Welcome to THAC0 . . . with Advantage! We’re two friends that have been playing D&D a long time. While we both love lots of other RPGs, D&D can still be unpredictable.

We all know the fantasy archetypes that spring from fantasy RPGs. The naïve but steadfast paladin, the stoic ranger who relates better to animals than people, the arrogant wizard that looks down on anyone less intelligent than they are. But we also know people that intentionally play against those archetypes. The hard drinking hedonistic paladin of the goddess of love, the ranger that has friends in every tavern in every city along the Sword Coast, the wizard that loves teaching and explaining new things to others. Today we’re going to look at playing against type, why you may want to do it, and how sometimes it can be very similar to playing a rigid archetype. 

While there are a lot of people who have argued otherwise, D&D has had rules to facilitate roleplaying almost from the beginning. Alignment is the first step along that path, but it created moral absolutes that were often wielded against players instead of supporting their character decisions. The 2nd edition Ravenloft Boxed Set introduced the Dark Gifts, temptations that would slowly turn PCs into the same Darklords whose evil they were resisting, but although these provided some benefits, they were, like alignment, mainly a tool of negative reinforcement. Player’s Option: Skills and Powers introduced one of the worst things you can do in any RPG, giving PCs more starting abilities for taking a flaw, where the real game was picking a flaw that would never affect you significantly. D&D 5e introduced Personality Traits, Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws, that involved positive reinforcement! You get something extra for roleplaying . . . just . . . not if you already have inspiration. And they’re not framed as “yes/no” questions, so deciding if you get inspiration can turn into a debate or at least a prolonged discussion in the middle of a session. So close.