3
\$\begingroup\$

After a brief discussion in chat about the topic, (which didn't really go anywhere), I was wondering if there was anything in the rules that determined whether certain classes must have particular alignments? (E.g. Paladins must be Lawful-Good to Lawful-Neutral)

Is there a difference in Editions?

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ What is the reason for the negative score? Helps to know why certain questions are voted down. \$\endgroup\$
    – Premier Bromanov
    Commented Aug 17, 2015 at 21:41
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I can't speak for everyone, but I personally downvoted because "this question does not show research effort." \$\endgroup\$
    – GMJoe
    Commented Aug 18, 2015 at 0:02

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
13
\$\begingroup\$

Each edition has different rules with respect to this. D&D 5e removed all restrictions and made alignment a general thing for characters. There is flavour text indicating which classes tend to do what, however the customization aspect allows for things like chaotic-evil Paladins.

For other editions, the easiest way to find out is to look up the class you're interested in and whatever edition you are playing.

For instance: Google search 3.5 Monk to find out that Monks need to be any lawful category.

As an example, D&D 3.5 has alignment rules for several classes such as Paladin, Barbarian and Druid.

Barbarians (any non-lawful); Paladins (lawful good); Druid (any neutral)

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ AD&D 1E & 2E had many alignment restrictions, assassins as any evil alignment got them removed from 2E. Thieves had to be non-lawful in 1E & 2E. \$\endgroup\$
    – Michael Shopsin
    Commented Dec 7, 2023 at 17:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .