I miss CG

[mrtomsmith]

So, according to the sneak peeks, alignment is in 4e, but it's a simple linear spectrum: LG, G, un, E, CE. Simplifying it like this disturbs me. One of the great things about D&D, one of the things that really opened my mind when I read the books as a kid, was the open spectrum of morality. Lawful Evil is a great way to define a truth about the world that opens up a wide variety of interesting roleplaying scenarios.

I'd been fine with the earlier rumors of minimal alignment in 4e, as I respect the difficulties of making alignment work in a RPG environment. Players don't abide by their character's alignment, and they shouldn't really be forced to. Having books or cosmology full of LN and LG beasties doesn't really help in a game where combat and conflict are key. But if you're going to minimize it, don't remove the best parts.

So yes, I'll be house ruling it in my campaign. But I feel bad for all those 10 year olds who aren't going to get their worldview expanded like I did.

My name is Tom, and I'm Chaotic Good.

 

[Cirex]

I suspect that alignments like NE and LE will be inside "Evil", while CG and NG inside "Good". We need to check the full description of each alignment.

However, alignments, at least in my case, are very secondary. I only ask my players to write an alignment if they feel like it, if not, nothing wrong happens. Me, as DM, got enough knowledge to see which alignment their characters are, even if they don't think about it.

 

[Simm]

Forget CG where's my LE. I demand my LE without it how can I have my ruthless yet honourable tyrants. You never realize how much you love somthing until it's gone

 

[Stogoe]

Ruthless yet honorable seems more Unaligned to me, personally.

 

[Kunimatyu]

It's a pity the whole alignment system wasn't ditched, really.

At least it no longer has a mechanical component, so I don't have to worry about it messing with my games and causing silly player arguments.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

I was gone for a long time but I'm back since last summer.

 

[Yaezakura]

I am rather disappointed to see Law and Chaos reintroduced at all. Let alone in a way that seems to suggest being Lawful Good is somehow better than simply being Good, and implying Chaos is the epitome of Evil.

This is the first thing about 4E that's really made me think I'll need to house rule something.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Forget CG where's my LE. I demand my LE without it how can I have my ruthless yet honourable tyrants. You never realize how much you love somthing until it's gone

So play someone Evil who obeys the laws and believes in "the system"

as far as Chaotic Good goes, it's basically unaligned with good leanings, or basically good with some mental problems.

I really don't see why you need a specific alignment to exist to play the character you want to play. (Personally I've rarely used alignments, so what do I know?)

Fitz

 

[mrtomsmith]

as far as Chaotic Good goes, it's basically unaligned with good leanings, or basically good with some mental problems.

Fitz

Exactly. I loved that D&D helped people see that good and mental problems work welll together. Implying that "Lawful = Good ++" isn't nearly as fun. Old alignments expanded the possibility space, new alignments are boring.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

You missed my point. Play a character who's Good and give him mental problems (unrelated to alignment) Why would that be hard? Why would you need a label for it?

Fitz