D&D General The Problem with Evil or what if we don't use alignments?

[Crimson Longinus]

I've described it in detail at least a dozen times, if not more in this thread alone.

Yeah, you just say it lets you know stuff about the creatures except it is not straitjacket so actually any creature with any alignment could have any trait anyway so it is questionable how that could actually work. Like how you think (reasonably) that a lawful creature can have some chaotic traits, (or vice versa) so how does just knowing the alignment tell you whether an individual has a particular trait if a person of any alignment could have it anyway? It doesn't. And of course all those traits are something you could just decide a creature has without an alignment anyway, so everything you can do with it, you can do without it.

 

[Cadence]

It's not a lot of work, it takes like couple of seconds! "This orc is the leader, they're a cold-blooded cruel sociopath," "This orc acts tough, but it's mostly bravado. They're afraid of their leader," "This orc is old and honourable warrior. They've seen a lot of combat and are not afraid to die. They think the leader orc is a jerk though." There. Three personalities for captured orcs, writing that took far longer than thinking it.

I'd be surprised if many people at all actually do that in practice when the group is much larger than two or three, and certainly not when its a camp with a dozen. (Trying to think of watching westerns and how many in the bar scene or posse actually have unique personalities).

 

[Faolyn]

I was just pointing out that "elusive pranksters" didn't seem like it said enough. Does "non-magically stealthy and circumspect jokesters who might steal someone but not intentionally cause injury" give enough particulars?

What I meant was, if I were creating elusive pranksters for a game, I would have figured out if they were harmful, benign, or something else before putting them in.

 

[Mistwell]

So why you think WotC has stopped putting alignment in their newer creature profiles then?

I am not sure, I assume they're trying something new out in response to the legitimate issues raised about some humanoid races and temporarily tossed out the whole thing until they could figure it out.

But they didn't do a survey on it. And I think a survey would be important, along with playtesting on whatever new system they come up with if that's what is in the works.

And I've discussed at a different time how removing the alignment system without at least replacing it with something else for Candelekeep caused confusion for some key encounters where the monster involved was actually "good" and open to negotiation but the stat block alone implied "here for combat only and evil" and if it was a situation where the DM had been caught off-guard on where the party was travelling to, and only had a brief period of time to skim the statblock for the encounter, they could easily be misled due to a lack of a reminder prompt in the stat block that it was intended as a non-combat encounter.

I don't think Candlekeep was written without alignment, based on that issue being present in it. I think it was just pulled out quickly as a patch.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I'd be surprised if many people at all actually do that in practice when the group is much larger than two or three, and certainly not when its a camp with a dozen. (Trying to think of watching westerns and how many in the bar scene or posse actually have unique personalities).

They have quantum personalities. You might have couple of planned and ones the PCs talk with get those. They will probably not talk with everyone anyway. Or if they do, it's not like coming up with this stuff is hard; perhaps every person will not be particularly memorable or unique, but that's fine.

 

[Maxperson]

So why you think WotC has stopped putting alignment in their newer creature profiles then?

Capitulation.

 

[Cadence]

And this is the major danger of having alignment: it encourages lazy gameplay. There's no thought involved in either planning the encounter or playing in it, because you can just throw orcs at the PCs--even orcs doing incredibly mundane tasks like game hunting--and the first thoughts are to interrogate and/or kill them. Not negotiate with, not help out, not trade with, not follow and see if they're up to no good, not avoid. Just violence.

In a version where not all of the race have the same alignment, or in a version where they're objectively evil and a source of badness in the world as surely as if they were rabid dogs?

I'm not arguing for the later - I think needing to have others like that seems unpleasant and might lead to falling into shallow thinking. But if in the game world the orcs are objectively evil, then interrogating or helping them hunt seems unwise.

But here's why it's contradictory: before, you write "It tells me which box they mostly play in. From that I can pick actions which reflect that box." But what I wrote also gives you a box--and it's a much bigger box. Why is it easier for you to pick actions out of a box marked "chaotic evil" than it is to pick actions out of a box marked "game hunters who will become hostile if their hunt is interfered with"?

How hostile? What game (deer or halflings)? What will they do later if we stealthily follow them? Are they helpful if we ask for directions or if we can help? Will they be more helpful if we use something to help them catch what they're hunting? You had 12 words and it only deals with this one encounter and then not very well

 

[Cadence]

They have quantum personalities. You might have couple of planned and ones the PCs talk with get those. They will probably not talk with everyone anyway. Or if they do, it's not like coming up with this stuff is hard; perhaps every person will not be particularly memorable or unique, but that's fine.

How would a dozen or two "quantum personalities" listed for each type in the MM be? (Say several for leaders and several for mooks?)

 

[Crimson Longinus]

How hostile? What game (deer or halflings)? What will they do later if we stealthily follow them? Are they helpful if we ask for directions or if we can help? Will they be more helpful if we use something to help them catch what they're hunting? You had 12 words and it only deals with this one encounter and then not very well

You decide that. Just like how a GM has to decide whether 'lawful evil' person is an embezzler or a methodological serial killer.

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
@Mistwell and @Neonchameleon

I'm going to have to ask you two to DISENGAGE from each other on this thread and topic from this point forward. The two of you seem to have no ability to have a constructive discussion here. The pair of you are becoming toxic, and it is time for you to stop responding to each other.