Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7924450" data-attributes="member: 4937">This reminds me of the change where they made 'speak with plants' work by giving plants sentience at that moment, rather than allowing communication with something that was already sentient. It avoids the "screaming broccoli" problem and makes things more familiar to the average modern player. They do this though at the cost of making the game not backwards compatible - for example a Libram of Silver Magic.But this is still not quite true. It's mostly true now, but there are exceptions.For example, 5e srd: "Alignment is an essential part of the nature of celestials and fiends. A devil does not choose to be lawful evil, and it doesn’t tend toward lawful evil, but rather it is lawful evil in its essence. If it somehow ceased to be lawful evil, it would cease to be a devil."This doesn't imply the devil ceases to be a devil when in its own opinion that isn't lawful evil. A devil might correctly perceive with its supernatural wisdom that it has ceased to be lawful evil, but I don't think the intended implication is that any act is lawful evil or not merely as a matter of opinion. Else, the whole alignment is an essential part of the nature bit wouldn't make sense.What 5e has tended to do is to make alignment of anything less than an outer planar being not a significant and essential part of their nature.  They've tended to rewrite mechanics that interacted with alignment to interact with classes of outer planar beings, and they've tended to turn damage conditional on alignment into named sorts of damage.Also, I would like to point out that there is a difference between something being a "matter of opinion" and something being a matter of disagreement.    That people disagree over something doesn't make it a mere "matter of opinion".   There is a categorical difference between the statement, "Chocolate tastes good" and "The Earth is a disk.", even though they are both statements upon which people have differing opinions.   The first statement is truly subjective and solely therefore a matter of opinion: everyone is right regarding their own tastes.   But the second statement is a statement about objective reality to which everyone is subject.   Someone is right or wrong, regardless of their being a disagreement.</blockquote>

Verification