• sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    *teeny tiny voice* alignment was never supposed to be for players consideration. it was only supposed to interact discretely with the spells and effects of Planar-type monsters and Detect/Smite Evil

    • psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      20 hours ago

      In 3.5 a druid must be neutral on one axis. Druid spells don’t interact with alignments; a monk must be lawful

      Players playing monks may have their character loose access to monk abilities if they do chaotic stuff too often

      Alignment has been an important part of the game

      • sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        20 hours ago

        fuck I forgot about monks and druids. okay, I guess no wonder it turned into such a big misunderstanding. that is a wider amount of people that were expected to think in terms of the alignment axis

        • psud@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          18 hours ago

          I’m pretty sure loads of other classes have alignment restrictions - notably clerics and paladins

          Early d&d had the universe constructed as interlocking planes of law, chaos, good, and evil, with the world on the intersection of all those. That was the reason for heroes and monsters - they were touched by our created from one of the planes.

          The world was a battleground between the planes, and alignment was your alignment to the planes, which side of each fight you were on. It has gotten weaker each version since

          In 3.5 I usually play druids and usually neutral-good as I still have that old model in my head and if I’m not going to care about one axis, it’s going to be law/chaos

          • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            I’m pretty sure loads of other classes have alignment restrictions - notably clerics and paladins

            I remember my D&D 3.x DM insisting we follow RAW, so if I wanted to take levels in assassin (who else remembers prestige classes?) then I had to be evil. 3 players went along, and the druid betrayed us to the “good” guys. Had a massive brawl where we (team evil) won, thanks in part to a hail mary “I run around the corner and hide. That’s… a natural 20 for 37” the betraying druid player couldn’t beat.

          • sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            Cleric alignment requesites go largely unnoticed by the player. staying within one step of diety is pretty easy, probably comes automatically to most people who would be interested in the class on the first place. Alignment gets complicated for them in considering if it’s appropriate to cast magic circle or not or holy word or not. but usually it’s safe to assume for those.

            Paladin is responsible for I think almost all alignment hangups at the table. sure, there are others but not as often.

            Druid probably would be because communicating the concept of neutrality is full of hangups but I think druids are pretty underplayed.

            • psud@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              17 hours ago

              but I think druids are pretty underplayed.

              Indeed, the class has a few fans like me. I don’t get why they’re so unpopular, druids are powerful and probably more broken breakable than any of the basic classes (at least in 3.5)

              • sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                17 hours ago

                Wild shape was hard to read as a new player. Full casters are intimidating too. I love them too but they’re just hard to explain to newcommers.

                • psud@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  15 hours ago

                  There have been fan works online explaining how to be an effective druid, see also though the guide to being everything a how-to for the Master of Many Forms druid prestige class

                  5e druids are easier - as casters they are excellent for battlefield control, as wildshape users they are a front line thwackers almost on par with fighters

                  3.5e druids seem most optimised as summoners, with you controlling numerous summons, but also capable in utility, buff, and battlefield casting

                  In 3.5 I like to have a spreadsheet listing all the spells for each level and allowing selection of the correct number of spell slots, it’s hard to manage on paper, especially when you’re using several books

              • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                16 hours ago

                The class fantasy never appealed to me. They can be powerful, but I don’t have any real interest in being a dirt wizard or turning into animals.

                More of a rogue guy, or arcane caster if I can get over spells-per-day being my anathema.

                • psud@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  15 hours ago

                  You and everyone in my d&d group :) we’re lucky enough to have one always wizard, one always rogue, one always cleric, over almost always druid, and two minmaxers