So why can't Hex Blade be good?

[Akisa]

So I was wondering why can't Hex blades be good? To me it seems like the arcanist trying to be melee. The only thing remotely functioning anything "not good" is there curse, which could be reflavor easily without changing anything else in the class.

[Tyndmyr]

Consider it like this. It's a paladin, that doesn't suck so badly. No code of conduct, arcane instead of divine, nifty curse instead of smite, which helps the entire party, not just you. And the casting is focused on lots of swift action options, so you melee AND cast.

In addition, when you do your buff spells, some of them have fun bonuses. Like when you have a specific line of spells up, failing the save of any one of them results in autofailing the saves against all the lower ones in the series.

Also, the only stat you need is cha for casting, and the usual melee stats. It's mad, but it ain't a monk.

Sure, it's not the most powerful class made, but it is fairly decent, if you know how to use it.

Edit: Just reread, and realized it was an alignment thing. I have no idea. I'd just houserule that the alignment restriction is stupid.

[IdleMuse]

I think the OP is referring to the Good alignment, not power level

[Tengu_temp]

Because WotC doesn't believe that dark can be good.

[Shyftir]

But they do believe that dark can be Neutral.

[Vemynal]

its ok Tyndmyr i totally almost did the same thing

[true_shinken]

So I was wondering why can't Hex blades be good? To me it seems like the arcanist trying to be melee. The only thing remotely functioning anything "not good" is there curse, which could be reflavor easily without changing anything else in the class.

If you are already considering refluffing, your question seems really pointless.
The hexblade printed fluff is definetly non-good.
If you want to change the fluff, you might as well change the requirements. Hardly gamebreaking at all. If you really have a reason to do so and are not simply collecting plusses, I doubt most DMs would have a problem with that.

Because WotC doesn't believe that dark can be good.

That trope basically says 'dark can be neutral', which is actually pretty fitting for a Hexblade. And it's not WotC that 'thinks' like that; it's the heroic fantasy genre as a whole. Even Elric is nongood. Dorn Graybrook, from Year of Rogue Dragons, is also nongood.

[Iferus]

I think it is because cursing others is not a good thing to do.

[Axinian]

Because WotC doesn't believe that dark can be good.

At least they did when the class was made. Shadowcasters can be good.

[PersonMan]

I think it is because cursing others is not a good thing to do.

How is it different from just stabbing them?

Is getting a -2 for half a minute before you die from a sudden increase in metal content so bad?

[Kyeudo]

Because the smart thing with the Hexblade is to only dip it Mettle and Shadow Companion before you go Paladin of Tyranny. Charisma to saves twice and -6 to opponent's saves. Your party wizard will say "Thank you!".

[Dralnu]

How is it different from just stabbing them?

Is getting a -2 for half a minute before you die from a sudden increase in metal content so bad?

Yup. Good cares a lot about how you kill things. Stab things in the face? Fine. Sneak behind them and toss daggers into their backs? Bravo. Curse them or poison them? You're going too far, son!

I recall one of the books mentioning that poisons / curses were non-good acts. Then funnily enough, BoED drops "good" poisons for people to use.

[Person_Man]

For the same reason Monks must be Lawful and Barbarians can't be. It's pretty much an arbitrary idea that the author of the class had. Feel free to ignore it.

[Ormur]

I think it is because cursing others is not a good thing to do.

Yet somehow bestow curse doesn't have the evil descriptor. I'd say it's mostly a fluff thing and even the curse can be refluffed. It doesn't have particularly vile effects.

[Nero24200]

At least they did when the class was made. Shadowcasters can be good.

Not always, though with the shadowcaster they did something smart and have a small section explaining why and how this interacts with certain settings. In Forgotten Realms, for instance, Shadowcasters would be evil, since they they would draw energy from the Shadow Weave (an evil form of magic) rather than the normally neutral shadow plane.

Personally, I think alot of classes should've had some side-bar like this, explaining why they are restricted to a set alignment and also surgesting what kind of situations where the class might not fall into that alignment.

[Gralamin]

For the same reason Monks must be Lawful and Barbarians can't be. It's pretty much an arbitrary idea that the author of the class had. Feel free to ignore it.

This. The only class that alignment restrictions actually matter for is Incarnates.

[Kelb_Panthera]

For the same reason Monks must be Lawful and Barbarians can't be. It's pretty much an arbitrary idea that the author of the class had. Feel free to ignore it.

Barbarians I don't really get, but Monks having to be lawful does make a certain degree of sense; given how the more realistic monk abilities, like unarmed strike damage, wis to ac, and fast movement, are developed IRL. Anyone that goes through that much daily repetition is probably lawful.

[DragoonWraith]

See, a Monk can easily be a hermit shunning all society and living in the wilderness - that's very Chaotic, to my mind. The Monk requirement does not make sense.

Paladin requirements kind of make sense (but variants for every alignment should be in the PHB), Incarnate alignment requirements make a lot of sense, and the alignment requirements on Devoted Spirit maneuvers make sense. Other than that, not so much.

[Talon Sky]

Meh, I generally rule that they can't be good because a good society wouldn't accept them. I mean, they could live their lives to be good, but if society doesn't let you ride in and save the day, then you have a hard time accomplishing your goal. In most people this would lead to an animosity towards society, or a neutralist attitude at best.

Similarly, in my games I let Paladins be any nonevil alignment as long as it follows their deity's alignment, much like a cleric. Paladins can't be evil, Blackguards can't be good, so maybe Hexblades shouldn't be, I dunno, lawful. And Duskblades can't be chaotic.

That seems like an interesting new houserule....

EDIT: Knights can't be chaotic either, but they're not a casting melee class. Just thought I'd clarify my....erm....thoughts.

[Kelb_Panthera]

See, a Monk can easily be a hermit shunning all society and living in the wilderness - that's very Chaotic, to my mind. The Monk requirement does not make sense.

I agree that is a chaotic decision. However, that monk is in his cave spending every waking moment devoted to further improving his martial skill and seeking enlightenment. Seems pretty lawful to me, spending all day every day doing the same thing over and over.

[Tyndmyr]

Repetition isn't inherently lawful. It's not very chaotic, but law is not exactly order. At least, not in the D&D world. However, any strong poking at alignments is bound to find issues.

[Zaydos]

I can understand Barbarians' alignment restriction, succumbing to that burning rage in your soul is a non-lawful act.

I can understand cleric and paladin alignment restrictions (although I like paladins of every alignment, I could understand it better if they got more lawful powers).

I can understand incarnate alignment restrictions.

I can understand Dread Necromancers' alignment restriction since excessive necromancy = bad in D&D.

Knights and samurai I can get that the character archetypes they represent are supposed to be always Lawful... mechanics-wise...

I can even get why certain maneuvers and spells have alignment restrictions.

But monks, bards, hexblades, druids... no. I can't really understand theirs.

[The Tygre]

Because WotC doesn't believe that dark can be good.

WHY DID YOU LINK?! Do you realize that just took up the next hour of my life?!

[Dusk Eclipse]

Meh, I generally rule that they can't be good because a good society wouldn't accept them. I mean, they could live their lives to be good, but if society doesn't let you ride in and save the day, then you have a hard time accomplishing your goal. In most people this would lead to an animosity towards society, or a neutralist attitude at best.

Similarly, in my games I let Paladins be any nonevil alignment as long as it follows their deity's alignment, much like a cleric. Paladins can't be evil, Blackguards can't be good, so maybe Hexblades shouldn't be, I dunno, lawful. And Duskblades can't be chaotic.

That seems like an interesting new houserule....

EDIT: Knights can't be chaotic either, but they're not a casting melee class. Just thought I'd clarify my....erm....thoughts.

FWIW the printed fluff of Duskblades says that many of them are chaotic since the Duskblade tradition was started by elfs, who are chaotic.