DDN Alignment Sidebar

[Mattachine]

The alignment sidebar on p. of the Character Creation packet briefly describes the 9 alignment system. Fair enough.

Still, the description of Chaotic Good is essentially the same as the old "unaligned" alignment in 4e: do as your conscience dictates, without worrying what others think. That's chaotic good? The new Unaligned alignment is left for creatures that operate on "instinct alone".

Meanwhile, the description of Neutral is the "balance the forces of law, chaos, good and evil" bit.

Does that mean the average person, not concerned with fighting evil or maintaining "the balance" is CG?

Perhaps this will get some more love in the next iteration.

 

[Thac0 the Barbarian]

It's odd formatting, but there actually is unaligned listed at the top of the next page.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I think 5e has the perfect amount of Alignment: it's a really big part of the flavor that doesn't go anywhere near the mechanics. Heck, even protection from evil just says "fiends and undead."

 

[1of3]

I really hope there will be other options alignment including no alignment at all in core.

 

[Li Shenron]

Still, the description of Chaotic Good is essentially the same as the old "unaligned" alignment in 4e: do as your conscience dictates, without worrying what others think. That's chaotic good?

I liked the 3ed descriptions of the 9 alignments a lot, but I suspect that they want to shrink the space dedicated to alignment in the book. Or, the playtest alignment text is still mostly a placeholder for the moment.

Regarding CG, that short definition is actually pretty accurate, but I realize that most people don't actually understand what "conscience" mean. I don't want to start a discussion that will feel too religious or philosophical, but generally speaking "conscience" is your inner sense of what is Good and Just, so if you follow it you more or less end up behaving Good and Just, but you are not following a code of conduct set by someone else ("without worrying what others think" means without worrying if you fit into any standard code of conduct).

"Do what you whim" (CN) is not following conscience. It's following convenience. The problem is that you can hear a lot of people commonly saying "I am ok with my conscience" when maybe they are accused of doing something wrong or even illegal, and they are just trying to forgive themselves by making up excuses for their behaviour, but haven't probably really questioned their own conscience, only bypassed it with reasoning like "my case is different" or "I had a good reason for doing this".

 

[Mattachine]

Still, the "Unaligned" alignment is listed as instincts, referencing creatures and animals.

The Neutral alignment is the "preserver of balance".

I just hope the final iteration of the game provides for Unaligned characters, who behave as everyday people, rather than "on instinct".

It's also worth noting is that the sidebar describes how the 9-alignment system is arrived at, and then Unaligned is listed last. It seems that it isn't intended for characters.

 

[Dragoslav]

I mentioned in the first impressions thread that I think the descriptions are terrible in that they seem hastily thrown-together, like an afterthought. Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil in particular seem basically the same, and the description of "Lawfulness" as it stands focuses more on obedience to local laws than on following a code. I'm hoping that in the final product they will dedicate some more care, thought, and space to the alignments. If they're going back to the 9 alignments and the emphasis on Law vs. Chaos and Good vs. Evil, then the Player's Handbook and DMG will really need to dedicate at least a couple of pages to it.

Just to clarify, I don't think that they need to dedicate much space to it for the playtest; this is just what I'd like to see in the final product.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Or, the playtest alignment text is still mostly a placeholder for the moment.

*DING DING DING DING* We have a winner!!!

Not everything in the playtest document is there for playtesting. Some of it is there just to have so you'll move on to the stuff they actually want playtested.

 

[Ahnehnois]

"Do what you whim" (CN) is not following conscience. It's following convenience.

This is a good point. Your conscience and you are different.

The problem is that you can hear a lot of people commonly saying "I am ok with my conscience" when maybe they are accused of doing something wrong or even illegal, and they are just trying to forgive themselves by making up excuses for their behaviour, but haven't probably really questioned their own conscience, only bypassed it with reasoning like "my case is different" or "I had a good reason for doing this".

D&D alignments don't really go there.

 

[KidSnide]

Still, the "Unaligned" alignment is listed as instincts, referencing creatures and animals.

The Neutral alignment is the "preserver of balance".

I just hope the final iteration of the game provides for Unaligned characters, who behave as everyday people, rather than "on instinct".

QFT. True Neutral is an odd artifact of D&D,* but it has its place in the game. But the addition of an "unaligned" alignment for the average person who doesn't care was a really nice advance of 4e and I'd like to see it incorporated into D&DN.

-KS

(*) Ok, I get the idea of keeping law and chaos in balance, but what kind of nitwit thinks that the good of the universe requires keeping enough evil around? What? Are we concerned that everyone else will get soft if they aren't struggling against evil? Or are we concerned that, without evil, ostensibly "good" adventurers will have to face the fact that breaking into people's homes, killing them and making off with their worldly possessions isn't actually, uh, good?