D&D 5E Recent Errata clarifications

I actually don't have a big problem with default PC race alignments going, as long as all the cultural stuff they do have remains in place to advise and inspire players.
How do you differentiate between inspiring players and dictating to players? I'm pretty sure Gygax only intended to inspire, but he became Word of God for 40 years.

The intention is to move away from the idea that mopocks all have the same history and culture, no matter what world they come from. The mopocks of Middlehaven have a completely different history and culture to the mopocks of Parasynbar.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Staffan

Legend
Alignments have always just been defaults in 5E. They just buried it in the intro to the MM that no one ever reads.
On one hand yes. On the other hand, there was a paragraph in the alignment section of the PHB that said something like (and I'm paraphrasing because it's been removed on D&D Beyond): "PC races were created by gods who liked free will, so they can have any alignment. But orcs and goblins and stuff were created by evil gods who didn't, so they are almost universally evil, and even the occasional exception has evil urges all the time, and that to some degree includes half-orcs too."

I found that quite abhorrent even back in 2014, and it has not aged well.
 

On one hand yes. On the other hand, there was a paragraph in the alignment section of the PHB that said something like (and I'm paraphrasing because it's been removed on D&D Beyond): "PC races were created by gods who liked free will, so they can have any alignment. But orcs and goblins and stuff were created by evil gods who didn't, so they are almost universally evil, and even the occasional exception has evil urges all the time, and that to some degree includes half-orcs too."

I found that quite abhorrent even back in 2014, and it has not aged well.
It was true as far back as 1st edition. But it's become pretty clear that you have to work really really hard to make it clear to your reader that a suggestion isn't a dictum.
 



Yeah, but saying "orcs are evil because Gruumsh made them that way, so it's totally OK to murderdeathkill them all" is not a good look.
Orcs can be any alignment, including evil. If a DM wants the orcs in their world to be evil because god made them that way WotC are making it clear that they are free to do so, good look or not.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I have found that rather than try and convince the people who enjoyed things the old way that they are wrong for not embracing the changes... I just smirk, shrug my shoulders, and wish them well. Because once they "stop giving their money to WotC", there will be two other new players replacing them that will.

Either that, or they'll just play their previous D&D editions and still occasionally give their money to WotC by buying older stuff off of DMs Guild. And WotC doesn't really care, they just want people to play anything-- it doesn't matter to them what people play.
 

On one hand yes. On the other hand, there was a paragraph in the alignment section of the PHB that said something like (and I'm paraphrasing because it's been removed on D&D Beyond): "PC races were created by gods who liked free will, so they can have any alignment. But orcs and goblins and stuff were created by evil gods who didn't, so they are almost universally evil, and even the occasional exception has evil urges all the time, and that to some degree includes half-orcs too."

I found that quite abhorrent even back in 2014, and it has not aged well.
I'm curious, how do you reconcile with yourself the Lord of the Ring mythos to enjoy the films or the upcoming series?
 


Remove ads

Top