Drow Runs D&D Next

First off, the edition is off to a better than expected, but as with all beta tests it has a few flaws. I am bolding the worst problems, the rest are minor problems.

1) Infinite jump. All forms of movment use a certain amount of your total movement allowance for that turn, except jump. For example climb takes 10 feet per 5 feet of movement, even standing up takes 5 feet of movement. But jump takes no movement amount, so you can move an inifinte amount as long as you jump everywhere.

2) Acid burns iteself. "Acid: If poured on metal, the acid takes 1d4 acid damage at the start of each of your turns for 1d4 rounds."

3) Xp is way off. My players leveled about 10 minutes in just by fighting goblins.

4) Healing has a problem. Right now to rest it requires that the players have at least 1 hp. At least 3 times I had a stabilized but unconscious party member. They gain 1 hp in 2d6 hours, so the rest of the party had to wait hours until they could take a short rest. I would suggest allowing players to use a Healer's Kit to heal a person to at least 1hp. However the new short rest healing is awsome.

5) The fighter and Human need some attention, the players who were these classes/races felt left out of the loop of special abilities.

6) Radiant lance is way too powerful. The Cleric ended up being the party blaster and the fighter would just block a hallway and full defence until everything died.

7) The clerics spell casting needed defining. As written a cleric prepairs 1 of each spell known. "Each day, after a long rest, you prepare the spells cure light wounds, spiritual hammer, and searing light. Preparing these spells takes 1 minute per spell level for each spell you prepare."

8) Channel Radiance (cleric ability) is spammed more than anything. Even though it hurts the party the cleric was able to solo any indiviual room by just winning initative and then running in, channel radiance, and then retreating with the rest of his move (if any enemy lived).

9) Armor is very annoying. Right now there is no purpose for heavy armor. Sure the fighter can take heavy plate and dump dex but then he is hurt for all reflex saves and dex checks, so it is actually in his interest to have at least a few points into dex and just go with light or medium.

10) Advantage/Disadvantage works soo well the party has an "I win" button. The cleric uses "shield of faith" the fighter has 18 AC the enemy will only hit the fighter 10% to 15% of the time. Aka 1 in 10 hits will hit the fighter, without multiple attacks this means a fighter is hit once every ten rounds, the fighter easily wins.

11) Reaper benefit, even my fighter complained about this ability, it is underpowered compaied to the other class abilities.

12) How does the fighter have a +6 to hit? This made it impossible to figure out the fighters attack when he tried to use a sword.

13) The Wizards to-hit numbers do not add up correctly.

14) "Ram, Portable: You can use a portable ram to break down doors. When doing so, you gain advantage on the Strength check. If another character assists you, your minimum die roll on the check is equal to your Strength score plus 2." What does this mean? by assiting the lower roll is boosted by 2? how is that any better than just getting advantage? The possibility that the two roll are close enough to matter is a 10% chance, and even then half the time it equates to a +1 bonus.

15) All magic classes run out of magic way too fast. My cleric member barely used any spells and just spammed the same two at will abilities (even at level 3). He got very board very fast.

16) Spells need to be fleshed out better, a little stat block at the top (like 3.x) would help a lot with clarity.

17) My players were begging me for attack of opportunity within 15 minutes of playing.

18) Reach weapons have no penality in close? Yeah that got abused hard by my party, 5 extra feet of reach with no penaty.

19) The break DC for rope and Chain is way to simple, my fighter broke out of chains in 4 rounds, a commoner can get out within 10.

20) How are checks made? d20 + stat, or d20+ stat mod? The book never says.

21) On the monster Xp awards, is that per person or to be divided by the group?

22) Long rest: If interrupted you have to start over, very bad idea. A single kobold can wander into camp ruin a parties day and gives no real benifit for the game. Why not just extend the rest time by 1 hour per interruption.

23) Two-handed weapons, what are the benifits? 2x Str to hit and damage?

24) Right now anyone can use a shield at no penalty.

25) The change for healing from negative is nice, just healing from zero make this a lot faster for the party and my cleric liked it.

26) The 3/4 cover rule got abused by our halfling rogue who carried a chair around with him. He got +5 armor and his medium sized opponents only got +2 armor. It was funny but broken.

27) Skills: My players want them so much so that it they way they will not buy the finished game unless it has them.

EDIT: 28) Cones have a problem: "A cone’s width at a given point is equal to its distance from the point of origin."   This does not work with a grid at all, try and draw it out, it does not work.




TL;DR
All in all I liked the new system, except for the skills. My entire group hates how skills are done. Most skills being unknow I was forced to ask for a lot of Stat checks which made the game all about stats and nothing else. My party really wants to be able to customize their skills choices to match there ideas. The don't mind backgrounds or themes/classes giving skill bonuses, but they want to be able to put points into their skills. They said this was a deal breaking issue. 

So, the game needs a few tweeks (like the 20 or so points I made above) and skills need to be completly overhauled. My groups is eager for the next round of play testing and hopes the next set fixes a few of these issues.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
First off, the edition is off to a better than expected, but as with all beta tests it has a few flaws. I am bolding the worst problems, the rest are minor problems.

1) Infinite jump. All forms of movment use a certain amount of your total movement allowance for that turn, except jump. For example climb takes 10 feet per 5 feet of movement, even standing up takes 5 feet of movement. But jump takes no movement amount, so you can move an inifinte amount as long as you jump everywhere.

It takes no additional movement to jump, but the distance you move during a jump ... is distance moved. The initial section of movement modes clears this up. While jumping doesn't divide nicely into 5 foot units, it still counts towards your total movement. [DM's might let you 'finish' the jump, instead of cutting you off midway because you've hit your speed cap for the turn].

7) The clerics spell casting needed defining. As written a cleric prepairs 1 of each spell known. "Each day, after a long rest, you prepare the spells cure light wounds, spiritual hammer, and searing light. Preparing these spells takes 1 minute per spell level for each spell you prepare."



They prepare all the spells, but they cast spontaneously, using up spell slots. So, they work like 3.5 Sorcs

   
10) Advantage/Disadvantage works soo well the party has an "I win" button. The cleric uses "shield of faith" the fighter has 18 AC the enemy will only hit the fighter 10% to 15% of the time. Aka 1 in 10 hits will hit the fighter, without multiple attacks this means a fighter is hit once every ten rounds, the fighter easily wins.



However, forcing enemies to attack the fighter becomes the issue. There are no OAs, so unless terrain is on your side, enemies can just go fight someone else. 


14) "Ram, Portable: You can use a portable ram to break down doors. When doing so, you gain advantage on the Strength check. If another character assists you, your minimum die roll on the check is equal to your Strength score plus 2." What does this mean? by assiting the lower roll is boosted by 2? how is that any better than just getting advantage? The possibility that the two roll are close enough to matter is a 10% chance, and even then half the time it equates to a +1 bonus.



Your Strength Score +2. So, instead of just rolling with advantage you also have the option of taking your Strength Score + 2 as a die roll. I.e. if you have 16 Str, you roll 2, take the higher. You can take that number OR 18 as your die roll. It's not worded well, but it is basically saying "the worst outcome is your Str score +2". This is probably going to be better than just going with advantage, but you can still roll and see if you get a 20.

   
20) How are checks made? d20 + stat, or d20+ stat mod? The book never says.



It's mod. The very start it said, under Making a check, roll a d20 and add the relevant ability's modifier.


14) "Ram, Portable: You can use a portable ram to break down doors. When doing so, you gain advantage on the Strength check. If another character assists you, your minimum die roll on the check is equal to your Strength score plus 2." What does this mean? by assiting the lower roll is boosted by 2? how is that any better than just getting advantage? The possibility that the two roll are close enough to matter is a 10% chance, and even then half the time it equates to a +1 bonus.



Your Strength Score +2. So, instead of just rolling with advantage you also have the option of taking your Strength Score + 2 as a die roll. I.e. if you have 16 Str, you roll 2, take the higher. You can take that number OR 18 as your die roll. It's not worded well, but it is basically saying "the worst outcome is your Str score +2". This is probably going to be better than just going with advantage, but you can still roll and see if you get a 20.



I don't know if this is what Walt was saying, but the way I read it was to have two possible scenarios when using the portable ram.

Scenario 1: using the portable ram by yourself: You roll a Strength check with advantage.

Mechanics: guy with 16 Strength rolls 1d20+3 twice, and uses the higher roll to attempt to meet or beat the DC. Two 45% chances to match (an example) DC 15, a significant increase in chance of success.

Scenario 2: using the portable ram while another character assists you: You roll a Strength check, without advantage, and the resulting roll total is compared to your Strength score +2 using whichever number is higher as the result of the roll.

Mechanics: guy with 16 Strength rolls 1d20+3 once, and if that roll isn't a total of 19 or better it is then considered to be an 18. One 100% chance to match (an example) DC 15, better than the above chances by a significant margin.

It's a strange rule, but if they meant it the way they wrote it - I like it.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.


27) Skills: My players want them so much so that it they way they will not buy the finished game unless it has them.




Skills were involved - for this playtest your background was the only way to flesh out skills but I think the plan is to have players be able to mix and match skills to create their own background if none of the ones provided are interesting.  If by skills you mean what they had in 3.x I hope they do NOT go that route as it limited what players could do too much (sure you could TRY most anything but unless you specialized in things the skill dc's went up so fast you were almost guaranteed failure)

Over all I MUCH prefer the idea I've seen so far of skills being ability checks with character backgrounds giving bonuses to a few different types of ability check/

3) Xp is way off. My players leveled about 10 minutes in just by fighting goblins.


I don't see how that's possible. Goblins are worth 100XP each and it takes 2000XP to get to 2nd level, meaning they'd have to defeat 20 goblins per player in order to level. Note that XP awards are split between party members, so that means a party of four PCs would need to kill 80 goblins to level.

5) The fighter and Human need some attention, the players who were these classes/races felt left out of the loop of special abilities.


Because we haven't seen the character creation rules, it's too early to judge the human or the fighter. For the human, we have no idea what bonuses were received due to being human as it was all done behind the scenes. The fighter build given is not a good example of what a fighter will look like because frankly it's a Slayer build. If you've played 4th Edition Essentials, the Slayer build for the fighter is a build that's meant to do one thing and one thing only - deal as much damage as possible with a basic melee attack. It's probably closer to a barbarian than a fighter in 3.X/4e terms, only without the rage ability. The biggest complaint I've seen from everyone is the fighter build, but it's also the one most easily refuted.

7) The clerics spell casting needed defining. As written a cleric prepairs 1 of each spell known. "Each day, after a long rest, you prepare the spells cure light wounds, spiritual hammer, and searing light. Preparing these spells takes 1 minute per spell level for each spell you prepare."


This one took me a minute to figure out too, but that's what the playtest is for. Basically, the cleric prepares all the spells he/she knows at the start of the day, then decides which to cast as needed while adventuring limited by the number of spell slots per level. So the "laser" cleric has those three spells prepared at the start of each adventuring day and can cast 2 of them in any combination. So one Cure Light Wounds and one Searing Light, or two CLW, or two Spiritual Hammers. Just depends on the need during the day. The reason it's hard to figure out is that the info is spread out over the Magic section and two different places on the character sheet and there's no examples given.

8) Channel Radiance (cleric ability) is spammed more than anything. Even though it hurts the party the cleric was able to solo any indiviual room by just winning initative and then running in, channel radiance, and then retreating with the rest of his move (if any enemy lived).


You can only use four Channel Divinity abilities per day. Granted it does a lot of damage in an area, but one to notice is the specific wording - "a 20 foot space centered on you". That means it only goes 10 feet out in every direction for 20 feet total, not 20 feet out for 40 feet total. Small but very significant difference.

10) Advantage/Disadvantage works soo well the party has an "I win" button. The cleric uses "shield of faith" the fighter has 18 AC the enemy will only hit the fighter 10% to 15% of the time. Aka 1 in 10 hits will hit the fighter, without multiple attacks this means a fighter is hit once every ten rounds, the fighter easily wins.


You, as DM, may be giving out Advantage/Disadvantage too often. It isn't just a flanking bonus or something like that, it means that something in the environment, some condition, or a strategy used has given one side a distinct advantage over the other. Also, Shield of Faith isn't included as a spell on any of the pregenerated characters, so I'm assuming you allowed your players to swap out for another spell. Shield of Faith is also a 1st level spell and not an orison, so it can only be used between 2-4 times per day and it only lasts for 1 minute (10 rounds) at the sacrifice of being able to do any magical healing at all.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />
12) How does the fighter have a +6 to hit? This made it impossible to figure out the fighters attack when he tried to use a sword.

13) The Wizards to-hit numbers do not add up correctly.


We won't know any of that until the character creation rules are released. Until then, you're just going to have to trust that the people who wrote the rules did the math right and use your best guess if you want to go outside the bounds of the playtest as they've released it so far.



Honestly, I can't agree here. But I also remember what it was like playing 2nd and 3rd edition magic users and it's the reason why, no matter what the mathematical bonuses, I will never ever ever again use a crossbow as long as I friggin' live. But in reality, the reason that magic seems to run out so fast is that they've gone back to quadratic wizards/linear fighters somewhat. If they keep to how it was in other editions with Vancian magic (cast-and-forget spellcasting), wizards and clerics are going to utterly dominate the game after around 6-8th level of so as everyone else just can't keep up. Hopefully they'll have a fix for this to balance things out a bit more, but be thankful they left in useful cantrips/orisons that can be used at-will.



Page 1 of "How to Play the Game" says it's the modifer.



Divided by the group. That's how it's been in every edition of the game. I'm skimming over the documents right now and can't find if it says it, and if so that's a major oversight. However, every single edition of the game from the original Chainmail all the way through 4e Essentials, XP is divided equally amongst all players (though there were more complex rules for other editions over who got XP for what).



I can't speak for the design team, but this really looks like a solution to the Five Minute Workday problem. In previous editions of the game from OD&D all the way through 3.5/Pathfinder (and to a lesser extent, even in 4th Edition), there's a strategy some munchkiny players would use where they'd go into a room, blast everything with every spell and daily ability/power they had, then immediately sleep again to get it all back. It completely wrecks game balance and unless there are mechanics in place to prevent it, there's nothing to stop players from doing it every time. 4th Edition tried to use the Milestone mechanic combined with the usefulness of Encounter Powers to get around it, and 3.X used a limitation of one 8 hour rest per 24 hours as an attempt to curb it, but neither really works unless DMs have a way to ruin it and force them to move forward. I'm betting we'll see this rule morph the most over playtesting as people come up with better ways to solve that problem.



Again, this is part of the character generation rules and we won't know until they release those rules for playtest.



That's where DM creativity comes into play. Reward him for ingenuity the first time by letting him get away with it, then punish him by having a kobold or goblin throw a "molotov cocktail" (pint of oil set on fire or an acid flask) at the chair itself, making it more of a liability than an asset.



Can't agree with you on that one. I really like how they're handling skills as bonuses to attribute checks. It forces the players to describe what they're doing in a narrative style rather than just saying "I make a whatever check." Adds to the storytelling aspect of the game.



Grid combat isn't fully supported yet and probably won't be until the advanced combat rules come out for playtesting. Use your best guess. A cone is basically an equilateral triangle with one of the points in the origin square. Draw it out on the grid and use a judgement call on whether someone is in the cone or not.



That's the point of the new system with the rules that have been released so far. It's to get players away from saying "I roll my whatever skill and get a result. What happens?" and get them into describing their actions. It's the DM's job to say "Make a whatever check" when they're doing something that might be difficult to do. They can ask if they get their bonus as written and the DM can say yea or nay, so that the DM can say that the rogue's bonus to stealth does or doesn't apply based on the player's description of his/her actions.

If your players really want gridded combat, opportunity attacks, and detailed skill lists; I'd probably say that D&D Next as has been released at this time isn't the game for you and your group.  I would probably wait until the character creation and/or advanced combat modules are released for playtesting if it's really bothering you enough that it's a huge issue. The rules they've released so far are very bare-bones and meant to be the core of the game that the rest of the rules build on. They've released these rules specifically without everything else because they want to make sure that the foundation every other rule or option rests on is solid before they move forward with anything else. If you're having fun with the game, keep playing it. If the lack of tactical combat and defined skills makes the game less fun than 4e/3.5/Pathfinder/Dragon Age/Savage Worlds/etc., then you may want to hold out until more rules are released for playtesting and then give it another try.
Thanks for the clarification on Channel diviinity, that needed to be made much clearier. And the same for how clerics cast spells.

First off, XP never says if it is divided amoung the party or not.


The cleric does get shield of faith at level 2. It lasts 1 minute which is 10 rounds but most of the map is 5 foot hallways so the fighter would block it off and the cleric was using Radiant lance to take out enemies. If the cleric could find a gap in the enemy lines he would walk into the room (no AoO yet) use a Channel Radiance and then fall back behind the fighter with the rest of his move. Hell, half the time the fighter would get hit by Channel Radiance but he easily made the save for half damage and had the HP to spare, the hobgoblins don't have the HP to spare. 10 died in 3 rounds. XP was raked in and my players leveled really fast.


Skills: My players want skills they can advance as they level. They don't mind that skills are chosen by background or class but they want to get better at them. Right now a 20th level character and a 1st level one have the same bonus to still checks, the only difference would be stats. Which right now we have not seen a stat up in the first three levels of the characters so we are looking at maybe 5 stat increases in the first 20 levels. And with modifiers only increasing every 2 stat points we are looking at a really minor differnce in the skill of a 20th level and a 1st level character. That is what my players were complaining about. 


The advantage/disadvantage broke after my players found a set of fullplate and a large sheild for the fighter, AC 20. If the paty ever came across a powerful creature the fighter would sit in a 5 foot hallway blocking the exit the cleric would put Shield of Faith on him and then start blasting away. The enemy would be stuck in a room with a cleric lasering them and a heavy fighter who would attak anything in range. I tired to counter with arrows snipeing the cleric but this just led to the cleric getting armor and a shield so he would avoid most of the attacks, AC 18. And if the enemy ever retreated out of the range of the fighter the cleric would step as far as he could into the room and drop a Channel Radiance. Most of the rooms are small and the enemy would just pop, the cleric would then use the rest of the move to fall back behind the fighter and resumed using Radiant lance.


My party only got to flank one time becuase the rooms were so small they could not maneuver and the fighter in the doorway maneuver worked so well that they did not even try to change tactics.
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]
My party only got to flank one time becuase the rooms were so small they could not maneuver and the fighter in the doorway maneuver worked so well that they did not even try to change tactics.

I think your looking at the map wrong. The caves are 1 square = 10 foot, not 1 square = 5 foot. Blocking up the door is still a very good tactic, but it makes the rest of it much harder.

My party only got to flank one time becuase the rooms were so small they could not maneuver and the fighter in the doorway maneuver worked so well that they did not even try to change tactics.

I think your looking at the map wrong. The caves are 1 square = 10 foot, not 1 square = 5 foot. Blocking up the door is still a very good tactic, but it makes the rest of it much harder.




Oh you have got to be kidding me... where does it say that? Oh in a little corner of the key. Great more work for me when I draw the grid. Although it does explain why they would have 20 monster in a 10 square area.

GAH!!!!
 
Im sorry but ADEU is a French word for goodbye, not a combat system. You say, "Encounter Power" and I stop listening to you. [spoiler Have Played/Run] D&D 1st ed D&D 3.5 ed D&D 4th ed Shadowrun Star Wars SAGA Cyberpunk Interlock Unlimited Run.Net [/spoiler] I know my games, don't try to argue about them. [spoiler Alignment Explained] This is a very simple problem and I will outline it below. Their are two types of people Type 1: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "I am lawful good thus I must play lawful good" Type 2: a lot of people (not all, but a lot) who play see alignment as "My previous actions have made people and the gods view me as lawful good. The difference is subtle but it is the source of the misunderstanding. Alignment does not dictate how you play your character. All it does is tell you, the player, how the rest of the world views you, and your previous actions. Any future actions will be judged by their own merits. Say you're a baby eating pyromaniac. You are most likely chaotic evil. But one day you decide, "Hey all I really need is love." So you get a wife, have a kid, and get a kitten named Mr. Snook'ems. You become a member of the PTA and help build houses for the homeless. You are no longer chaotic evil. And just because you were once chaotic evil it does not mean that you have to stay chaotic evil. Alignment never dictates what you can do, it only says what you have done. Now that is cleared up here is a simple test. What is the alignment of... A Police officer: The average Citizen: A Vigilante: The answer is simple. The Police officer is lawful good. He uses the laws of the country and city to arrest people and make them pay their debt to society. The Citizen is Neutral good. He wants to live is a place that is Good and follows moral and ethical principle, but he sometimes finds the laws impedes him, and he wonders why we spend so much on poor people. The Vigilante is Chaotic Good. He wants to uphold the morals and ethics of society but finds that the bad guys often slip through the cracks in the law. He takes it upon himself to protect the people from these criminals. That is the basic breakdown of the good alignment axis. What needs to be remembered is that any one of these people can change alignments, easily. The Police officer could be bought off by a local gang, and suddenly he drops to lawful neutral. The average citizen might find that his neighbors dog is annoying, barking at night and keeping him up. So he poisons its food, now he is no longer good, he is stepping towards true neutral. Maybe the citizen really goes crazy also kills the neighbor, hello neutral evil. It is possible that the Vigilante realizes that the cops are actually doing a pretty good job and decides to become an officer himself, leaving his masked crime fighting days behind him. Now he is Lawful good. Your alignment is not carved in stone, it is malleable and will change to reflect your actions.[/spoiler]