0
\$\begingroup\$

I had a discussion with a player about the alignments, and my player said she wanted to play the homebrewed 5e dhampir as chaotic good vs. chaotic neutral. The reason she cited came from www.easydamus.com from that definition as a person who loves her brother she can't be chaotic neutral.

I'm of the persuasion that a player can care for loved ones as a dhampir and be neutral or evil simply because they view that person as an extension of the last vestiges of their humanity or some version of themselves.

Furthermore, when every character is in reality the hero of their own story, should we call her a hero if she has the potential to be turned to darkness?

Am I over doing it with the analysis?

The homebrew did not make any restrictions to the alignment. Only it specified with "most" and "rarely" I was trying to honor those by not specifically restricting the options, however I felt I should play devils advocate for the section. This came from the 5e dhampir section of www.dandwiki.com.

\$\endgroup\$

closed as primarily opinion-based by Miniman, Zachiel, Wibbs, Oblivious Sage, KRyan Apr 30 '16 at 18:06

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Unfortunately, alignment questions have proven to be very prone to be answered with opinions. The inherent vagueness of alignment is usually the culprit. \$\endgroup\$ – Zachiel Apr 30 '16 at 17:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ Quick note, the site you found the homebrew on is notorious for bad homebrew. This is especially clear on the page for classes, with one class outside the WiP section gaining 8 extra attacks by level 20. \$\endgroup\$ – xanderh May 1 '16 at 7:20
2
\$\begingroup\$

There are a lot of different Dhampir homebrews, but I haven't seen any that say a Dhampir must be a certain alignment. They are intelligent and free-willed; they can be any alignment- including Chaotic Good.

Whether the character herself is chaotic good is hard to say- you've told us almost nothing about her. You're right that loving her brother doesn't necessarily make her good but there are many other things that would.

The player thinks her character is Chaotic Good, so let her play Chaotic Good. She knows best what alignment her character is- don't try to change it unless she's definitely not acting good.

\$\endgroup\$
2
\$\begingroup\$

While the whole alignment discussion hasn't been resolved yet, and opinions run wide and far, there is one thing I feel we can all agree on: An alignment does not limit the range of emotions you can experience. A Good person can be sad, an Evil person can be happy, a Chaotic person can be bored and a Lawful person can be angry. Love is simply another emotion. There are tons of fantasy and IRL figures who are clearly evil, yet had (several) love-interests. For example, Adolf Hitler was a huge animal-lover and a vegetarian. However, I do not think anyone believes that those would make him any less evil than he was.

The evil-people-can't-feel-love misconception is most likely caused because many Evil characters are deranged in one way or another. Many Evil characters are psychopaths and sociopaths, which greatly affects their ideas about other human beings. They often believe them to be merely "tools" or "meatbags", and simply can't be bothered. The result being that they seem unable to love other human beings.

On another note, I have been told that 5e got rid of all alignment restrictions. It wouldn't seem logical to me that this template (homebrew or not) would add such a restriction. This is especially true since dhampirs are not necessarily Evil at all, and have no history of having such a restriction, as far as I am aware.

\$\endgroup\$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.