D&D (2024) D&D Dungeon Master’s Guide (2024)

[Oofta]

I really hope the DMG offers alternative alignment systems.

1. MTG Alignment
   1. White
   2. Blue
   3. Black
   4. Red
   5. Green
2. Tradition Alignment
   1. Paragon
   2. Traditionalist
   3. Neutral
   4. Rebel
   5. Iconoclast
3. Masquerade Alignment
   1. Secret
   2. Neutral
   3. Open
4. Wrestling Alignment
   1. Face
   2. Tweener
   3. Heal

And how to use alignment and their alternatives in meaningful ways during campaign

I agree there should be discussion of how to use alignment (or not) and I think the 3E descriptions were better. While I don't want to get into the never ending debate about alignment, but at least lawful, chaotic, good and evil all have inherent meanings. Someone telling me they are "Red" alignment has absolutely no meaning.

 

[Minigiant]

I agree there should be discussion of how to use alignment (or not) and I think the 3E descriptions were better. While I don't want to get into the never ending debate about alignment, but at least lawful, chaotic, good and evil all have inherent meanings. Someone telling me they are "Red" alignment has absolutely no meaning.

Red alignment has as much of a meaning as chaotic. If not more meaning and more understood by those who use the term.

This is why there should be a discuss on the lawful-chaotic axis, good-evil axis, and other axis, what they mean, and how to use them.

 

[Oofta]

Red alignment has as much of a meaning as chaotic. If not more meaning and more understood by those who use the term.

This is why there should be a discuss on the lawful-chaotic axis, good-evil axis, and other axis, what they mean, and how to use them.

Chaos has meaning that you can use to get an idea of behavior with no other explanation,
although I do think there should be better guidance on how to use it.

Red is a color. No comparison.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Chaos has meaning that you can use to get an idea of behavior with no other explanation,
although I do think there should be better guidance on how to use it.

Red is a color. No comparison.

The problem is that Chaos/Law are cultural gained things, and people who are truly new to D&D do not, generally, understand them in the ways which D&D defines them. For people raised on early editions, Moorcock stories, and so on, they seem second nature, but to new people, there's a lot of confusion caused by Chaos and Law, and I don't believe that was ever entirely untrue, because the meaning of "Lawful" in D&D has attracted far more debate than any other alignment-related topic, and I've seen that debate continue for the last 30 years! Indeed if anything it was more intense 30 years ago.

So I don't honestly think Chaos or Law as alignment descriptors are, at this point, in 2024, significantly more useful than "Red" or the like. Especially as pretty much no fantasy media has used them, including D&D-related media like Critical Role or even actual D&D media like the movie. They're confusing archaic terms where their in-game meaning is not at odds with their colloquial one, yet distinctly quite different from it in a counterintuitive way.

Good and Evil seem, perhaps unfortunately, to have peaked in relevance maybe 10-20 years ago. Back then, we'd long since moved away from Gygaxian "genocide is good actually!" definitions of Good and the like, to a naturalistic kindness, selflessness, decency, helpfulness, lack of murderosity is Good, and selfishness, greed, narrow-minded-ness, leaping to violence and so on was Evil. And I don't want to talk about politics here, but in both the US and UK and the Western world in general, we've seen those concepts eroded, with violence, greed and selfishness being celebrated by people attempting to justify certain opinions or behaviours. Let's not even start on whether Gygaxian opinions are making a comeback.

So I mean I guess I'd like to see a version of D&D with pretty firm and clear definitions of Good and Evil, but I don't think it's likely to happen. I'd be unsurprised if 2024 has the weakest and most wishy-washy definitions of Good/Evil of any edition of D&D.

Chaos/Law though I think has largely lost relevance and cultural cachet. I mean, I hate that no-one reads Moorcock anymore, but... they don't. They haven't for 20+ years. Ironically the one place keeping the flame alive for them seems to be MCDM, but maybe D&D should just cede that territory. Or not - they are part of the default cosmology, but maybe they should be refocused on as cosmological principles, not alignment components.

 

[bedir than]

As I said, Fighters and Wizards.

You said this as a backing for the request to have optional rules in the PHB.

Fighter and Wizard aren't optional rules. Gritty Realism and Plot/Hero points are

 

[Minigiant]

Chaos has meaning that you can use to get an idea of behavior with no other explanation,
although I do think there should be better guidance on how to use it.

Red is a color. No comparison.

Red has a meaning under MTG.

That's why I wrote it under mtg

Red

Red is one of the five colors of mana in Magic. It is drawn from the mountains and embodies the principles of impulse and chaos. The mana symbol for Red is represented by a fireball. On the color pie, it is allied with black and green, and is enemies with white and blue. Red seeks freedom...

mtg.fandom.com

Red

Red is one of the five colors of mana in Magic: The Gathering. Red mana comes from the Mountains and the fiery heart of the world itself. Red magic is filled with fire, frenzy, and storms of rock and lava. Its creatures are warlike and dangerous, ranging from mighty dragons to hordes of...

mtg-archive.fandom.com

MTG is under WOTC and they blatantly copy MTG settings.
They should convert MTG Alignment too.

 

[Clint_L]

Hopefully there won't be any discussion of alignment at all and it can continue to fade away.

 

[Oofta]

The problem is that Chaos/Law are cultural gained things, and people who are truly new to D&D do not, generally, understand them in the ways which D&D defines them. For people raised on early editions, Moorcock stories, and so on, they seem second nature, but to new people, there's a lot of confusion caused by Chaos and Law, and I don't believe that was ever entirely untrue, because the meaning of "Lawful" in D&D has attracted far more debate than any other alignment-related topic, and I've seen that debate continue for the last 30 years! Indeed if anything it was more intense 30 years ago.

So I don't honestly think Chaos or Law as alignment descriptors are, at this point, in 2024, significantly more useful than "Red" or the like. Especially as pretty much no fantasy media has used them, including D&D-related media like Critical Role or even actual D&D media like the movie. They're confusing archaic terms where their in-game meaning is not at odds with their colloquial one, yet distinctly quite different from it in a counterintuitive way.

Good and Evil seem, perhaps unfortunately, to have peaked in relevance maybe 10-20 years ago. Back then, we'd long since moved away from Gygaxian "genocide is good actually!" definitions of Good and the like, to a naturalistic kindness, selflessness, decency, helpfulness, lack of murderosity is Good, and selfishness, greed, narrow-minded-ness, leaping to violence and so on was Evil. And I don't want to talk about politics here, but in both the US and UK and the Western world in general, we've seen those concepts eroded, with violence, greed and selfishness being celebrated by people attempting to justify certain opinions or behaviours. Let's not even start on whether Gygaxian opinions are making a comeback.

So I mean I guess I'd like to see a version of D&D with pretty firm and clear definitions of Good and Evil, but I don't think it's likely to happen. I'd be unsurprised if 2024 has the weakest and most wishy-washy definitions of Good/Evil of any edition of D&D.

Chaos/Law though I think has largely lost relevance and cultural cachet. I mean, I hate that no-one reads Moorcock anymore, but... they don't. They haven't for 20+ years. Ironically the one place keeping the flame alive for them seems to be MCDM, but maybe D&D should just cede that territory. Or not - they are part of the default cosmology, but maybe they should be refocused on as cosmological principles, not alignment components.

All I will say is that there does not need to be universal acceptance of alignment, just general agreement at the table. The word "red" gas no inherent meaning. Law, chaos, evil, good do even if we don't all agree.


Beyond that I'm not going to derail this thread further. If you want to continue on a different thread I may give my thoughts.

 

[Stormonu]

Chaos has meaning that you can use to get an idea of behavior with no other explanation,
although I do think there should be better guidance on how to use it.

Red is a color. No comparison.

If you're playing in a MTG campaign, a Red alignment would have meaning. Just not to most pure D&D players.

As far as optional rules, they've been in the PHB in many editions, even as recent as 5E (feats anyone? And the whole psionics thing for 1E, weapon modifiers vs. AC in 2E). As long as you put a sidebar or note block pointing out that it's optional or put it in a chapter specifically labelled "optional", it should be fine.

 

[Parmandur]

Why do you suspect the DMs Guide will lack variant rules, and the rules necessary to play the game will be split into two separate books?

We know Chapter 3 of the DMG will have DM specific rules, and there is no obvious spot in the outline for variants as a batch.