The BEST way to get spells in D&D...

There are multiple ways of getting spells in D&D. You can learn spells from ancient books, gain them from your deity, bargain with a demon, invent them yourself, and so on. Same ideas apply to various RPGs - some treat spells as powers, others see them as skills, etc.

Mechanically, there is nothing particularly special about spells when compared to other abilities a character can learn. If you require warriors to find a tutor in order to become polearm specialists, magicians might also require a teacher to learn spells. On the other hand, if fighters get stronger as they level up, there is nothing stopping you from just giving new spell away.

Of course, any given system can play with these ideas. For example, in old school D&D, some spells might be stronger than anything a warrior could ever accomplish, so it would make sense that the magic-users would get random spells from adventuring - the same way fighters would get magical weapons.

Alternatively, each class may have their own ways of learning spells. Clerics might gain them automatically, while magic-users must study, and paladins will LOSE their spells if they ever steer away from their righteous path!

D&S often separates spells between "divine" and "arcane" spells. Personally, I don't care much for this distinction. Both types of spells work almost identically, and some spells are both divine an arcane, so both clerics and magic-users can cast them.

It seems to be the best way deal with spells in order to maximize adventure possibilities is letting PCs get their spells any way they want - despite their class. And once they get it, it is theirs - for good or ill.

Paladins and clerics can pray their lawful deities for a spell top aid their efforts... But the deity may ask for a quest or proof of faith. 

Chaotic deities, on the other hand, will be more flexible - they might exchange spells for goods and services.

A paladin that falls from grace still keeps his powers - making fallen paladins the stuff of legend! What is worse, they can pledge loyalty to an evil, rival deity becoming more powerful in the process. There is always a high demand for turncloak healers in the Evil Lord's army! That is why lawful deities are so careful when choosing their clerics and paladins!

Of course, forgotten tomes of forbidden lore are also useful when studying magic. Their authors must guarde them carefully, or such secrets might be turned against them.

On the other hand, casting spells you haven't memorized should always be dangerous. Magicians can also create "trap grimoires" to fool their rivals.

And magic has a will of its own. Casting an unknown spell repeatedly will make it enter your memory whether you like it or not. While this has no apparent downsides, it occupies a chunk or your brain that might be better used for other stuff (or other spells) - which is why fighters and thieves usually shy away from such books unless they have some arcane ability themselves.

In short, this means the mechanics of spells are always similar, but they way you acquire them is different in the game world.

I have added most of these ideas to my Dark Fantasy Basic game. If you like this, you might want to check it out: 

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/229046/Dark-Fantasy-Basic--Players-Guide

On the other hand, most pages of Dark Fantasy Basic are meant to be used with any OSR game; if you prefer, you can pick this single page and adapt it to your own games (more about this concept here).

How to do this in 5e? 

If you want these concepts applied to 5e, just let characters go searching for patrons, tutors or deities to give them spells (AND feats - there is no reason to exempt non-spellcasters from these hardships!). Of course, these will make the game significantly harder, so such quests should grant extra-XP by themselves and should never be mandatory. 

Doing this for every single spell might be a hassle (especially for Wizards, etc.), so the GM can choose to guard a few spells instead (spells such as Wish, for example), or let spellcasters TRADE spells for new ones - this doesn't mean they lose their spells, but they will teach the spells they know in order to learn new ones.

What's the point?

This gives the PCs lots of reason to:

- Interact with the warlock's patrons.

- Deal with powerful entities in a non-violent way.

- Follow a deity's commands (for a paladin, cleric, or just a warrior that needs to cure his wounds!).

- Go searching for a rival wizard's grimoire.

- Go through ancient catacombs in search of forgotten scrolls.

- Fear for their soul when they read an unknown book with a cover made of human skin!

Just don't let it become a nuisance to your players!

D&D 5e fighting styles: Double Weapons

"Double Weapons" - weapons made for attacking with both ends - are quite rare in real life (except for the quarterstaff, and a few Chinese weapons), and unseen in actual armies, as far as I know. They might be better for dueling than war, but I am not sure such a weapon (with the exception of the quarterstaff) can really be effective.

Of course, you can always punch with a sword's pommel or guard, or add a spear head to the other end of a pole weapon, but I'm talking about weapons that are SWUNG to attack with both ends. Something like this:

While a bit strange, double weapons are not uncommon in fiction. They are usually associated with characters that are both agile and strong. When I wrote my old Adryon setting, I gave the weapon picture above as a cultural weapon to the Bashti, my cat-people.

In D&D, 3rd edition had a whole class of double weapons. Here is how they work (from the SRD):

Double Weapons

Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaffs, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he or she incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

The character can also choose to use a double weapon two handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

That is a very good treatment of double weapons, since the traits we usually associate with "fighting with two weapons" (TWF) are them same we associate with "double weapons": dexterity, speed (more attacks), improved defense, less damage per attack.

It is not impossible to use the 3.5e rules in 5e almost as written. Just apply 5e's two-weapon fighting limitations to double weapons. You can attack with one end with a bonus action but you don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus action unless you have the fighting style that says you can.

Damage should be limited to 1d6/1d6 unless you can dual-wield weapons that aren't light (with the Dual Wielder feat, for example) - then you can get a heavier weapon that deals 1d8/1d8 damage, which is basically the same as wielding two rapiers.

Even better, you can keep the quarterstaff damage as written and give 1d4 damage to the other end so that characters with multiple attacks get a boost.

This is how a "double" weapon properties would look like in 5e:

Double. When you take the Attack action and attack with a double weapon that you’re holding in both hands, you can use a bonus action to attack with the other end of the weapon, causing 1d4 damage. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.

If used this way, double weapons seem a bit better than TWF - mostly because of how they interact with things such as multiple attacks, magic item attunement, object interaction, spells such as Magic Weapon and Shillelagh, etc. - but they cannot be thrown or used with finesse, which balances things a bit.

Since we're doing feats, we might probably distinguish double weapon fighting from two weapon fighting with a feat. Here is my take:

Double Weapon Master
You have mastered techniques that allow you to fight effectivly with both ends of a single weapon. You can treat the quarterstaff as a double weapon. In addition, while wielding a double weapon with both hands, you gain the following benefits:

You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls you make with your weapon.

As a bonus action on your turn, you can take a defensive stance and gain +1 to AC. Your stance lasts until the beginning of your next turn.

If roll a natural 2 for a weapon attack, you can choose to ignore this attack and roll again to attack with the other end of your weapon. You must use the second roll. 

As you can see, the second bullet point is from my last post on two-weapon fighting.

The feat still looks underwhelming when compared to Polearm Master (one of the best feats in the PHB, IMO), but might be used with the exotic double weapons, in addition to the increased accuracy and AC. It is better than PAM to deal damage consistently on your turn, but worse when trying to "control the battlefield" against incoming enemies.

Better for dueling, worse for war. Makes plenty of sense for double weapons.

D&D 5e fighting styles: Two Weapon Fighting

"Fixing TWF" seems to be an usual concern among 5e homebrewers.

I analysed the issue here and, like many people, concluded that TWF in underwhelming, basically because:

* The Dual Wielder feat is bad when compared to other weapon feats such as GWM, PAM, and SS, or even +2 to your Dexterity.
* It doesn't interact well with the fighter's multiple attacks, action surge, and other fighting styles.
* You'd need twice as many magic weapons to make full use of TWF, and each might require attunement.
* Wielding a lance or quarterstaff in each hand is ridiculous.

But TWF has some upsides:

* Can target multiple enemies.
* More chances of applying sneak attack damage for rogues. Paladins, barbarians and even battle-master fighters will get some perks too (but not enough to compensate). Rangers are being revised by WotC anyway, but better TWF would be nice. Champions do not usually miss the bonus action anyway. And so on.
* The damage does not fall behind most fighting styles until you get your third attack (level 11) - which most classes don't - and even at level 20 (and most campaigns do not go that far...) the difference is not that great if you disregard feats like GWM.

As you can see, there is a pattern there: most of TWF problems come from feats.

By itself, TWF might be a bit lackluster damage-wise but makes up for it in versatility. Which makes plenty of sene.

In short, TWF does not need fixing, the Dual Wielder feat does!

I'm not even sure it NEEDS fixing; it would be more accurate to say that it could benefit from an overhaul.

And not all classes need a better mechanic. It is mostly a fighter thing.

In any case, fixing a feat is easier fix than remaking the whole mechanic.

So, here is the Dual Wielder feat:

Dual Wielder 
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits: 
* You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand. 
* You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one handed melee weapons you are wielding aren’t light. 
* You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.

Point 1 is ok, 2 is comparable to +1 damage and looks silly (two quarterstaves etc.), and 3 is situational at best.

Here is one proposed fix:

Two Weapon Master
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the following benefits:
* While you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand, you gain +1 to hit with both weapons.
* You can use two-weapon fighting even when one of the one handed melee weapons you are wielding isn't light. 
* As a bonus action on your turn, you can can take a defensive stance an gain +1 to AC until the beginning of your net turn.
* If roll a natural 2 for an weapon attack when wielding two weapons, you can choose to ignore this attack and roll again to attack with the other weapon. You must use the second roll. 

I think this basically fixes TWF because:

- The "main hand" stuff scales well with multiple attacks, and benefits you even when you don't attack with your off-hand.
- The defensive part cost your bonus action.
- The "to-hit" bonus make TWF even more reliable, which is the whole point.
- The "natural 2" thing (that is from 13th Age, BTW) will encourage you to use both weapons frequently.

The best part? You can add the second feat as an alternative to the original feat, or even use both, since they are not completely redundant nor become overpowered when stacked. Dual Wielder will be good for some characters (specially if you want to throw daggers) and Two Weapon Master is a better picks for rapier + dagger fighters (although it is a bit better overall IMO).

As you can see when comparing this post to the last one, a pattern is beginning to emerge. It has a bit of 3e and a bit of 4e in it. I will eventually explain that in detail. But, first, let us talk about double weapons.

All images copyright of Wizards of the coast.

---
UPDATE : I released a book (5e Manual of Arms: Weapons) that deals with weapons in 5e. Check it out below!

To support this blog, take a look at my books on DTRPG! 

Try my 5e Manual of Arms: Weapons or any of my books. 

If you prefer comic books, check The Displaced series. 

Alternatively, click here or on the DriveThruRPG banner on the right. Any shopping you do through this link - even form other authors - helps us!

In addition, there are many other ways to support this blog! Share and recommend it, leave comments, etc. 

Thank you all for your audience and support!

D&D 5e fighting styles: Spears

The spear has been used throughout human history both as a hunting and fishing tool and as a weapon. Along with the axe, knife and club, it is one of the earliest and most important tools developed by early humans. As a weapon, it may be wielded with either one hand or two. It was used in virtually every conflict up until the modern era, where even then it continues on in the form of the bayonet, and is probably the most commonly used weapon in history. - Wikipedia. (emphasis mine)

The spear being the "most commonly used weapon in history" is not hard to see, right? You can easily picture a Norse god, a Zulu warrior, a mounted knight, an Irish mythological hero, or a native American fighting with a spear - same goes from Greek, Roman, Japanese, Chinese and Middle-eastern soldiers, cavemen, not to mention fictional beasts such as fish-men and aarakocra.

You'd probably have a harder time saying the same of a sword, mace or axe.

So 5e gets it right by making it a "simple" weapon anyone can use. It also has a couple of good features - versatile, thrown - to showcase its versatility (I'm sorry for the redundancy).

On the other hand, it is pretty useless for in all other aspects except versatility. If you're fighting with one hand or throwing it, you'd better use the cheaper, lighter, javelin - which also has a better range.

Fighting with two-hands makes the spear a decent simple weapon... but you're not very likely to use a two-handed weapons if you're not proficient with martial weapons. And, of course, picture those spear-fighters again: I bet they are using a shield (the legionnaire, the hoplite, the Zulu warrior etc.), and they are probably proficient in martial weapons (fighters, barbarians. etc.)...

"But what about the wushu spear", you might say. Well, I admit 5e has got this one covered, because the spear is a decent weapon for a monk. It bothers me a bit than you HAVE to be a monk to do that, tough - a "finesse spear" is no stranger than a one-handed quarterstaff - but I can't sey the archetype is not in the book.

Now, there are plenty weapons in 5e that are somehow related to the spear: javelins, pikes, halberds, lances, tridents, etc. You might say the spear is just the simple, non-specialized weapon, that should only be used when you don't have a more specialized tool. Still, NONE of those are good for our spear-and-shield build.

There are at least two ways we can fix this. You could just create a martial "heavy spear" or "military spear" that would be comparable to the long-sword (instead of the useless trident), or even a full SET of military spears: a heavy spear, a finesse spear, a long spear, etc.

Or you could just create a feat for specialized spear-fighters. Here is the one form feat from Unearthed Arcana (source):

Spear Mastery

Though the spear is a simple weapon to learn, it rewards you for the time you have taken to master it. You gain the following benefits.

• You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls you make with a spear.
• When you use a spear, its damage die changes from a d6 to a d8, and from a d8 to a d10 when wielded with two hands. (This benefit has no effect if another feature has already improved the weapon’s die.)

• You can set your spear to receive a charge. As a bonus action, choose a creature you can see that is at least 20 feet away from you. If that creature moves within your spear’s reach on its next turn, you can make a melee attack against it with your spear as a reaction. If the attack hits, the target takes an extra 1d8 piercing damage, or an extra 1d10 piercing damage if you wield the spear with two hands. You can’t use this ability if the creature used the Disengage action before moving.

• As a bonus action on your turn, you can increase your reach with a spear by 5 feet for the rest of your turn. 

Even though I usually dislike that "+1" stuff (just because it is not a thing you see in most 5e feats), I have to agree it is a great feat, and covers most bases I'd like to see covered - better damage, reach, and "receive a charge" like in old school D&D.

However:

* I don't quite see the reason to "increase your reach for the rest of your turn". Why not go all the way in and let you increase it until the beginning of your next turn, or until you choose to end it?

* While the "d6 to d8" stuff is nice, it is practically the same as +1 to damage, with a strange limitation (what other feature improves weapon damage die? and even if there is one - is +1 damage to a spear a cause of concern?).

* The feat applies to one single weapon - which seems a bit limited when compared to feats such as Crossbow Expert (useful for ALL ranged attacks), GWM (useful for all melee weapons), Polearm Master (useful for four different weapons but - alas!- not the spear).

* It also bears remembering that the feat must be compared with a +1 increase to your Strength modifier, which would give you +1 to-hit and +1 damage (without the limitation) with ALL weapons, plus some benefits to grappling, encumbrance, skills, saves, armor, etc. I'm not sure the last two points make up for the difference.

So, I'm tempted to make a feat that would make the spear the uber-versatile weapon and ALSO make it useful for shield-wielders. Something like this:

Hoplite
You have mastered the spear and many similar weapons to make the best use of them. While you're wielding a spear, trident, lance, glaive, halberd or pike, you gain the following benefits (the benefits don't apply to other weapons you're wielding).

You gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls you make with these weapons.

As a bonus action on your turn, you can change your fighting stance to add the reach or finesse properties to one weapon you're wielding, provided the weapon doesn't have it already, or take a defensive stance an gain +1 to AC as long as you're also using a shield. Your stance lasts until the beginning of your next turn.

The +1 AC part highlights the defensive aspect of the spear-and-shield fighter and benefits "martial" classes (most classes that are proficient with shields are also proficient with martial weapons).

As for setting the spear against a charge part... I would probably keep that last bullet point as written (other than allowing you to do the same with a pike, etc). I might even allow pikes to attack at an extra 5 foot distance, with disadvantage to attack a target within 5 feet of you.

It is mildly frustrating that I can't think of something better than whoever wrote this (very neat) feat, but hey - this was in OD&D (Monsters and Treasure, pg. 31) and I don't think I can do a much better than Gygax & Arneson anyway.

All images copyright of Wizards of the coast.

---
Support this blog!

To support this blog, buy my books on DTRPG! Try my 5e Manual of Arms: Weapons or any of my books. If you prefer comic books, check The Displaced series. Many titles are free!

Alternatively, click here or on the DriveThruRPG banner on the right. Any shopping you do through this link - even form other authors - helps us!

In addition, there are many other ways to support this blog! Share and recommend it, leave comments, etc. 


Thank you all for your audience and support!

10 fighting styles that are missing from D&D 5e (and how to find them)

We have analyzed 5e fighting styles. Let us try improving it.

Here is a list of 10 fighting styles that are popular in fiction, real life or older editions, etc. but useless, nonexistent or clearly sub-optimal in 5e D&D:

1. Melee spears (e.g.: hoplite, phalanx, finesse, Oberyn Martell).
2. Dual wielding that works for fighters.
3. Double weapons (e.g.: quarterstaves, "double axes", Darth Maul).
4. Thrown weapons.
5. Ranged weapons for high-Strenght characters.
6. Parrying blades (e.g.: niten ichi-ryū, main gauche).
7. Bucklers and capes.
8. Two handed finesse (e.g.: "kung fu" spears and staves for non-monks)
9. Weapon grappling (e.g.: trip, disarm).
10. Big shields (e.g.: shield wall, pavise, scutum).

Before saying that 5e D&D doesn't need all these fighting styles please consider that, as I've said before, holding a quarterstaff or lance in each hand is a viable tactic in 5e, while sword and main-gauche is not.

It's been a while since the PHB was released, and there is no clear sign that there will ever be an official hoplite in 5e - except for the Weapon Feats in the Unearthed Arcana.

So, if these styles ever come into play, it will be trough feats - and after we get another 200 new spells, since apparently there aren't enough spells already. If anything, the feats we already have indicate that there will be NO new weapons - instead of a d8 "heavy spear" we get a feat that causes a spear to deal 1d8 damage, for example.

Fortunately, some of this stuff is easy to fix, and some of it has enough precedent in Pathfinder and other games (although Pathfinder is far from "easy" IMO). There might also be an an easy solution to ALL these problems at once - inspired by the Rules Cyclopedia and even 4e. But I'll tackle this after I've analysed all missing fighting styles.

I'll try to explain each style separately and make them work in 5e with homebrew feats and equipment (and comment on the UA feats we already have) - for now, I've added some "tags" after each style to give you an idea about what I'm talking about.

I will leave "useless" weapons (such as the mace or trident) for a later post.

I'm seriously considering making no alterations to the rules, only additions, but that remains to be seem.

Are there other styles that you'd like to see in 5e? If I missed anything, let me know in the comments.

All images copyright of Wizards of the coast.

Some ideas for 2018

Happy new year!

2017 has been a good year for this blog - it seems I've reached a decent pace - and hopefully 2018 will be even better.

I hope you have an awesome 2018 too!

I've made a few new year's resolutions, but as far as RPGs are concerned, they are pretty simple:

1) Play more RPGs.
2) Write more stuff in this blog.
3) Publish more stuff.

I haven't played much in 2017, and I miss it. So, there are plenty of options out there, and I intend to make the best use of them: hangouts, play by post, gathering some friends at my house, we will see what works. Something has to fit the schedule.

I am very happy with the one book I published in 2017, the Dark Fantasy Basic Player's Guide. Now, I've a few ideas on what to do next, but no fixed plans or schedules.

In any case, resolutions #2 and #3 are basically the same - whatever I choose to publish in the future, I'll probably write about it here first (DFB, for example, is the sum of lots of ideas that started here).

Whatever I do, it will probably be using 5e D&D rules, OSR / Dark Fantasy Basic, or both. My Days of the Damned RPG is coming, but it might take a while (it is a big book with lots of original art being produced) - and to be honest I'm already considering doing a 5e version.

I have a few projects in different stages of completion, but not one "main" project, or anything that is near finished. Most of these are small, some will probably be free, and may will never become a book, but a series of blog posts instead.

I want to finish at least ONE project in 2018 - less than that would be disappointing. If I finish TWO or THREE projects, I'll be very glad. If I finish more than that, it will be AWESOME!

Here is what I've got so far:

The Wretched Hive (adventure) - an expansion of my One Page Dungeon into a full module with 10-20 pages. This is half written already.

A monster generator for 5e - I've been writing about 5e monsters in this blog for a while, and I'd like to turn it into a short monster generator - basically random tables to give you not only ideas but also stats for various creatures. I've also got some monsters, but realistically there are too few to make my own bestiary, so I might add them here. This is just an idea so far.

An "Armory Book" for 5e, with martial, exotic and magic weapons - this might be a bit niche - sometimes it seems that most D&D players prefer to have 500 different spells than 50 different weapons - but I really like swords, shields, polearms, armor, etc. I already have a few blog posts on that, so you'll read it here even if it doesn't become a book!

A "Fighter's Handbook" for 5e and OSR/DFB - 5e is lacking in fighting styles. And, again, I like it. So, maybe I'll make a single book for both weapons and fighting styles, maybe two separate small books. In addition to fighting styles, I'd like to write on grappling and "stunts" - hit locations, throwing sand to the eyes, feinting, etc. So maybe there is enough material for a couple of books, I dunno.

The reason I'd also like to make a book for DFB is because I'm interested in the old "weapon proficiency" system, and I think I could write something a bit simpler but still varied and flavorful for DFB. Again,you'll read it here even if it doesn't become a book - I have a few posts on the works for many different fighting styles.

Planet Asterion and The War of Earth and Sky, two small setting books - I have a few settings I like to use, but not these two - they would be small books, made purely to inspire and entertain, not full settings. If I could create something as inspiring as Black Sun Deathcrawl I would be very happy.

Yeah, that is basically it.

I'm not putting this stuff out there to advertise or make promises. As you might have guessed, this is a hobby to me - but it became my main hobby.

There are two reasons I do this - I enjoy writing, and I enjoy being read. I can only write what I believe, I only write about things I enjoy writing about... but given theses parameters, I write this blog for the readers. Which is probably pretty obvious, I guess.

What I'd like to know with this post is - does any of that sound interesting to you? What would YOU like to read next? Adventures? Monsters? Fighting styles?

So, again, thanks for reading my stuff and have a great 2018!

XP, gold, and alignment

In the "old school" versions of D&D, gold was the main way to get XP. Monsters would give you some XP, but most of your experience would come from treasure. This encouraged going around monsters, parlaying, etc. Modern versions of D&D usually make killing monsters the most important way of getting XP, which makes PCs monster-slayers and a greater part of the game to revolve around combat.

One popular house rule for old school games is making spending gold, not acquiring it, a source of XP. This justifies some sword&sorcery tropes like the carousing barbarian who is always broke.

Another source of XP in some versions of D&D is "good role-playing", i.e., accurately playing your character's personality gives you extra XP. This is often tied to alignment. For example, a good cleric might spare bandits and gain XP because of that. Whether this is a good idea remains a heavily debated topic - one downside is that it makes the DM pass judgement on the characters actions, and leads to endless debates about alignment.

In my game, Dark Fantasy Basic, for example, there are several ways to gain XP, each with its own special rules: treasure, monsters, surviving extreme risks, and achievements (making an impact upon the world) - but no extra XP for "good role-playing".

One way to avoid judgment and debate is making these XP prizes objective and automatic. Jeff Rients has some awesome ideas for that, and I feel that they could be expanded in a complete XP system that would make alignment relevant but not constraining.

Let's give it a try.

For example, using some of my Dark Fantasy Basic categories as guidelines:

Treasure:
* Lawful: gets XP when spending gold on charity, church, helping the needed, etc.
* Neutral: gets XP when spending gold on anything, but only half as much.
* Chaotic: gets XP when spending gold while carousing, buying drinks, etc. Giving to chaotic deities will also do the trick!

Monsters:
* Lawful: double XP for defeating chaotic creatures, no XP for defeating lawful ones.
* Neutral: normal XP plus 10% bonus.
* Chaotic: triple XP for defeating lawful creatures. They are much less common.

Achievements:
* Lawful: adds 10% to current XP upon building the first church for a deity, gaining an honorific title, etc.
* Neutral: adds 10% to current XP upon gaining a nobility title, starting a neutral organization, etc.
* Chaotic: adds 10% to current XP upon destroying an organization or temple, starting a thieves' guild, etc.

A more interesting take on that would be giving each adventures or session some extra XP that would vary according to the groups' choices. For example, in the end of an adventure, the PCs have the option to give the relics they found to the nearby church, sell the to the highest bidder, or desecrate them in a bargain with darker powers in order to gain new spells. The first option would give XP to lawful PCs, and so on.

This would encourage - but not force - PCs to associate with people who have similar goals and worldviews.

Further reading:
http://jrients.blogspot.com.br/2015/07/xp-and-alignment.html
http://dungeonofsigns.blogspot.com.br/2017/12/gold-for-experience-in-5th-edition-d.html