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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So what's the problem with restrictions, especially when it comes to the Paladin?
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="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 6121800" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>If you mean that people will misinterpret it no matter how clear it is, I agree.</p><p></p><p>They will have to be interpreted to a point, yes. Much as a druid "reveres nature", or the like, and people have different takes on what that means (even if the author goes on to clarify).</p><p></p><p>I only played in 3.X, but I don't remember "respect life" at all in the code. If it was, the sentiment should be made more clear, I agree.</p><p></p><p>If the code says "act with honor (not lying...)", then I think it's abundantly clear that the Paladin can't lie without losing his powers. People will still misinterpret it, yes, but the same goes for any strong thematic material (druids, clerics, warlocks, etc.). I still want to keep those strong themes around, so I say if some people misinterpret things, oh well. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good, and all that. Make it as clear as possible, and then let people play the game.</p><p></p><p>I think the "problem" has more to do with trying to squeeze standard moral views into the alignment system. In my game, Good was literally a defined force, but to my players, it wasn't always "the right thing to do" (and they were Good throughout most of the game... two started as Neutral, but transitioned to Good). This led to some pretty interesting conflicts in the game (the Herades philosophical discussion, backing up Good people just because you're Good, clashing with but never attacking a Lawful Evil Monk NPC that only hunted Evil people, siding with Asmodeus for the greater good [not Good], etc.).</p><p></p><p>Hopefully alignment is optional anyways, though. I like it in my D&D, but clearly enough people have real problems with it that it's just an option. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 6121800, member: 6668292"] If you mean that people will misinterpret it no matter how clear it is, I agree. They will have to be interpreted to a point, yes. Much as a druid "reveres nature", or the like, and people have different takes on what that means (even if the author goes on to clarify). I only played in 3.X, but I don't remember "respect life" at all in the code. If it was, the sentiment should be made more clear, I agree. If the code says "act with honor (not lying...)", then I think it's abundantly clear that the Paladin can't lie without losing his powers. People will still misinterpret it, yes, but the same goes for any strong thematic material (druids, clerics, warlocks, etc.). I still want to keep those strong themes around, so I say if some people misinterpret things, oh well. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good, and all that. Make it as clear as possible, and then let people play the game. I think the "problem" has more to do with trying to squeeze standard moral views into the alignment system. In my game, Good was literally a defined force, but to my players, it wasn't always "the right thing to do" (and they were Good throughout most of the game... two started as Neutral, but transitioned to Good). This led to some pretty interesting conflicts in the game (the Herades philosophical discussion, backing up Good people just because you're Good, clashing with but never attacking a Lawful Evil Monk NPC that only hunted Evil people, siding with Asmodeus for the greater good [not Good], etc.). Hopefully alignment is optional anyways, though. I like it in my D&D, but clearly enough people have real problems with it that it's just an option. As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So what's the problem with restrictions, especially when it comes to the Paladin?
Top