D&D 5E Evil characters material not going to be in the PHB

[Paraxis]

Where is the pole option to not have EVIL PC content in the game at all?

I want alignment completely gutted from the game. Anything that would be villainous like stuff from the old Book of Vile Darkness should only be in the monster manual.

PC's starting from level one are Big Damn Heroes, the heroes part to me means that if alignment was used they should all be good with the rare exception being neutral.

 

[delericho]

PC's starting from level one are Big Damn Heroes, the heroes part to me means that if alignment was used they should all be good with the rare exception being neutral.

... in your game.

And don't get me wrong, that is absolutely your prerogative, and it's a fine playstyle choice. But it's not the only one. Indeed, when I finally turned to some of the Appendix N works that inspired the game, it was actually telling just how far from "Big Damn Heroes" many of the protagonists were - there were a lot of self-centred rogues amoungst them, and some who were outright evil.

 

[Paraxis]

... in your game.

And don't get me wrong, that is absolutely your prerogative, and it's a fine playstyle choice. But it's not the only one. Indeed, when I finally turned to some of the Appendix N works that inspired the game, it was actually telling just how far from "Big Damn Heroes" many of the protagonists were - there were a lot of self-centred rogues amoungst them, and some who were outright evil.

That is why the best solution is to just remove alignment from the game.
No protection from evil, detect evil, smite evil etc... Just change it to protection from undead, smite fiend, etc...

So that way if a PC wants to play a warlock that sells his soul to a demon prince or an assassin is hiding in a crowd you can't use some magic to detect them or keep them from coming into a building.

 

[Evenglare]

Not reading through 10 pages of comments, but I can't believe that people are FOR not having evil rules in the PHB. How could MORE OPTIONS for people be a bad thing? Simply ignore them if you don't like it. It sounds pretty selfish to me actually, basically I can't have those rules in the PHB because you don't like it, and want an entire fanbase to be subject to those opinions.

 

[delericho]

That is why the best solution is to just remove alignment from the game.
No protection from evil, detect evil, smite evil etc... Just change it to protection from undead, smite fiend, etc...

On balance, that's probably the way to go.

However, your previous post argued that the PCs should be "Big Damn Heroes", which isn't actually reliant on alignment being part of the game. It was that, and specifically the absolute nature of it, that I was taking issue with.

 

[the Jester]

PC's starting from level one are Big Damn Heroes, the heroes part to me means that if alignment was used they should all be good with the rare exception being neutral.

...in YOUR campaign. For SOME playstyles.

Not for mine, not for many others.

 

[Lwaxy]

Oh jeez no, I love myself an evil campaign here and there. Way of the Wicked anyone? And I almost always prefer to play neutral chars.

This is also why I want the evil options in the PHB. No need to artificial limit options plus yeah, the missing spells would be very odd.

 

[Raith5]

Part of me says: do you need rules for evil? Evil is intent and action. A paladin uses smite on a demon, an anti-paladin uses it a helpless prisoner. A ranger shoots an ogre in the face, an assassin, the prince in the back. I don't think there needs to be explicit mechanical support for evil.

Then again, D&D has had precisely that in the past, and there are special cases, like "inherently evil" spells and poisons.

I think I'm in favor of dropping the all inherent moral descriptors. It's not evil to poison a tyrant, it's not inherently evil to create undead -- perhaps they were the willing martyrs?

Agree. I have a hard time seeing what alignment and rule based notions of evil add to D&D at the best of times. I quite like the idea of the ambiguous hero or the guy who fights evil with evil spells etc.

If a PC is evil then it should have in game and in world consequences and costs - not be discouraged or be ruled out of order by the rules.

 

[Lwaxy]

Indeed. Which is one more reason for me to have all the options in the PHB. There are a lot of groups, some of mine included, that never really used alignment to begin with.

 

[Mistwell]

Not reading through 10 pages of comments, but I can't believe that people are FOR not having evil rules in the PHB. How could MORE OPTIONS for people be a bad thing? Simply ignore them if you don't like it. It sounds pretty selfish to me actually, basically I can't have those rules in the PHB because you don't like it, and want an entire fanbase to be subject to those opinions.

Some people have said they are fine with that content in the game in general, but it's a bit too niche to squeeze into the first PHB and probably needs to be in a different book. The PHB cannot fit all playstyles all at once, and needs to make some choices as to what to put in the first book and what to put into later books, and this just seems like the kind of content that works best (and benefits from being fleshed out more) in a later book. So sure, throw some basic evil spells in the PHB (like cause wounds), allow for evil characters with a brief description in the PHB and DMG, but the bulk of the evil character material should probably be in a book dedicated to that concept.