Oh so letting someone short change you on items and gear that you use to SAVE LIVES is ok because he wasn't actually evil? Furthermore if a paladin's abilities are entirely dependent on the target being evil then in the case of said thief the paladin is likely less well equipped to catch said thief than a fighter, or even barbarian of the same level, if the pally can't be good at anything until Baron Von Kittensquisher shows up then most people won't bother to keep one around when a fighter or barbarian will be more consistently competent.
I think DMs should just define it for their games. D&D has traditionally done a very poor job of defining the alignment terms. The devs aren't philosophers for sure. My own definitions that I give to players coming into my campaign work fine and I don't have any disagreements. I happen to think that they reveal interesting information about a PC or NPC without defining them utterly. Most of the alignment stuff I've seen published is a waste of space.
I've flirted though with inventing a more complex system. But I haven't as yet. I think the pictures though in the first post are bogus as representations of alignment.
One thing that lawful and chaotic are NOT is how organized a person is. That is a ridiculous definition.
I have to agree that it should be defined for each game. I think you have to define the status quo for lawful before establishing some of the other alignments.
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl
And this is why alignment threads go down the swirler so quickly. Everyone has a different take on which alignments truly mean what, and whether they should be abandoned completely. For example: I only agree with 3 of the 9 pics in the OP. The alignments are far too subjective to be taken as a completely serious ruleset. That being said, I'm all for their inclusion in 5E, just as long as they are not tied to the other rules (or at least so loosely tied that if I drop them I won't have to rewrite or omit 200 different spells, magic items, and so on).
My point is that paladins have to be able to back up their reputations no matter what their situation, and that abilities that are only useful against evil creatures make them less effective as keepers of peace and law than unaligned fighters and barbarians, as such alignment should not be a determining factor as to whether or not a paladin can use his abilities. For example detect evil is a terrible power, improved insight for ferreting out lies and misdirections on the other hand is a good power. Smite evil is a terrible power, Smite is a good power, especially if you can inflict status like slow or stun with it to help you incapacitate enemies without always needing to kill them or pummel them senseless. I'm saying Paladins should be good at upholding truth and justice regardless of the alignment of the liars or the corrupt.
Sometimes even good people do bad things and that shouldn't render a paladin helpless to stop them.
Yeah the whole target must be evil in order for your abilities to do anything really gimps paladins, which kind of takes away from their roles as gaurdians of civilization when they can't even stare down a grumpy shopkeeper, or catch an amatuer thief whose's out for a lark.
Oh so letting someone short change you on items and gear that you use to SAVE LIVES is ok because he wasn't actually evil? Furthermore if a paladin's abilities are entirely dependent on the target being evil then in the case of said thief the paladin is likely less well equipped to catch said thief than a fighter, or even barbarian of the same level, if the pally can't be good at anything until Baron Von Kittensquisher shows up then most people won't bother to keep one around when a fighter or barbarian will be more consistently competent.
Sounds like a Paladin with either an attitude problem or a very very hardcore legal system.
Murder: Penalty is Death Rape: Penalty is Death Stealing a loaf of bread: Penalty is Death Shortchanging: Penalty is Death
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome
Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012
DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
Hmmm. Ok, I see your point. I think part of the reason we look at this differently is because we have different views of what a Paladins powers are meant to represent.
A Paladin in my worldview is granted his powers to fight Evil, not petty crime. Demons. Devils. Abominations. Tentacled horrors. The most vile and depraved of humanoids. Cultists and committers of crime too vile to pass the boards censoring software. Not shoplifters and poachers.
Against mundane threats, they are reliant on their wits.
Admittedly, that opinion is coded to what I think the archetype represents; but so, to an equal degree, is yours.
Evil - real capital E no moral nuance about it EVIL - actually exists in the D&D millieu. So do Chaos, Good, and Law. It's fundamental to the setting, and thank goodness otherwise the awkward question of "Wait, why is it ok to go into the goblins homes and kill them and take their stuff again?" would arise far too often.
My point is that paladins have to be able to back up their reputations no matter what their situation, and that abilities that are only useful against evil creatures make them less effective as keepers of peace and law than unaligned fighters and barbarians, as such alignment should not be a determining factor as to whether or not a paladin can use his abilities. For example detect evil is a terrible power, improved insight for ferreting out lies and misdirections on the other hand is a good power. Smite evil is a terrible power, Smite is a good power, especially if you can inflict status like slow or stun with it to help you incapacitate enemies without always needing to kill them or pummel them senseless. I'm saying Paladins should be good at upholding truth and justice regardless of the alignment of the liars or the corrupt.
Sometimes even good people do bad things and that shouldn't render a paladin helpless to stop them.
Paladins are good at upholding truth and justice, regardless of the alignment of the corrupt; and they are not helpless to stop good people from doing bad things.
It is when the truelly evil adversaries come along that a Paladin has extra resources at his disposal; resources that a fighter or barbarian cannot call upon. This is the Paladin's strength, his moment to shine (and Smite). The fact that he can't use his special abilities against just anyone only makes them more special.
I see paladins as more than mere monster killers and cult busters, any fighter can do that, often for a reasonable sum that would make a real world mercenary laugh you out of the office.
Paladins have to protect civilization, that means purging the wicked from the ranks, correcting those who stray from the path before they become monsters, and being vigilant agaisnt the forces of complacency and stagnation. These are the true enemy of the paladin because unlike eldritch abominations or ravagin marauders people don't always recognize the harm they can do until it's too late.
Shasarak, I never said kill the thief or the shopkeep, I said that the paladin shouldn't sudenly be incompetent if said shopkeep and thief are the worst things in the room.
Lawrence, really, let's see, can't smite, can't detect, those are central abilities of the pally in 3e, unless he has abilities not dependent on aligment he's not much good at anything another class couldn't do more consistently. Why would anyone put faith in a guy who can't even handle the town drunk most days? Paladins need to be able to inspire people, and they can't do that if the only time they get to be cool is if there's a demon in the room.
Yes...but much more than that, is the fact that LAW and CHAOS are two opposing axioms; Changing something as inalienable, archetypal and iconic as that dichotomy would be very weird...and pointless...and chaotic.
When it comes to concepts that reach far beyond the scope of the game (like LAW vs. CHAOS), it's always best that the players take the extra effort required to understand them.
I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.
Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.
This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).
The Basic boxed set contains:
Quick Start Rules A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms. Player's Handbook (Softcover, 125 pages) Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level. Dungeon Master's Guide (Softcover, 125 pages) Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.
Monster Manual (Softcover, 100 pages) Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D.
Introductory Adventure (Keep on the Borderlands) An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.
Also includes:
Character Sheets Reference Sheets Set of Dice
ExpertSet
A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:
Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.) Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.) Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)
Expansions
These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.)
Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book) Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book) Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book) The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on DamageShow
A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points
In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...
What are hit points? The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.
So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then? It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.
But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target? Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.
Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact? Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.
If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent? Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.
Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack? It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area.
What about poison and other types of non-combat damage? Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.
If hit points don't don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages? Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.
What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points? If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.
Why are monsters killed immediately and not players? Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.
What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage? If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).
Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded? See below.
Damage and Dying
Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.
Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly.
Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.
If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.
Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.
Unharmed: 1 hp or more Wounded: 0 hp or less Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level) Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)
Wounded When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.
Incapacitated Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).
If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.
If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.
Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.
Dead Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.
