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

[TerraDave]

...

Obviously, the message is to point players towards good, but that isn't really the game's business.

In some cases, it could be the DMs business, or at least the groups business.

But I would prefer things like poison or anti-paladin's to be in the DMG not because they are eviiilll but because they are less core and more campaign optional then say, halflings (though I could totally see some groups not playing with halflings). On the other hand animate dead or cause wounds should be in the PHB, along with all the other 'evil' material, e.g. that which allows you to harm, trick, or control others, which is about 85% of the page count.

 

[lutecius]

It's not a big thing but it does sound a bit lame, especially concerning spells. I'm not even sure what makes a spell evil (apart from the descriptor) when so many abilities revolve around hurting and killing things. I can't really think of one that couldn't be used by "good" characters (as far as dnd adventurers go) under some circumstances. From an organisational point of view this separation looks like more trouble than it's worth.

As for evil classes, sure, evil characters may cause some problems in a cooperative game, especially with beginners, and some players may feel entitled to play an evil class because it's in the PHB, regardless of the campaign. But similar conflicts may occur for many other reasons and I think it's a good thing to make players understand the need for a cohesive party from the start. Those who want to play evil (or chaotic) characters would simply have to come up with a good reason why they'd want to accomplish a particular mission and collaborate with non-evil PCs (or each other in an all-evil group).

 

[TwoSix]

There's no post option for "Don't care where it's located." They obviously should include it at some point, but I have no concern about which book it's in.

 

[Ahnehnois]

In some cases, it could be the DMs business, or at least the groups business.

Absolutely. Not debating that.

But I would prefer things like poison or anti-paladin's to be in the DMG not because they are eviiilll but because they are less core and more campaign optional then say, halflings (though I could totally see some groups not playing with halflings). On the other hand animate dead or cause wounds should be in the PHB, along with all the other 'evil' material, e.g. that which allows you to harm, trick, or control others, which is about 85% of the page count.

To me, this leads to the question of what the niche for the DMG is. Personally, I'm kind of preferring PF's one giant core rulebook approach. The editions have always struggled to decide what rules to relegate to the DMG.

 

[dmgorgon]

Yes, have a cohesive party is very important. It also doesn't occur naturally, especially when everyone is role playing their characters. Adding evil to the mix makes it more difficult.

 

[TwoSix]

Yes, have a cohesive party is very important. It also doesn't occur naturally, especially when everyone is role playing their characters. Adding evil to the mix makes it more difficult.

That's true. My one group has taken to having votes of "evil or not-evil" when we plan our characters.

 

[TerraDave]

...

To me, this leads to the question of what the niche for the DMG is. Personally, I'm kind of preferring PF's one giant core rulebook approach. The editions have always struggled to decide what rules to relegate to the DMG.

Its a good question! My feeling is almost the opposite. To the extent to which something is optional or really about DM adjudication, it should be in the DM book. The (core) player book should be shorter and very focused.

 

[dmgorgon]

One of the worst post-1e changes in D&D is the increasing level of "YOU WILL BE GOOD GUYS!!!" shoved down the playstyle throat.

From removing assassins from the PH to not having evil gods in the PH, I think this trend is horrible. Evil pcs are a playstyle choice; leaving them out of the PH smacks very much of enforcing a specific playstyle- something that I thought 5e was going to try to stay away from.

So far, this decision is one of my two least favorite things about 5e. (The other being the damned overpowered human racial package.)

I do recall that change upsetting many 1e players. In fact, it was a hot topic for the 1e/2e edition war.

The assassin was removed from the game because they thought that any class could be an assassin in principle. While that's true, they did add it back in as a 2e kit in the Thief's Handbook. If you haven't already you should listen to the recent pod cast with Steve Winter. He explains this a bit more.

In my experience it was a good change because the assassin PCs were always trying to kill the other characters. When things start to go bad in a party they get even worse with Evil characters, even more so when a Paladin is in the group. IMO, New DMs and New players don't need that crap.

I also support the removal of all the gods from the PHB. I like the concept of domains, but the PHB should be campaign setting neutral just like the 2e PHB. I hate it when new players show up worshiping gods that are not in my campaign. It's even worse when they have built their characters with powers that those particular gods grant them.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Yes, have a cohesive party is very important. It also doesn't occur naturally, especially when everyone is role playing their characters. Adding evil to the mix makes it more difficult.

All true to a significant extent. I just don't think that putting a few spells in the DMG will stop a player from acting evil. That's really an interpersonal issue within the group, not a rules question.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Its a good question! My feeling is almost the opposite. To the extent to which something is optional or really about DM adjudication, it should be in the DM book. The (core) player book should be shorter and very focused.

As far as I'm concerned, it's all optional. I don't see that evil spells or classes are any different from the other ones in that regard. DM's restrict access for any number of reasons. Dictating the moral compass of the game is simply one of those reasons.