Regarding Aetherborn Alignment:

That kind of language in D&D is always guideline, rather than iron-clad law. "As a rule" usually indicates a rule of thumb.

Aetherborn are . promotes its self interest ahead of other ends. This is one of the elements of "Evil" alignment in D&D, so entities (Races, groups, individuals...) would tend to skew away from good. Remember, kids! In the Great Wheel, unlike in life, doing the right things for the wrong reasons is still the mark of the bad.

I made this chart once, depicting where I felt colors skewed versus alignment...



Regarding the Document as a whole: Since they didn't include it or even mention it, here's A link to the Artificer class for D&D 5e that they published online earlier this year. Frankly I'm shocked it didn't even get a line in "Classes on Kaladesh".

It got a shout-out in the introduction:

Well, I guess we might as well swing that way and only start worrying about it if it's actually contradicted at some point... So, probably never.


And I'd probably need a Blogspot account to leave comments there, which I don't have, so while you're here: Your blog is absolutely awesome on every level and a gift to the community, so, whatever you do, please keep it going! Je bent een echte historicus! And that's all the Dutch I'm going to attempt for today...

Thank you for the kind words Dat is erg aardig van je

Slightly more on topic: I never really gotten into the D&D alignment grid. In 5th Edition I played an Avenger of the god of beauty, who would never kill enemy's, but who did forcibly tattooed and pierced them after defeat in an attempt to make the world more beautiful. I insisted the character was lawful good, following a very strict (if bizarre) code for the betterment of the world. Everybody else kept insisting that should be Chaotic Evil instead.

Hey, people are speaking Dutch. Dan kan ik meedoen.

D&D's alignment system never had much room for moral ambiguity. Seeing as killing is a logical conclusion of a combat-centric game, so it's considered morally neutral as long as you don't kill for no or bad reasons. Forcing people to change their appearance will be considered more Evil.

I can see how it would Lawful, though.

Does seem subtly Chaotic to me, but not Evil.

Think of it this way; if there was a dude running around tattooing, piercing, or completing mostly permanent cosmetic surgery on unwilling victims that he considered "ugly" do to some weird cult he was in, most people would consider him to be evil and committing crimes against people.

Granted, morality in the D&D world is a little off anyway due to there being definable, provable deities with conflicting goals and laws, and good and evil are real, tangible concepts that can be measured and sided with. Even then, I would consider a religious order that goes around beating things up and then forcibly "converting them" through physical body modification to be Lawful Evil. But sure, there are arguments to be made that would keep us at it forever, as the D&D alignment spectrum was so haphazardly designed anyway.