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.

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

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
I apparently haven't been very good about alignment anyway, even in systems where it mattered. My last five D&D characters were marked down as:

5e _____________
1e Neutralish-Goodish
3.5 Good
3.5 ______________
3.5 Neutral

I want to say I once had one that was "Lawful Hungry" (a Bugbear iirc). I'm all for the path of ditching it except for maybe as a few adjectives folks might find useful.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
That still won't result in all our books saying the same thing. I don't know anyone in the real world who'd replace their current book(s) just because WoTC changed the Alignment section wording. Or added wording stating Orcs are people too or such. I don't even know anyone who'd intentionally pirate the book for that.
Sure, NEW players to our groups will have the "new" printing of the book. But the rest of us? Our books won't match theirs.
I wouldn't make only these changes.

I'd probably use the anniversary, as has been suggested, to come out with a new set of covers, extra pages of art, errata/revised text and address some other deficiencies with "bonus" material that's otherwise 100% compatible with existing 5E books. Add variants of underpowered monsters in the MM (if you don't like the default orc warrior, here's the orc blademaster!), etc.

I think a lot of people would buy a new set of core books if they all had 10% more of everything added, along with shiny new anniversary covers, etc.
 

prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun
Supporter
So, two possibilities: Either the game system shapes play, in which case it shapes the fiction generated by play at a remove; or, you are generating the fiction, not the game system, in which case the only politics in it are yours.
 





Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Then what's your concern? The D&D Police are not coming over to your house to dictate the way you play.

Hopefully not. But .... are there applications to join the D&D Police?

"YOU! Drop that d20 right now! That's right. Drop it! We have reports that there have been people playing Druids wearing metal armor in this household. We are going to have to bring you down to the dunge... um, station."
 

Which is why flavor text matters. Flavor informs play − especially as default.

So for the sake of gaming, removing race tropes from flavor texts helps end the recycling of racist assumptions from an earlier era.

Why should there be a default? Why shouldn't every table be unique? I think every D&D table should orcs, dragons, bugbears, etc. differently. Sameness is dull.
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top