D&D 5E A different take on Alignment

[Aldarc]

I don't want two paragraphs to sift through and deeply consider, I want a short-hand that matches their importance to the story.

I'm puzzled as to how alignment says anything practical as a shorthand regarding the importance of a creature or NPC to the story.

 

[Oofta]

I'm puzzled as to how alignment says anything practical as a shorthand regarding the importance of a creature or NPC to the story.

It doesn't. You have it backwards.

If an NPC or creature is only making a cameo, I'm more likely to lean on alignment in any decision it may make because I didn't take the time to add background and motivations. In most cases, for unimportant actors, alignment (frequently along with alliances, if any) is all I use.

It's like those backdrop settings in movies. If you just see the front of a building, all you need is a facade and the door goes nowhere. You still need to know what type and style of building it is. If it's more important, you need to add more detail.

 

[Aldarc]

It doesn't. You have it backwards.

I had it in your own words, which you can see in what I quoted. Hopefully you can sympathize with how I could get the wrong impression from what you wrote.

If an NPC or creature is only making a cameo, I'm more likely to lean on alignment in any decision it may make because I didn't take the time to add background and motivations. In most cases, for unimportant actors, alignment (frequently along with alliances, if any) is all I use.

It's like those backdrop settings in movies. If you just see the front of a building, all you need is a facade and the door goes nowhere. You still need to know what type and style of building it is. If it's more important, you need to add more detail.

If an NPC or creature is only making a cameo, then it seems that I would be more likely to lean on my own dramatic reasons/needs for introducing a NPC/creature into the narrative in the first place. It seems like there are more substantial shorthands you could provide yourself for roleplaying a NPC who is only making a cameo: e.g., suspiciously nervous, greedy, cutthroat, treacherous, "used car salesman," etc. Alignment seems like an unnecessary added step to that process. If I have determined, for example, that I need a character to be "hard-working" or "enterprising" then what does the added step of determining that the NPC is a "Capricorn" actually serve my gameplay needs in a meaningful way?

 

[Manbearcat]

But again, if you don't find it useful, ignore it. Done. Just leave it for us that do find it useful. Easy peasy.

Well, I have good news! You're in luck!

1) I can't take Alignment away from you! The books and their cultural history aren't going anywhere (and I wouldn't want them to go anywhere)!

2) To the extent that my words have any purchase, they're limited to this conversation on ENWorld!

3) Following from (2), my words also have to be persuasive. And if 9 years of posting on ENWorld is any predictor of the future, my words on ENWorld aren't very persuasive to the ENWorld cultural majority (I may have convinced 10 people of a handful of things in all of this time...at best)!

Which has little or nothing to do with how those two characters view the world and why they do what they do, their alignment. It would only an issue if alignment was the only descriptor for these two paladins. It's not.

When creating complex characters I don't stop at alignment. Sometimes I don't think about alignment, or only after I have a few other things figured out. On the other hand for the 2-dimensional NPCs and monsters that only have a cameo in the game? I don't want two paragraphs to sift through and deeply consider, I want a short-hand that matches their importance to the story.

Here is how Dungeon World's keywords handle 2-dimensional (literally 2 dimensions; Instinct and Moves) NPCs and monsters (outside of the Tags and pithy statements that indicate what it looks like, how it organizes, how big is it, how it fights):

What is it known to do?​

Write a monster move describing what it does.

What does it want that causes problems for others?​

This is its instinct. Write it as an intended action.

For instance:

Dragon

Instinct: To rule

Moves:

• Bend an element to its will
• Demand tribute
• Act with disdain

Flesh Golem

Instinct: To live

Moves:

• Follow orders
• Detach a body part

Rebel

Instinct: To upset order

Moves:

• Die for a cause
• Inspire others

Not much to sift through - check
Thematically focused - check
Plenty to work with to bring the character to life - check

This is similar to how Hirelings/Followers are but different from PCs.

 

[Manbearcat]

Saying that something is not useful because it doesn't create any conflict in party, seems odd. I tend to prefer my adventuring groups to be extremely loyal to each other. Those that are not tend to die off. So alignment is more of a question of how the group interacts with the outside world.

It may seem odd because your play priorities diverge from mine even in D&D. As you've expressed in the past (and is kindred with the heavy bulk of folks on this site), your apex priorities are definitely some marriage of Skilled Play (with a heavy lean toward strategic) meets Sandbox Simulation.

If I'm running D&D, its the priorities are basically the following:

Moldvay Basic - Pawn Stance Skilled Play (exclusively and balanced between strategic and tactical).

4e - PC protagonism with conflicts and a world that orbit around the Player Character's focused thematic tropes (dramatic need) + heavy Skilled Play (with a heavy lean toward tactical).

Dungeon World - PC protagonism with the story and the world that emerges through play and orbits around the Player Character's dramatic needs (heavy on the intrapersonal conflict with intragroup conflict being present) + comparatively muted (but definitely present) Skilled Play.

Torchbearer - PC protagonism (dramatic need in the form of exploring ancient places, trying desperately to survive, fighting for what you believe/maintaining your humanity in a world heavily tilted against) + intrapersonal conflict + intraparty conflict + heavy Skilled Play (managing a huge suite of short term and long term, interacting, resources and decision-points.

All 4 of these experiences are different from each other and all 4 of these are different from the experience of the intersection of your play priorities (for a host of reasons including the objective vs subjective DC issue that we've discussed at length). Intrapersonal conflict and intraparty conflict is featured in the last 2 but not in the first 2.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The implication of this contrast is that lawful people believe that legitimate authorities remain legitimate even when acting illegitimately

No, it isn’t.

Lawful people follow legitimate authority unless given a reason not to. A legitimate authority can be wrong about a thing and remain legitimate in general. The lawful person also is less likely to advocate removing the entire system of rule along with a bad ruler, because tradition.

A chaotic person simply does not default to obedience to authority, regardless of legitimacy. They challenge and question authority unless given a specific and compelling reason not to (like an emergency where questioning the person directing traffic is dangerous enough that you just save the arguments for afterward). They are also unlikely to be traditionalists.

 

[FrozenNorth]

But again, if you don't find it useful, ignore it. Done. Just leave it for us that do find it useful. Easy peasy.

It seems that many of the people who find it useful have been playing for many years. So why not flip the script? If you find it useful, add it in. If you are running a game where the Law-Chaos and/or Good-Evil cosmologies are important, add it in.

Currently, it is vestigial and Personality, Flaws, Bonds and Ideals does a much better job of adding complexity to PCs.

As to NPCs, many more two word descriptors are better at conveying what aspects of the character are relevant to the scene than alignment.

 

[Aldarc]

Here is how Dungeon World's keywords handle 2-dimensional (literally 2 dimensions; Instinct and Moves) NPCs and monsters (outside of the Tags and pithy statements that indicate what it looks like, how it organizes, how big is it, how it fights):

For instance:

Dragon

Instinct: To rule

Moves:

• Bend an element to its will
• Demand tribute
• Act with disdain

Flesh Golem

Instinct: To live

Moves:

• Follow orders
• Detach a body part

Rebel

Instinct: To upset order

Moves:

• Die for a cause
• Inspire others

Not much to sift through - check
Thematically focused - check
Plenty to work with to bring the character to life - check

This is similar to how Hirelings/Followers are but different from PCs.

I'm sorry, but I couldn't follow any of these as they were all more than two letters long and thus beyond my willing reading comprehension or attention span.

 

[Oofta]

I had it in your own words, which you can see in what I quoted. Hopefully you can sympathize with how I could get the wrong impression from what you wrote.


If an NPC or creature is only making a cameo, then it seems that I would be more likely to lean on my own dramatic reasons/needs for introducing a NPC/creature into the narrative in the first place. It seems like there are more substantial shorthands you could provide yourself for roleplaying a NPC who is only making a cameo: e.g., suspiciously nervous, greedy, cutthroat, treacherous, "used car salesman," etc. Alignment seems like an unnecessary added step to that process. If I have determined, for example, that I need a character to be "hard-working" or "enterprising" then what does the added step of determining that the NPC is a "Capricorn" actually serve my gameplay needs in a meaningful way?

I may have made a typo.

As far as an NPC/monster making a cameo, I still like to throw in some personality. I don't see the need to reinvent the wheel with a new shorthand for every monster when I have a handy guide. If I was into astrology, I could use it instead. After all, I don't really care under what sign the NPC/Monster was born I just need a quick guide. I don't care about astrology so I don't use it.

Don't like alignment? Don't use it.

 

[tetrasodium]

I'm sorry, but I couldn't follow any of these as they were all more than two letters long and thus beyond my willing reading comprehension or attention span.

I think it's like a quick translation of fate style high concept trouble aspect & character aspects with some relabeling of them to instincts/moves.