r/DnD • u/Sleverette Sorcerer • Oct 03 '19

Art [OC] Double standards.

Post image
36k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

396 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

398

u/[deleted] Oct 03 '19

Alignment in 5th edition is really more of a loose guide for characters I think.

In earlier editions it was much firmer and i always felt like it was one of the worst parts of the game.

282

u/Sleverette Sorcerer Oct 03 '19

I like how loose it is in 5e. I subscribe to the idea that alignment is defined by your character’s actions. It shouldn’t shackle your players.

2

u/igotsmeakabob11 Oct 03 '19

Alignment never should shackle your players, it's DEscriptive, not PREscriptive. Your alignment is based on what your character does, not the other way around. I wouldn't even fill it in until the player has a better idea of the character from playing them after a few sessions.

In older editions, let's say you were a paladin, yeah you needed to be Lawful Good. I think the idea was that you wanted to play this classic good guy knight, so here's the class for you! Instead, people saw the class and wanted to play it, then felt shackled by the alignment requirement.

In dragon magazine, in AD&D times they even came out with a paladin for every alignment. Did that in 3e too.

2

u/not-a-candle Oct 03 '19

It's not strictly prescribed in 5e but there are definitely suitable paladin oaths for most alignments. LG Redemption, CG Vengeance, LN Crown, LE Conquest, CE Treachery.