I know that when I think of lawful good I typically go to a goody two shoes kind of character. They follow every law to the letter, have only the best intentions, and get frustrated when other party members bend the rules or blatantly disregard them. There must be a way to play lawful good that isn't necessarily like that stereotype. How have you seen or played a character who was lawful good that maintained the idea of the alignment without falling into that typical idea?
Playing the Lawful Good archetype is only tiring if you play them one-dimensionally. What does the character care about so much that they'd be willing to break the law or act selfishly for it? You're going to have to be able to justify why the Lawful Good character doesn't turn over their party of borderline anarchists.
Perhaps the character only presents themselves as "Lawful Good" when in public to maintain a certain image, but is different in private. Or they are "Lawful Good" because that expectation was imposed on them by family or other external pressures, and they choose to adventure to give themselves a chance to act out and find out who they really want to be.
It's important to remember alignment isn't a static value, and even the PHB states "few people are perfectly and consistently faithful to the precepts of their alignment." It is not unusual for me to shift my character's alignment during a campaign based on choices I've made throughout the adventures (typically no more than one step in any direction).
Lawful doesn't require you to follow the laws of the land, so you could create a character that follows a personal set of rules.
For example Violence must be avoided at all costs as a creed could lead to a character willing to steal/lie to further a goal in a way that prevents interactions that would turn violent. If such a character finds a noble that is mistreating their servants, they would have no qualms stealing/fabricating evidence of crimes, but they would run and hide to avoid violent conflict.
Lawful doesn't require you to follow the laws of the land, so you could create a character that follows a personal set of rules.
Depending on the depiction, Batman is absolutely a Lawful (strictly adheres to his own code) Good (puts the welfare of others, and of society, above himself) character
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Lawful doesn't require you to follow the laws of the land, so you could create a character that follows a personal set of rules.
Depending on the depiction, Batman is absolutely a Lawful (strictly adheres to his own code) Good (puts the welfare of others, and of society, above himself) character
Five posts before Batman came up in an alignment thread. I believe you set a new record!!
To answer the OP, well, it's not much of an answer, so I apologize if it doesn't help much. I simply ignore alignment. I play my character with a consistent set of values. If someone wants to try and package those up in a box and hang a label on it, more power to them, but it's something I find irrelevant.
I've heard that alignment alterations can have severe repercussions. Is that maybe something from a previous edition of D&D?
Yes. I don't know in 4e but in 3.5 if a druid stopped having a neutral alignment or a paladin was no longer lawful good, they couldn't take levels in their class (if I remember correctly they also loose access to their class features until they are the correct alignment again)
The easiest way to play proper Lawful Good is to emphasize Good, not Lawful. Your character seeks to selflessly help those in need, however they (reasonably) can. They try to do so within the law whenever possible and they try to gently guide their compatriots to a nobler path (keywords: gently guide), but if Lawful and Good come into conflict the Actually LG character remembers that Law is there to promote the common Good and chooses to do what's right over what's lawful. Play the character as compassionate, helpful, and patient - subvert the stick-up-the-ass LG trend by making your character one that can laugh off the party's antics so long as they don't cross the line into wickedness and overall...overall...serve the common good. They try and steer the ship when they can, but they're also content to simply go with the flow and ensure the party's results are Good even if their methods are a li'l shaky.
I've heard that alignment alterations can have severe repercussions. Is that maybe something from a previous edition of D&D?
Yes. In previous editions of D&D there were serious repercussions for changing alignment. To start with, in AD&D, there was an experience penalty just for having your character's alignment changed. On top of that, some classes had alignment restrictions: paladins had to be Lawful Good, Rangers had to be any good, Druids had to be True Neutral, and Bards had to be any partially neutral. If your alignment changed to where you no longer met your class's alignment restriction, you lost access to that class's abilities. It was a real pain in the butt, especially for Paladins, who many GMs forced to run in an overly-restrictive manner (typically known as Lawful Stupid) or lose all their abilities.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Her backstory was she worked in the city watch investiating criminal groups to get evidence of their activities whether that was though infiltrating the group or sneaking into their base.
In the beginning, D&D was expected to be played in a manner that the PC would act within their alignment. If the PC appeared to have no regard for their alignment, bad stuff would happen.
I find the best way to get around most alignment issues as a player is to declare my character as Neutral Good. He acts in a good way, with equal respect for law and chaos.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
The best descriptor I've found to use for the Lawful Alignment is this: You like that rules and laws to govern behavior exist.
Following every law to the letter is simply nonsensical and wouldn't ever actually work for any character because laws change depending on where you are and can be completely arbitrary. If the monarch's word is law and the monarch randomly declares that the character shall be executed and their stuff given over to the crown, not even a Lawful character would agree to that.
No, a Lawful character simply likes the fact that laws exist. Whether they think that laws should be used to help the common good or be exploited for their own gain determines whether they are Good or Evil.
So the stereotypical Lawful Stupid character basically makes no sense. Rather you should look to people like Fred Rogers, who is a great example of a Lawful Good person who acted with compassion and understanding rather than frustration or judgment. Or Steve Rogers, who was faced with choices that put his Good in conflict with his Lawful, but stood his ground rooted like a tree besides the river of Truth.
That said, I still don't even like Alignment and think that we should drop it in favor of PBIF.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Matt Colville has a great bit where he says the problem with Alignment is that people tend to treat it as Proscriptive rather than Descriptive. Your alignment doesn't determine your actions, it describes your actions in a general sense.
The great Batman debate creates some interesting twists on this because while he does follow a code (Lawful) and works to the greater good (Good), he also violates people's rights by engaging in psychological torture (Evil) and acts in ways that are contrary to the commonly accepted rules of his home culture (Chaotic). So yeah.....
As stated above, there were back in the days of 2nd ed, real benefits and consequences to alignment shifts. Some spells only worked on characters of a specific alignment and if you had to shift alignment either due to character growth or due to a snap decision, there were consequences.
For me with Lawful Good -
Lawful means you prefer the world to be orderly. Freedom is nice but predictability and stability are better. Yes it can feel a little confining to have to wear a suit and tie every day to work but you respect that a bit of a "uniform" helps people focus on the job at hand, and makes your own life easier as you know what you're wearing when you're working.
Good means you think about the community and others as much as yourself. You think about how to your actions affect others and take those feelings into account. As a contrast, I think of Evil as selfish and self-serving. It doesn't matter if someone else gets hurt so long as you benefit.
And lastly all of this exists on a spectrum. Very few people are at the corners of alignment just as with other measures, few people are lock step with most extreme points of dogma for their social, religious or political affiliations. So you can have a knight who is generally good, but sometimes creates harms in his up choice to put the law first. You can have a shop keep who really wants to see her community grow and prosper but will still raise prices if she feels she can safely to do so and not lose business.
I'd say the stereotypical lawful good character is also a zealot. They don't have to be puritanical about their world view, they can have a preference and a point of view without thinking that everyone else needs to follow in lock step, or that its always the right answer in every situation.
I'm playing a lawful good wizard right now, who was raised in a noble family to act as a royal scholar and advisor. In the party he has his point of view but recognizes the value the chaotic rogue brings to the group as well. Also, in game his lawfulness gets expressed more often in terms of his personal life keeping his things tidy, meticulous note taking, doing things by the book, etc. As well as his goodness, caring about how the party's actions impact those around them, wanting to be of service. Rather than an expressed ideology, society ought to operate in an orderly fashion, businesses need permits, lawbreakers need to be punished, etc.
I guess I'm saying it can be about embracing the value of diversity rather than demanding everyone adopt your disposition. And a focus on the personal rather than a larger system. As ways to get away from the LG stereotype. I think that goes for pretty much any alignment too.
Ah, the classic Lawful Good discussion. Some good points have been raised already, along with a few I disagree with. My biggest point of disagreement is probably the "they have a personal code" bit. Everyone has a personal code to one degree or other, so that's not really a helpful starting point. To me, the basic core of the Lawful portion of the alignment is the belief that society as a whole functions best within a defined system of rules. Lawful Good broadly believes this system provides the best means to protect and support the people, Lawful Neutral means a character generally believes the system is the most effective way for society to function regardless of how any particular individual or group fares under it, and Lawful Evil generally believe that such structures are useful for exploiting to their own benefit.
So, for a Lawful Good character, they're typically going to have and/or look for some authority to rally behind, but they will be thinking critically and checking to see if this is truly a legitimate and beneficial authority. Blindly obeying laws or trying to push a single standard of behavior on everyone leans more into LN or LS territory. The most important element of a good Lawful Good character is that they're going to think critically about how to apply whatever system they're operating under to support the common good. A savvy cop who knows how to work the system and bend a few regulations is still LG if they are still making legitimate arrests rather than planting evidence or beating a confession out of the guilty party.
Ah, the classic Lawful Good discussion. Some good points have been raised already, along with a few I disagree with. My biggest point of disagreement is probably the "they have a personal code" bit. Everyone has a personal code to one degree or other, so that's not really a helpful starting point.
This cannot be emphasized strongly enough.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The thing to remember is that there is no typical lawful good character. What you are describing is a stereotypical lawful good character.
Two characters with the same alignment can act, think, and talk in very different ways. All it means to be lawful good is that you will typically try to do what is good and good by society. You do not have to follow societal rule or expectation to the book or never do anything bad. What being LG suggests you'll do instead is to typically act that way, with some exceptions. No one is always perfect, and there is no alignment that cannot be strayed away from slightly.
Alignment is merely a role-playing aid, when used right. If you don't like it, don't pick one or play with one for your character. It is not inflexible and rigid; On the contrary it can be changed, ignored if it isn't helpful, and defied at certain times.
Very few Dungeon Masters punish characters for straying from their alignment. Very few mechanics relate to your alignment. Ultimately, if you are concerned about alignment then talk to your DM about it. If you don't feel comfortable using the system and the person running for the game for you requires you to, then you may not be at the right table
Thank you for listening to my TedTalk. It's over now (probably).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
"Good men don't need rules...now is not the day to find out why I have so many..."
-Doctor Who, A Good Man Goes To War
(Not to imply the doctor, especially the 11th doctor, is lawfully aligned since fictional characters rarely fit perfectly into any dnd alignment, but just including the quote because I think it's a good example of a more nuanced but still good aligned character).
I consider the Lawful/Chaotic seesaw to be more of a difference between Predictable and Unpredictable. I understand that the inclusion of the word "Law" makes people jump to societies and laws and enforcement and all that, but these are adventurers, not lawyers. Their alignment needs to hold true in the wild.
So, I instead see it as Predictable and Unpredictable. A Lawful character is one where you can generally map their actions to their beliefs, and as such you have some degree of foreknowledge of the likelihood of a scenario playing out in a specific way with this character. Any DM knows you get some players whose characters you can reliably say "Put an orphan with no food in front of them and they will probably feed them". We also know that there are characters who you do the same and you say "I have no idea if they will adopt them, feed them, use them, get them in with the thieves guild to get them a job, give them money, steal candy from them, or use them in a bank heist to steal money from the local mafia". To me, these are the differences between Lawful and Chaotic. It also gives these roles an in-game purpose; to hint to the DM how to make the world interact with the characters.
Following the law is 99% about concern over being caught and the consequences thereof. In real life, you need only put a speed camera on a highway and see how much differently everyone drives to illustrate this. To me, sensibly saying "I won't break the law, because I don't want to be arrested" holds no bearing on a players alignment, though a players alignment may hold a bearing on whether they agree with the laws or disagree with them.
I know that when I think of lawful good I typically go to a goody two shoes kind of character. They follow every law to the letter, have only the best intentions, and get frustrated when other party members bend the rules or blatantly disregard them. There must be a way to play lawful good that isn't necessarily like that stereotype. How have you seen or played a character who was lawful good that maintained the idea of the alignment without falling into that typical idea?
Playing the Lawful Good archetype is only tiring if you play them one-dimensionally. What does the character care about so much that they'd be willing to break the law or act selfishly for it? You're going to have to be able to justify why the Lawful Good character doesn't turn over their party of borderline anarchists.
Perhaps the character only presents themselves as "Lawful Good" when in public to maintain a certain image, but is different in private. Or they are "Lawful Good" because that expectation was imposed on them by family or other external pressures, and they choose to adventure to give themselves a chance to act out and find out who they really want to be.
It's important to remember alignment isn't a static value, and even the PHB states "few people are perfectly and consistently faithful to the precepts of their alignment." It is not unusual for me to shift my character's alignment during a campaign based on choices I've made throughout the adventures (typically no more than one step in any direction).
Lawful doesn't require you to follow the laws of the land, so you could create a character that follows a personal set of rules.
For example Violence must be avoided at all costs as a creed could lead to a character willing to steal/lie to further a goal in a way that prevents interactions that would turn violent. If such a character finds a noble that is mistreating their servants, they would have no qualms stealing/fabricating evidence of crimes, but they would run and hide to avoid violent conflict.
I've heard that alignment alterations can have severe repercussions. Is that maybe something from a previous edition of D&D?
Depending on the depiction, Batman is absolutely a Lawful (strictly adheres to his own code) Good (puts the welfare of others, and of society, above himself) character
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Five posts before Batman came up in an alignment thread. I believe you set a new record!!
To answer the OP, well, it's not much of an answer, so I apologize if it doesn't help much. I simply ignore alignment. I play my character with a consistent set of values. If someone wants to try and package those up in a box and hang a label on it, more power to them, but it's something I find irrelevant.
Yes. I don't know in 4e but in 3.5 if a druid stopped having a neutral alignment or a paladin was no longer lawful good, they couldn't take levels in their class (if I remember correctly they also loose access to their class features until they are the correct alignment again)
The easiest way to play proper Lawful Good is to emphasize Good, not Lawful. Your character seeks to selflessly help those in need, however they (reasonably) can. They try to do so within the law whenever possible and they try to gently guide their compatriots to a nobler path (keywords: gently guide), but if Lawful and Good come into conflict the Actually LG character remembers that Law is there to promote the common Good and chooses to do what's right over what's lawful. Play the character as compassionate, helpful, and patient - subvert the stick-up-the-ass LG trend by making your character one that can laugh off the party's antics so long as they don't cross the line into wickedness and overall...overall...serve the common good. They try and steer the ship when they can, but they're also content to simply go with the flow and ensure the party's results are Good even if their methods are a li'l shaky.
Please do not contact or message me.
Yes. In previous editions of D&D there were serious repercussions for changing alignment. To start with, in AD&D, there was an experience penalty just for having your character's alignment changed. On top of that, some classes had alignment restrictions: paladins had to be Lawful Good, Rangers had to be any good, Druids had to be True Neutral, and Bards had to be any partially neutral. If your alignment changed to where you no longer met your class's alignment restriction, you lost access to that class's abilities. It was a real pain in the butt, especially for Paladins, who many GMs forced to run in an overly-restrictive manner (typically known as Lawful Stupid) or lose all their abilities.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I have a lawful good (swashbuckler) rogue.
Her backstory was she worked in the city watch investiating criminal groups to get evidence of their activities whether that was though infiltrating the group or sneaking into their base.
In the beginning, D&D was expected to be played in a manner that the PC would act within their alignment. If the PC appeared to have no regard for their alignment, bad stuff would happen.
I find the best way to get around most alignment issues as a player is to declare my character as Neutral Good. He acts in a good way, with equal respect for law and chaos.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
The best descriptor I've found to use for the Lawful Alignment is this: You like that rules and laws to govern behavior exist.
Following every law to the letter is simply nonsensical and wouldn't ever actually work for any character because laws change depending on where you are and can be completely arbitrary. If the monarch's word is law and the monarch randomly declares that the character shall be executed and their stuff given over to the crown, not even a Lawful character would agree to that.
No, a Lawful character simply likes the fact that laws exist. Whether they think that laws should be used to help the common good or be exploited for their own gain determines whether they are Good or Evil.
So the stereotypical Lawful Stupid character basically makes no sense. Rather you should look to people like Fred Rogers, who is a great example of a Lawful Good person who acted with compassion and understanding rather than frustration or judgment. Or Steve Rogers, who was faced with choices that put his Good in conflict with his Lawful, but stood his ground rooted like a tree besides the river of Truth.
That said, I still don't even like Alignment and think that we should drop it in favor of PBIF.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LawfulGood
You might find that site useful
Matt Colville has a great bit where he says the problem with Alignment is that people tend to treat it as Proscriptive rather than Descriptive. Your alignment doesn't determine your actions, it describes your actions in a general sense.
The great Batman debate creates some interesting twists on this because while he does follow a code (Lawful) and works to the greater good (Good), he also violates people's rights by engaging in psychological torture (Evil) and acts in ways that are contrary to the commonly accepted rules of his home culture (Chaotic). So yeah.....
As stated above, there were back in the days of 2nd ed, real benefits and consequences to alignment shifts. Some spells only worked on characters of a specific alignment and if you had to shift alignment either due to character growth or due to a snap decision, there were consequences.
For me with Lawful Good -
Lawful means you prefer the world to be orderly. Freedom is nice but predictability and stability are better. Yes it can feel a little confining to have to wear a suit and tie every day to work but you respect that a bit of a "uniform" helps people focus on the job at hand, and makes your own life easier as you know what you're wearing when you're working.
Good means you think about the community and others as much as yourself. You think about how to your actions affect others and take those feelings into account. As a contrast, I think of Evil as selfish and self-serving. It doesn't matter if someone else gets hurt so long as you benefit.
And lastly all of this exists on a spectrum. Very few people are at the corners of alignment just as with other measures, few people are lock step with most extreme points of dogma for their social, religious or political affiliations. So you can have a knight who is generally good, but sometimes creates harms in his up choice to put the law first. You can have a shop keep who really wants to see her community grow and prosper but will still raise prices if she feels she can safely to do so and not lose business.
It's not called Lawful Perfect.
"Teller of tales, dreamer of dreams"
Tips, Tricks, Maps: Lantern Noir Presents
**Streams hosted at at twitch.tv/LaternNoir
I'd say the stereotypical lawful good character is also a zealot. They don't have to be puritanical about their world view, they can have a preference and a point of view without thinking that everyone else needs to follow in lock step, or that its always the right answer in every situation.
I'm playing a lawful good wizard right now, who was raised in a noble family to act as a royal scholar and advisor. In the party he has his point of view but recognizes the value the chaotic rogue brings to the group as well. Also, in game his lawfulness gets expressed more often in terms of his personal life keeping his things tidy, meticulous note taking, doing things by the book, etc. As well as his goodness, caring about how the party's actions impact those around them, wanting to be of service. Rather than an expressed ideology, society ought to operate in an orderly fashion, businesses need permits, lawbreakers need to be punished, etc.
I guess I'm saying it can be about embracing the value of diversity rather than demanding everyone adopt your disposition. And a focus on the personal rather than a larger system. As ways to get away from the LG stereotype. I think that goes for pretty much any alignment too.
Ah, the classic Lawful Good discussion. Some good points have been raised already, along with a few I disagree with. My biggest point of disagreement is probably the "they have a personal code" bit. Everyone has a personal code to one degree or other, so that's not really a helpful starting point. To me, the basic core of the Lawful portion of the alignment is the belief that society as a whole functions best within a defined system of rules. Lawful Good broadly believes this system provides the best means to protect and support the people, Lawful Neutral means a character generally believes the system is the most effective way for society to function regardless of how any particular individual or group fares under it, and Lawful Evil generally believe that such structures are useful for exploiting to their own benefit.
So, for a Lawful Good character, they're typically going to have and/or look for some authority to rally behind, but they will be thinking critically and checking to see if this is truly a legitimate and beneficial authority. Blindly obeying laws or trying to push a single standard of behavior on everyone leans more into LN or LS territory. The most important element of a good Lawful Good character is that they're going to think critically about how to apply whatever system they're operating under to support the common good. A savvy cop who knows how to work the system and bend a few regulations is still LG if they are still making legitimate arrests rather than planting evidence or beating a confession out of the guilty party.
This cannot be emphasized strongly enough.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The thing to remember is that there is no typical lawful good character. What you are describing is a stereotypical lawful good character.
Two characters with the same alignment can act, think, and talk in very different ways. All it means to be lawful good is that you will typically try to do what is good and good by society. You do not have to follow societal rule or expectation to the book or never do anything bad. What being LG suggests you'll do instead is to typically act that way, with some exceptions. No one is always perfect, and there is no alignment that cannot be strayed away from slightly.
Alignment is merely a role-playing aid, when used right. If you don't like it, don't pick one or play with one for your character. It is not inflexible and rigid; On the contrary it can be changed, ignored if it isn't helpful, and defied at certain times.
Very few Dungeon Masters punish characters for straying from their alignment. Very few mechanics relate to your alignment. Ultimately, if you are concerned about alignment then talk to your DM about it. If you don't feel comfortable using the system and the person running for the game for you requires you to, then you may not be at the right table
Thank you for listening to my TedTalk. It's over now (probably).
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE."Good men don't need rules...now is not the day to find out why I have so many..."
-Doctor Who, A Good Man Goes To War
(Not to imply the doctor, especially the 11th doctor, is lawfully aligned since fictional characters rarely fit perfectly into any dnd alignment, but just including the quote because I think it's a good example of a more nuanced but still good aligned character).
I figure I'll throw my 2 cents in!
I consider the Lawful/Chaotic seesaw to be more of a difference between Predictable and Unpredictable. I understand that the inclusion of the word "Law" makes people jump to societies and laws and enforcement and all that, but these are adventurers, not lawyers. Their alignment needs to hold true in the wild.
So, I instead see it as Predictable and Unpredictable. A Lawful character is one where you can generally map their actions to their beliefs, and as such you have some degree of foreknowledge of the likelihood of a scenario playing out in a specific way with this character. Any DM knows you get some players whose characters you can reliably say "Put an orphan with no food in front of them and they will probably feed them". We also know that there are characters who you do the same and you say "I have no idea if they will adopt them, feed them, use them, get them in with the thieves guild to get them a job, give them money, steal candy from them, or use them in a bank heist to steal money from the local mafia". To me, these are the differences between Lawful and Chaotic. It also gives these roles an in-game purpose; to hint to the DM how to make the world interact with the characters.
Following the law is 99% about concern over being caught and the consequences thereof. In real life, you need only put a speed camera on a highway and see how much differently everyone drives to illustrate this. To me, sensibly saying "I won't break the law, because I don't want to be arrested" holds no bearing on a players alignment, though a players alignment may hold a bearing on whether they agree with the laws or disagree with them.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!