D&D General Alignment: the problem is Chaos

[Sithlord]

So much emphasis on the regulations governments pass as law is a joke to me. men don’t make laws they make regulations enforced by threat of force and violence. I don’t get it at all.

 

[Yaarel]

So much emphasis on the regulations governments pass as law is a joke to me. men don’t make laws they make regulations enforced by threat of force and violence. I don’t get it at all.

That gets into LG (voluntary cooperation) versus LE (punishment for disobedience)

 

[ph0rk]

As I said elsewhere: Alignment is a bunch of meaningless words without game mechanics that key off of it.

A character could be Lawful Orange or Chaotic Blue and it wouldn't matter one bit in terms of the rules.

This is one of the most compelling reasons to play older editions (than 5e), imho.

 

[Yaarel]

As I said elsewhere: Alignment is a bunch of meaningless words without game mechanics that key off of it.

A character could be Lawful Orange or Chaotic Blue and it wouldn't matter one bit in terms of the rules.

This is one of the most compelling reasons to play older editions (than 5e), imho.

The alignments in the older editions of D&D − with their conflictive and less helpful examples − iare what caused the confusions and debates in the first place.

5e alignment descriptions are pretty clear, consistent, narratively useful, and without the mechanical punishments, the 5e alignments are effortless to opt out of.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I think the Batman argument is an excellent showcase of alignment being meaningless. Even people who like the system interpret the same character to be two extremely different alignments.

 

[Shadowedeyes]

Ascribing mechanical significance to alignment means that it needs to have a fairly uniform agreement on which each means, and I think that is not the case. You can't have an argument about if Batman is Lawful or Chaotic if his abilities hinge on it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

As I said elsewhere: Alignment is a bunch of meaningless words without game mechanics that key off of it.

A character could be Lawful Orange or Chaotic Blue and it wouldn't matter one bit in terms of the rules.

This is one of the most compelling reasons to play older editions (than 5e), imho.

That's one of the most compelling reasons to play 5e. The alignment can easily be completely ignored.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Ascribing mechanical significance to alignment means that it needs to have a fairly uniform agreement on which each means, and I think that is not the case. You can't have an argument about if Batman is Lawful or Chaotic if his abilities hinge on it.

Yep. In Yaarel's 3e game Max's Batladin would lose their abilities even though Max thought that they played a perfect exemplar of lawful good.

 

[Maxperson]

Batman doesnt keep his word. He is often deceptive, secretive, and employs trickery.

On crooks, sure. If he tells his companions that he will do something, he is very honest and reliable. Cops also lie to crooks. It's part of what is necessary(his code) to do.

Batman doesnt respect authority. He violates laws all the time. He happily pursues and harasses officials.

I absolutely respects authority. He respects the police as well as Commissioner Gordon. Disagreeing with them sometimes or going against them if necessary(his code demands it) is not a lack of respect. Spitting on a cop or throwing bottles at them is disrespect. He doesn't do that.

He could care less if normal citizens uphold "their duties".

But his duties are absolute. There is no room for chaos in his life. He's far too ordered for that.

Batman violates his own honor due to him, all the time.

I don't even know what that means.

Batman lives in cave, spends obscene amounts money, and darts around with his own invented gadgets ... for no other reason except personal freedom.

Yes. Some aspects of his personality are chaotic. Those are dwarfed by the lawful aspects.

 

[Maxperson]

The alignments in the older editions of D&D − with their conflictive and less helpful examples − iare what caused the confusions and debates in the first place.

5e alignment descriptions are pretty clear, consistent, narratively useful, and without the mechanical punishments, the 5e alignments are effortless to opt out of.

You can't really get a clear, consistent, narratively useful description out of one sentence. That's why I've been using 3e. At least those alignments tell you something somewhat clear.