• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E WotC's Jeremy Crawford Talks D&D Alignment Changes

Jeremy Crawford has spoken about changes to the way alignment will be referred to in future D&D books. It starts with a reminder that no rule in D&D dictates your alignment. Data from D&D Beyond in June 2019 (Note that in the transcript below, the questions in quotes were his own words but presumably refer to questions he's seen asked previously). Friendly reminder: no rule in D&D mandates...

Jeremy Crawford has spoken about changes to the way alignment will be referred to in future D&D books. It starts with a reminder that no rule in D&D dictates your alignment.

align.png

Data from D&D Beyond in June 2019

(Note that in the transcript below, the questions in quotes were his own words but presumably refer to questions he's seen asked previously).

Friendly reminder: no rule in D&D mandates your character's alignment, and no class is restricted to certain alignments. You determine your character's moral compass. I see discussions that refer to such rules, yet they don't exist in 5th edition D&D.

Your character's alignment in D&D doesn't prescribe their behavior. Alignment describes inclinations. It's a roleplaying tool, like flaws, bonds, and ideals. If any of those tools don't serve your group's bliss, don't use them. The game's system doesn't rely on those tools.

D&D has general rules and exceptions to those rules. For example, you choose whatever alignment you want for your character at creation (general rule). There are a few magic items and other transformative effects that might affect a character's alignment (exceptions).

Want a benevolent green dragon in your D&D campaign or a sweet werewolf candlemaker? Do it. The rule in the Monster Manual is that the DM determines a monster's alignment. The DM plays that monster. The DM decides who that monster is in play.

Regarding a D&D monster's alignment, here's the general rule from the Monster Manual: "The alignment specified in a monster's stat block is the default. Feel free to depart from it and change a monster's alignment to suit the needs of your campaign."

"What about the Oathbreaker? It says you have to be evil." The Oathbreaker is a paladin subclass (not a class) designed for NPCs. If your DM lets you use it, you're already being experimental, so if you want to play a kindhearted Oathbreaker, follow your bliss!

"Why are player characters punished for changing their alignment?" There is no general system in 5th-edition D&D for changing your alignment and there are no punishments or rewards in the core rules for changing it. You can just change it. Older editions had such rules.

Even though the rules of 5th-edition D&D state that players and DMs determine alignment, the suggested alignments in our books have undeniably caused confusion. That's why future books will ditch such suggestions for player characters and reframe such things for the DM.

"What about the werewolf's curse of lycanthropy? It makes you evil like the werewolf." The DM determines the alignment of the werewolf. For example, the werewolf you face might be a sweetheart. The alignment in a stat block is a suggestion to the DM, nothing more.

"What about demons, devils, and angels in D&D? Their alignments can't change." They can change. The default story makes the mythological assumptions we expect, but the Monster Manual tells the DM to change any monster's alignment without hesitation to serve the campaign.

"You've reminded us that alignment is a suggestion. Does that mean you're not changing anything about D&D peoples after all?" We are working to remove racist tropes from D&D. Alignment is only one part of that work, and alignment will be treated differently in the future.

"Why are you telling us to ignore the alignment rules in D&D?" I'm not. I'm sharing what the alignment rules have been in the Player's Handbook & Monster Manual since 2014. We know that those rules are insufficient and have changes coming in future products.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

reelo

Hero
The split between chimp and bonobo is a recent one. Certainly more recent than the one between human ancestors and chimp/bonobo ancestors. Drawing conclusions about our palaeolithic past from bonobos has not more (or less) merit than drawing different conclusions from chimps. Our ancestors were neither.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hussar

Legend
What you are describing is "World of Warcraft".
Is that a bad thing?

What I'm describing is pretty much standard in any modern 4x game. Civ, Stellaris, whatever. Heck, it was around in Master's of Orion and that predates World of Warcraft by a decade or so.

This isn't a new idea, nor is it even an MMO idea.
 

I am happy that people are taking an interest in this, academically.

The post that reconstructs paleolithic humanity, including the role of the feminine figurines, synthesizes many different academic sources. Mostly they are papers from Classical Archeology, but also Stone Age archeology (paleolithic, neolithic, chalcolithic), some come from studies relating to the construction of gender, and some from animal behavioralists comparing humans to other animals. Even the philosopher Foucault is an influence, because he focuses on identifying what a culture censors in order to understand how those in power perpetuate their power.

Unfortunately, most of the books and papers that are most influential to me, I have donated to libraries and individuals. It would take effort to remember which books to recommend.

At the moment, three books that stick out on this topic, are probably dated now, but I remember them being eye-opening about sexuality in the ancient world.

• The Reign of the Phallus : Sexual Politics in Ancient Athens (Eva C Keuls 1985). If I remember correctly, her book both focuses on the transition from matriarchy to patriarchy evident within Greek sacred memory, and focuses on the construct of the institution of prostitution − how it works. I remember the fascination of how women prostitutes were both among the most powerful people in Greek society because of being educated, independent, and allowed to own property, and at the same time, among the least powerful because they were a palpable threat to a Greek patriarchy that almost institutionally punished and humiliated these prostitutes to keep them out of power.

• Womens Work : The First 20,000 Years : Women, Cloth, and Society in Early Times (Elizabeth Wayland Barber 1996). I think this is the same book I have in mind, the title is something like this. The book I have in mind is ingenious how she traced the origins of the invention of the loom, and how this single invention spread across paleolithic humanity. When the mens group went off to hunt, the womens group did the weaving of cloth because they could easily put it down if they needed to attend to the children or the elderly. She notices the skirt that the paleolithic woman figurines are wearing, and tracks its evolution all the way into modern times among traditional womens clothing. Along the way, she is able to plausibly reconstruct a great deal of information, including the sacred ceremonial function of this skirt that the figurines are wearing.

• Greek Homosexuality (J K Dover 1978). Probably worth mentioning is the pioneering work on the social construction of homosexuality. He was way before his time. Heh, apparently he was one of the few academics who could talk about homosexuality publically − because he himself was "notoriously" heterosexual. His work is solid and is still a reference.

Anyway there are many sources. It is an endlessly fascinating topic.
 
Last edited:




Equating what happens in prison with the normal spectrum of sexuality among free, consenting adults is venturing into territory liberally seasoned with landmines.
The thing is, when people use violence to silence gays, they literally erase the evidence.

Scientists have no choice but to extrapolate from whatever evidence survives.

In any case, if someone uses violence to "prove" a claim is true, it evidences the claim is inherently false. Something that is true, people can see for themselves. The need to use violence proves the claim is false. If heterosexuals are using violence to censor homosexuality, then a claim about "almost everyone" being heterosexual is obviously false.

Even in this thread, there have been a handful of persons who seemed eager to harm gay people. Probably not physical violence (yet), but certainly an effort to erase gay people.
 
Last edited:

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Supporter
The thing is, when people use violence to silence gays, they literally erase the evidence.

Scientists have no choice but to extrapolate from whatever evidence survives.

In any case, if someone uses violence to "prove" a claim is true, it evidences the claim is inherently false. Something that is true, people can see for themselves. If heterosexuals are using violence to censor homosexuality, then a claim about "almost everyone" being heterosexual is obviously false.

Even in this thread, there have been a handful of persons who seemed eager to harm gay people. Probably not physical violence (yet), but certainly an effort to erase gay people.
The comparison is still a big, fat non sequitur. Prison Sex ≠ Normal sex, and can’t be used to draw any meaningful conclusions about normal human sexuality.

You might want to leave off this subject at this point. Maybe talk about D&D again.
 



Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top