D&D 4E No evil gods in 4e?

[Jack99]

Evil gods are described briefly in the PH and detailed in the DMG. Contrary to limiting player options, it gives the DM the option to go by a default assumption that PCs don't worship evil deities without "over-enforcing" the point. (Most D&D games involve heroic PCs, at least as good as the Han Solo who shot first, not villainous ones.) The DM has all the info needed for evil paladins, whether a player ever creates one or not. If a DM wants PCs to have access to evil gods, it's easy enough to do.

The idea that common folk might see evil gods as unaligned is a story issue for a DM to decide, and one we played on in places such as Mulmaster in FR. The presentation of the gods in the DMG makes it plain what they really are—evil or worse.

Also, can someone who thinks he or she doesn't like the alignment system tell me where the line is between neutral good and chaotic good? Lawful evil and neutral evil? I have a hard time drawing those lines definitively.

Awesome, thanks for clarifying.

Cheers,

 

[mach1.9pants]

Also, can someone who thinks he or she doesn't like the alignment system tell me where the line is between neutral good and chaotic good? Lawful evil and neutral evil? I have a hard time drawing those lines definitively.

I will, after you tell me where the line is between LG and G is

I have no real problem with the new alignments but missing LE is sad, evil tyrants who have their own strict codes type baddies are quite common IMC

 

[Mouseferatu]

I have no real problem with the new alignments but missing LE is sad, evil tyrants who have their own strict codes type baddies are quite common IMC

And they'll continue to be as common as you want 'em. Such characters could easily fall under the Evil alignment, or (if they're more honorable than they are evil) even potentially unaligned, IMO.

 

[malraux]

Also, can someone who thinks he or she doesn't like the alignment system tell me where the line is between neutral good and chaotic good? Lawful evil and neutral evil? I have a hard time drawing those lines definitively.

Well, if I had to answer that, I'd say that NG characters would prefer that a dictator be convinced to step down, while CG would prefer to take him out. But then again, I don't think my definitions of lawful and chaotic are the default ones.

 

[Minicol]

I don't think that the alignment changes are "retarded" at all. I like the fact that it appears that Wizards has created a less straight-jacketed alignment system.

).

I don't know about straight jacked, as I feel this is highly subjective, but from I have seen, it seems like a cut and paste from warhammer 1e.

Not necessarily bad, far from it, but not terribly creative in itself.

 

[BvS]

I have no real problem with the new alignments but missing LE is sad, evil tyrants who have their own strict codes type baddies are quite common IMC

Why can't they still be?

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Also, can someone who thinks he or she doesn't like the alignment system tell me where the line is between neutral good and chaotic good? Lawful evil and neutral evil? I have a hard time drawing those lines definitively.

Chaotic good is classic liberalism, the belief that the only use for laws is to ensure personal freedoms. Anything beyond that is too much. Chaotic good is antipathetic towards strong governments.

Neutral good is the understanding that laws can be both harmful and beneficial. There are times when one must follow the laws, and times when one must not. As the name suggests, it's apathetic towards government entirely, and judges on a case by case basis.

I don't think that the alignment changes are "retarded" at all. I like the fact that it appears that Wizards has created a less straight-jacketed alignment system.

No, it's more straight-jacketed. That's what happens when you remove choices.

 

[Kaodi]

I do not know that I would call chaotic good classic liberalism. I would call altrustic anarchism chaotic good, however.

 

[Guild Goodknife]

No, it's more straight-jacketed. That's what happens when you remove choices.

How? How is this more of a straight-jacket? Please give examples of what kind of characters you're are not able to play with this system.

 

[DylanCB]

Eh, Good covers chaotic and neutral. I , in fact, think Lawful good would too. Caring about laws and good at the same time seems fine, but I guess its enough of a struggle to be different. Lawful evil is evil. Following rules for the sake of rules without morality seems plain evil. Chaotic Evil is different in that its psycho evil. Evil that cant be dealt with short of head choppin'. Unaligned covers everyone else. Whats it matter anyway, theres no mechanical cost. Write Chaotic Good on your character sheet, and be good and wacky at the same time. I sorta wish they hadn't even bothered with putting it in.