@Someone_Evil personally, i dislike updating closed questions unless it's specifically an attempt to reopen. Otherwise, it raises the profile for no apparent reason. But that is entirely just my own opinion.
especially since only the first edits bring it up in the Review Queue so after the reviewers click past saying it isn't ready for re-opening, any later edits actually intending to get it reopened won't automatically bring it queue
(instead waiting for a high rep user to vote to Reopen to set it in queue)
@MageintheBarrel If I'm playing a character that has a really structured set of principles, regardless of their general Good↔Evil alignment, they'll almost always be lawful.
Examples: My Lawful Good Monk, who used to be an MMA-esque brawler used to strict rules of engagement, honorable behavior, etc.,. Or my Lawful Neutral Sorcerer, who is a Freelance Assassin, but who has certain types of people she will not target (children, poor, etc.) and always holds back the killing blow until she can ascertain that her target is correct.
(Assassin is a title, not a reference to the Rogue subtype)
If you want watch a LN character played out: Acq Inc's Omin Dran. (How strictly they are using alignment - or any other part of the rules - is debatable though.)
Lawful doesn't have to be about strict rules. Principles of Order or groups are just as - if not more - important. Kobolds are LE, but will welcome any idea (as long as it gets all of them loot/food)
@MageintheBarrel Lawful doesn't mean they aren't free thinkers. Some lawful thinkers are perfectly happy to change the laws/code/rules, they are just adamant that whatever the laws/code/rules are should be maintained
Like a police officer might dislike the way a laws are designed personally, but upholds the law anyway. That would still be a lawful character in my eyes.
In contrast, a chaotic character places less stock in laws, personal codes, or other rules.
@Xirema SRD and basic rules are different things, but D&D Beyond's listing of the "basic rules" is actually an inclusive combination of the two
SRD is here: http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf (hasn't been updated with the latest errata) Basic rules are here: http://media.wizards.com/2018/dnd/downloads/DnD_BasicRules_2018.pdf (they are updated)
@DavidCoffron Judging from my previous search on the matter, only editing the post body causes it to appear in the review queue; tag edits alone won't do it? I might be wrong there.
A Lawful-Good character isn't an Angel or Celestial, literally incapable of reasoning about their circumstances—if a LG character encounters rules that are bad, they push to have those rules changed.
@MageintheBarrel I personally believe that we should adhere to the laws of a democratic country even if I disagree with them. We should work to change them as they are intended to be changed. My personal perspective would likely change if laws are instead dictated by a monarch or other non-democratic regime, but I don't have the experience there. Lawful characters in D&D could just have the same idea..
@Someone_Evil I don't think it matters much as long as we don't leave them untagged. I basically said as much as in my reply to Jon Ericson's response on meta. In most cases there's not too much benefit to adding a bunch of tags to questions that are off-topic or will otherwise stay closed forever.
@MageintheBarrel Your argument sounds like a personal disapproval of strict legal/rule systems, not a criticism of the alignment itself (as a mechanic).
@MageintheBarrel that very much depends on the world in which you're playing. That's only a true if there's a single creature determining, managing, and keeping those laws.
@MageintheBarrel Umm... just because you pose two examples of disorderly (debatably) change doesn't mean there is no orderly change. Many countries have orderly change
@MageintheBarrel Why so USA-centric? Take a look, for example, at the dissolution of USSR through orderly means, when everyone expected to need a hot world war to break it up.
Like, there's a seriously difficult conversation to be had about the value of Democracy in a world where the voters can be so easily led astray by the power of social media and organized propaganda campaigns, but that's sort of orthogonal to a question about how alignment should be applied.
@MageintheBarrel And if we are able to step away from countries, Workers Cooperatives are at least an example where the rules are definitely not created by those on top
A true neutral character that treats it like an excuse to not care about anything is very disruptive to cooperative play. And that's just one interpretation of that alignment (which is a disruptive one)
@V2Blast Agreed. Alignment imo should just be the principles the character values. I consider myself a principled (lawful) person, but I violate my principles from time to time due to a variety of factors (the flavor of sugar is the main one xD)
@TheSimpliFire We can tell. The topic gets... interesting and then two users with blue names drop in in quick succession. I'd just like to pretend otherwise.
@DavidCoffron Right. Alignment is a guide post. People are changeable. It's using alignment as a cudgel for a player when roleplaying that it can become My Guy. And any alignment can do that - it's more of a player issue than an alignment issue.
Which is why at my tables we use alignment as a descriptive rather than a prescriptive mechanism. I might call my character neutral good because he values goodness and doesn't really have a preference for law or chaos. You might think my character is true neutral because he doesn't do to many good things, but he wishes he did more
@MageintheBarrel Let's still remember Be Nice. But i'm not sure it's poorly implemented in all systems. Heck, in 5e they really make it clear that it's just a guideline.
@MageintheBarrel Well I don't agree with that. I find alignment useful in some systems at some tables as a way to convey basic ideas between characters
@MageintheBarrel Honestly, it seems like you and your DM are not only on different pages, but different books. You need to have a lot of this convo with them. :)
@MageintheBarrel But at the end of the day, the world you're playing in is your DM's world. Lore is lore, but how they use the lore to build their world takes precedence.
Although I would never make a character adhere to an alignment just because they adhere to a set of rules. It depends on how the character sees those rules
@MikeQ I believe Mage is having a viewpoint difference with their DM over alignment of the spring and summer courts and the enforcement of said alignment.
@MikeQ Speaking of, I think I met my first co-player who uses very contrived interpretations rules to justify what I would consider anti-rules rulings.
The GM handled it very well though, so it didn't affect my enjoyment of the game
@MikeQ In this case, it seems that it's due to it apparently being a playable race in Mage's game and thus the DM apparently informing them their alignment must be lawful (for whatever that's worth)
Okay, @MageintheBarrel ask your DM about how lawful alignment would impact the character. E.g. Ask if you can still roleplay the character as the concept you want.
@MageintheBarrel Then that is a conversation to have with the GM. If you feel like the restriction is not justified and would negatively impact your fun/roleplay, you can ask that it be lifted.
@MageintheBarrel - Bottom line comes down to their game, their rules. You need to sit down and have a good give and take discussion with them about reasons on both sides, and then decide if you want to play in their system, compromise or take your participation elsewhere.
@MikeQ The ruling in question was a discussion about catapult and the player's request that if he catapulted a weapon it would also deal weapon damage (in addition to the 3d6). The DM was hesitant, but the player insisted that since the spell said "straight line" he could direct the dagger to puncture.
The DM agreed to allow it, but made it pretty clear that "throwing all your weapons to the enemy side" may not be the best strategy (implying that he will use in-world reasons to nerf it rather than just banning it, which I liked)
I also expect that the GM would be happy to say something like "a larger weapon like this greataxe you are trying to fling is too unwieldy to direct effectively. You only get the bludgeoning damage for that one"
@DavidCoffron That sounds like an eminently reasonable DM. I might have said they could have either/or. Bludgeoning or piercing, with the reasoning that if it is piercing, there is no bludgeoning impact which (presumably) requires a greater surface area for impact.
Maybe it's odd, but as either a player or GM, I have no problems with a weapon that is visually massive (like a two-handed maul) but does 1d8 (1d10) warhammer damage.
I might have a particular look and feel that I want but if it makes it easier on the GM to just treat it like some existing mechanic, then I'm fine with that.
For example, I've had a character rolling around in my head that uses a buckler and a massive hammer. Ostensibly two-handed for most people, my character has enough strength that they can just wield it with one hand. I'm okay with that hammer dealing 1d8 bludgeoning.
The low overhead route is getting a PDF of your content together and getting it on drivethrurpg, but I hear their cut is a bit much if you don't have much of a following. Knowing the rules of publishing content for the game system you target is super important.
@TrevorFait Well, first thing is to make sure it adheres to the copywrite policies WoTC has lined up. You can find information about thier Open Gaming License here
I don't know how flooded the market is with 5E 3rd party content. It was a complete mess in 3.0/3.5 days. Getting your name out there isn't easy. If you're aiming for a product on retail hobby store shelves, that's even harder.
I recently found myself in a situation where my PHB Beastmaster's animal companion was killed. There were no suitable beasts in the vicinity. As we were partway through a dungeon the party was unwilling to take a several day detour to replace the beast.
After a long rest the rest of the party...
I have the feeling Lucky feat in 5e is overpowered.
I have a modification that I want to propose my players with says you have to decide to use your luck point BEFORE rolling the dice. That's the only modification so the feat will be:
You have 3 luck points. Whenever you make an attack roll,...
I am a new DM with one session under my belt and am planning to run the campaign as a "West Marches" D&D 5e campaign. One of my players requested I have some social encounters next time and I am wondering how to have these in a WM game, especially as it progresses and players spend more time away...
I was thinking about casting mage hand while hidden to do things like, for example, pulling a lever behind a guard's back. But if I'm not an Arcane Trickster, the hand is visible and the question is, does it have any kind of “spectral” connection to me as its caster?
The spell doesn’t say anythi...
I have the feeling Lucky feat in 5e is overpowered.
I have a modification that I want to propose my players with says you have to decide to use your luck point BEFORE rolling the dice. That's the only modification so the feat will be:
You have 3 luck points. Whenever you make an attack roll,...
