Poll: Allignment effect on intended game play actions

[UnknownAtThisTime]

The are a few topics about which I am merely curious about what the "consensus opinion" is. Lacking a scientific method of discovery, I will be resorting over the next few days to find the answers via the best alternative: Internet Forum Polls. [ ]

By default I am trying to keep the number of options minimal.

This is UnknownAtThisTime Poll Number One:

In 4E game play, does your group's PC allignments change a previously planned action in a mechanical way. Literally, does considering the PC allignment (either through self examination or DM 'guidance') ever change an action you had previously resolved to take?

 

[Destil]

Other way around in my book. I play the character how I think they would act, then the DM tells me what alignment I'm playing.

 

[UnknownAtThisTime]

Other way around in my book. I play the character how I think they would act, then the DM tells me what alignment I'm playing.

Destil, good point. In my book, that is a "no" response because you don't consider an allignment label in your actions.

Does your DM ever suggest you consider changing an action after he's prescribed an allignment based on your past actions?

 

[Dice4Hire]

I know what my character is when I make him up and write the background. Alignment is not really a consideration, though I can of course, pigeonhole him on the alignment axis.

But then again, my characters are in the good, lawful or chaotic areas, not in the evil areas, so it is a lot easier.

I would have voted 'it does not matter' as I've seen alignment used as a justification way too often. Instead, I chose door #3.

 

[UnknownAtThisTime]

I know what my character is when I make him up and write the background. Alignment is not really a consideration, though I can of course, pigeonhole him on the alignment axis.

But then again, my characters are in the good, lawful or chaotic areas, not in the evil areas, so it is a lot easier.

I would have voted 'it does not matter' as I've seen alignment used as a justification way too often. Instead, I chose door #3.

Hmmm, again that sounds like number two, because it sounds like you don't consider allignment when taking an action.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

So far during the two years I've played 4e with my new group, alignment hasn't even been mentioned--except to specifically comment that alignment just doesn't matter anymore. I myself don't even write one on my character sheet.

 

[Destil]

Destil, good point. In my book, that is a "no" response because you don't consider an allignment label in your actions.

Does your DM ever suggest you consider changing an action after he's prescribed an allignment based on your past actions?

It's never come up when I play. When I run I do, very rarely, ask for justifications for things that seem to be wildly out of character. But my group is pretty good and that's few and far between.

 

[Shin Okada]

Kind of.

When I make up a PC and write up one's background and mental motives and such, I use his/her alignments as part of her character.

But alignment is a rough categorization, though. No two LG PCs share completely same mindset and motivation.

Then, I play my PC as I think he/she would be.

 

[The Little Raven]

I keep a description of my character's alignment on a card that I keep in front of me. Whenever I consider an action that is questionable, I read the description again and ask myself "Is this an action that a truly Good/Lawful Good/whatever character would take?" After I answer that, I decide whether violating what his moral code would direct him to do is worth it or not.

 

[KarinsDad]

I think Alignment is one of the better features of the original game that was thrown on the trash heap.

From my 4E experience (which is hundreds of sessions with over a half dozen different groups), the game has boiled down a lot to "breaking and entering", "murder", and "theft". The game was always that way, but alignment used to be a bit of a brake on the more egregious offenses. As can be seen by the number of people here who totally ignore alignment now, the game has evolved into more of a hack and slash video game than it ever was before. Not that players cannot play their good characters as good, but there used to be some in game mechanics reasons to do so and those are now gone, opening the floodgates to whatever haphazard behavior any given player wants to do, regardless of alignment.

Many people did not want the behavioral handcuffs that alignment brought to the game system, so WotC listened to that and for all intents and purposes, got rid of it. It would be nice if the Holy Avenger weapon could only be used to its full extent by a PC that was actually "Holy".

It used to be that a Holy Avenger gave a nasty surprise to any Evil creature that tried to use it. Now, it's just another bigger, badder, better weapon. Ho hum.