Crimson Binome, post: 7488625, member: 6775031"] They're only conspicuous by absence if you put them in the wrong context. If you look at the AD&D rules and compare them to the 5E rules, then you might draw the conclusion that paladins could fall in AD&D and can't fall in 5E. But AD&D rules aren't 5E rules, and it would be wrong to take them into consideration here. Just by what it says in the PHB, about how the game works, the DM is already fully expected to role-play the gods to the best of their ability. We might reasonably disagree about whether any given action is something that a particular deity could or should do, but both perspectives are equally RAW, as long as both of our opinions are based on what it actually says in the book. My own best guess is that they took out the specific rules for falling, because they didn't want to seem like they were encouraging that as the only option. I've heard stories of bad DMs who would contrive moral dilemmas that were nearly guaranteed to make a paladin fall, because they read those rules in the book and assumed that's the sort of thing they were supposed to do. By not explicitly calling out the possibility, it leaves the DM free to address egregious cases, but it doesn't encourage them to pull the rug out under a well-intentioned player. There are players who intentionally make a mockery of the setting, by playing to the letter of the rule rather than its underlying intent, and banking on the expectation that the DM won't call them out for it. That sort of thing happens all the time. In my experience, jerk players are significantly more common than jerk DMs. If I have one message for anyone reading this, it's that the DM needs to stand up for themselves and their game. Don't let a player use the rules to bully you, because nobody at the table will have any fun if the DM isn't having fun.The DM is the only one who could possibly know with certainty what makes sense in their own world. If their immediate reaction is to assume the player is up to something with such a suggestion, then that makes sense, because it is likely to be the case most of the time. If the DM has a reason to believe that the players is well-intentioned, then they may choose to look further into the matter, and then make a decision. It is unreasonable of a player to bring such a character to the DM with the expectation that it will be allowed. That's just pure player entitlement. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Arguments and assumptions against multi classing
Top