D&D 5e - Classes and Backgrounds with the more freedom and murderhoboring

[DragonSorcererX]

Hello adventurers, there is something that bothers me with RPG (Both Table Top and Video Game) that are Duties, Oaths and Vows, and when I read about the classes I think: "This guy shouldn't be killing good ol' orcs for money...", on 5e D&D this happens a lot, so, how do I get rid of these responsabilities that the classes and backgrounds bring and make them more generic and more about murderhoboring without losing the fluff?

Here are some examples:

Clerics: When I read the Clerics description I can't stop to think that they should be either at their churches or fighting on a war/crusade instead of be killing some orcs.

Druids: As I read the Druid he has the same problem as the Cleric, he should be protecting his forest and his sacred tree instead of going out with his pals to kill some orcs.

Paladins: Do I really need to say anything?

Warlocks: I like Warlocks, but they really make me crazy when I try to figure out why someone who made a pact that in most cases means servitude, if the patron is not interested in your soul or ocasionally "use" your body, would go kill some orcs.

(If any orc felt offended, sorry, I used your race just as a classic and easy to understand example)

[Giant2005]

If you don't like the fluff, then ignore the fluff. Just consider your class abilities to be a bunch of talents the character has and justify them however you like.

[Easy_Lee]

To address warlocks specifically, I think they vary quite a lot in what's their patron expects of them. I take it as similar to an exchange of favors, where one's patron grants power in exchange for being able to call on the warlock when it needs something done. Like a well-run mafia.

Edit: That's just my interpretation, but perhaps this sort of fluff is what you need.

[DragonSorcererX]

If you don't like the fluff, then ignore the fluff. Just consider your class abilities to be a bunch of talents the character has and justify them however you like.

"...whitout losing the fluff?"

I want the Cleric to be a Cleric, but, I also want a fast and dirty explanation of why he is here and not there...

[ClintACK]

In my experience Murderhobo campaigns usually ignore all the fluff anyway.


But you can make such a campaign fit the fluff. Imagine the Orcish Horde has just crossed the mountains into a vast, bucolic grassland dotted with small farming villages. They're burning and pillaging their way across the land. The Characters -- whoever they once were -- are now survivors of destroyed villages and towns, banding together for vengeance. Boom. Murderhoboing it is.


Or if it's just a matter of fitting your one character in... just because a Cleric of a certain god is *supposed* to be a certain way doesn't mean he doesn't struggle. Think of the preacher in a Western who's a semi-reformed gunfighter with a past of drunken lechery and violence. He's genuinely trying to do better -- and genuinely remorseful when he fails. But when his old buddy is getting the gang back together for one last job to settle some unfinished business they share...

[Cybren]

If you don't like the fluff, then ignore the fluff. Just consider your class abilities to be a bunch of talents the character has and justify them however you like.

I can understand this. To a point. My favorite games have a strong resonance between mechanics and flavor. "refluffing" is one of my least liked concepts, as if the mechanics aren't modelling the thing within the world in any meaningful way, why have the mechanics?

I have a lot of sympathy for the OP. I feel the same way re: Warlocks. They do some cool things, but nothing about the flavor is appealing.


To address warlocks specifically, I think they vary quite a lot in what's their patron expects of them. I take it as similar to an exchange of favors, where one's patron grants power in exchange for being able to call on the warlock when it needs something done. Like a well-run mafia.

Edit: That's just my interpretation, but perhaps this sort of fluff is what you need.

the perspective that allows me to tolerate them is that the patron isn't always a willing or aware participant in the exchange. Making them more "Solomon binding demons against their will"

[Giant2005]

I have a lot of sympathy for the OP. I feel the same way re: Warlocks. They do some cool things, but nothing about the flavor is appealing.



the perspective that allows me to tolerate them is that the patron isn't always a willing or aware participant in the exchange. Making them more "Solomon binding demons against their will"

That is my favorite part about Warlocks. It makes me think of Ammon Jerro (from Neverwinter Nights 2, I think). He was a Warlock that subjugated a bunch of demons in order to harness their power. It was badass as hell and made me love the character - 5e Warlocks are basically the same in their unwilling patrons.

[Gastronomie]

The 21st century Vatican church probably wouldn't order to kill orcs. But, you know, Christians in the crusade were basically crazy murderhobos. Wouldn't be surprised if Clerics and Paladins were too.

Actually, think. In the 21st century, there's all sorts of human rights issues and such, but even that's only in the truly peaceful countries. People don't care about that stuff in Syria or North Korea.

And D&D is set in a medieval world. At least most of them. Orcs are not humans with rights, but rather a form of a plague - if we don't eradicate them first, we'll suffer the same fate as Gauntlgrym, or however you spell it. Killing them is justice.

Even if a character is "good", doesn't mean he can't kill orcs. I don't think most of the soldiers in WWII or the Vietnam War were of evil intentions, but they did kill a lot of innocents, and no one can deny that.

[Cybren]

That is my favorite part about Warlocks. It makes me think of Ammon Jerro (from Neverwinter Nights 2, I think). He was a Warlock that subjugated a bunch of demons in order to harness their power. It was badass as hell and made me love the character - 5e Warlocks are basically the same in their unwilling patrons.

ugh that game. i don't know why they thought i cared about silver swords that much... and the entire part with the guard... i barely care about this stuff why am I going to start a career in the mob/anachronistically well organized law enforcement agency just to get access to a place that literally opens the scene after they let me in

[Slipperychicken]

You can easily murderhobo with just about any background.

Outlander, criminal, charlatan, hermit, and urchin are obvious. They have murderhobo written all over them. Even hermits just need the "murder" part, you can just give him some kind of "every man for himself" ideal that justifies anything he does to people.

Sailor is easy, just take the pirate variant and start acting like a degenerate because people are too scared to report you for it. Even non-pirate sailors aren't exactly known to be great people.

Soldier isn't hard. Plenty of soldiers go on to act like violent, disturbed people. Or just mercenaries or criminals, killing for money. Sometimes even while they're serving.

Noble is easy too. Back in third edition, I can't tell you how many murderhobos I saw whose backgrounds said they were a runaway noble. It was even an obscure form of powergaming, as some of the more creative and underhanded players would try to mooch extra treasure and bonuses from their rich families. If you're talking in-universe, a lot of nobles and knights have gone and acted like horrible people. Criminalistic, rapacious knights were so common in history that we even invented the word "robber knight" to describe them, and they feature occasionally in Arthurian myth as antagonists - they run up to a traveler, see that he has a nice horse and a cute wife, decide they want both, then charge him with lances hoping to kill him and take his stuff.

Folk Hero takes a tiny bit of thought. Your character, in the course of being a murderhobo, happened to do something nice as part of a quest, so the locals there really like him.

Sage and Guild Artisan however, I've got nothing. Say your character got bored of that life and decided to set out on adventures. You won't win any points for originality, but then again you don't care about that because you're a murderhobo.


But at the end of the day, murderhoboing is about playstyle and attitude, not your build. You can take any build you want and be a murderhobo. If you're thinking too hard about the backstory, then you're doing it wrong. Get the bare minimum of backstory together so the DM won't bother you, then just start shamelessly pursuing XP and loot, and ignore all other concerns. That's all it takes really.

[BW022]

I think you need to broaden your horizons.

It isn't necessary for characters to "Kill orcs for money." Most good characters would presumably want to kill orcs. Orcs are evil and generally kill people. If necessary a DM can roleplay townsfolks going missing, found with their heads missing, babies being slaughtered in their cribs, farms burned down, etc. Presumably, any good character would want to prevent this. As for the reward...

* Clerics need money to fund their churches and crusades.
* Paladins may have a charity. Or they figure that gold might help them buy better armor, weapons, mounts, etc. for their lord's/god's service.
* Warlocks. Gold still buys scrolls for their tombs, weapons, arcane things to research, etc.

Of course any decent character should have some type of background story -- where they are from, their family, what is important to them, etc. Some may want money, some influence, some to prove themselves, etc. A good DM would then incorporate these into the plot as to why they need to kill the orcs.

[Sigreid]

Gods being active in the world means that they want something from that world. In most D&D worlds that is worship. Who do you more want to worship? The god who makes his cloistered clerics lock themselves away in some monastery leaving only to fight some Holy War, or the one whose clerics go on grand adventures supported by their god's blessings and coming back with the bling and the chicks?

Paladin, pretty similar to cleric, really. More people will want to emulate you if your ideals have clearly led you to the good life. Besides, you have to give up so much, why would the light deny you some comfort?

Druids revere nature. Cities and all that come with them are nature. A city is really not that different than an ant hill or termite den, except the inhabitants put on airs and pretend they aren't just animals following their instincts.

Warlock: Exactly like cleric. If you want more suckers, er people to make a pact you need to let your hoes be seen living large all because of you.

[DragonSorcererX]

I am the DM of my game. Thank you, all of you! Your words of wisdom have enlightened me! I hope that any gods you worship bless you for being helpful! Sorry for the bad english.