D&D 5E A different take on Alignment

[Oofta]

What people? Is there any basis whatsoever for this claim?

The PHB came out in 2014. It’s been 6 and a half years. Like I said, I haven’t seen a single thread on ENWorld about people having problems with PIBFs.

By way of contrast, 4e lasted from 2007 to 2013. Lots of complaints about a lot of different aspects of 4e.

But who knows? Maybe there will be a flood of threads in 2021 of people having issues with PIBF.

I've seen people abuse backgrounds and justify being an ass because of flaws.

On the other hand I don't start a thread on these things because I accept that people will pull this crap no matter what the rules are. I assume most people pay little or no attention to it and just accept that if Bob wants to be an ass Bob will be an ass.

 

[Oofta]

This must be how horrific it must have felt for all those people who were forced to put Comeliness or sex-based stat adjustments back in their games.


One issue that you are not taking into account is what the enculturation of alignment in the game does for players and GMs. It creates and establishes play expectations as a meta-awareness of the foes: e.g., "Oh. It's a Green Dragon, so it's LE, which means..." or "It's an orc, so it's CE, which means..." So it's not necessarily as easy as "ignoring" alignment that's in the game, as it also involves unlearning and disassociating alignment from various monsters and ancestries. It's easier to do this when alignment is not there for people to make shorthand stereotypes about them.

Why would that change? If grue are always eating people when there is no light, people aren't going to suddenly change their opinion of grue based on lack of alignment. Besides, if there's an expectation of that green dragon always being evil, it gives me an option to surprise players when the green dragon is good.

There will always be "bad guys" in a game that largely revolves around combat.

 

[Oofta]

...you are. You are among those who said that if they stop printing monsters with alignment labels, that would be horrible. I can go dig up the quotes if you really need me to. But you really did say, in this thread and the previous ("RIP alignment"), that monsters printed without alignment would be a terrible awful thing.

Literally all I'm advocating for is that. Not printing monsters with alignment anymore. I don't care if specific settings still use it (just as I don't care if specific settings say that certain kinds of classes do or don't exist, e.g. Dark Sun and the Divine power source). I don't care if specific tables still elect to use it. I don't even care if it's still explicitly laid out in an "optional rules" section in the DMG and/or PHB. Presumably the DMG part would cover deities, outsiders, and various creature groups, organizations, and--if necessary--cultures, while the PHB would present alignment as an optional system for adding specificity to one's character. All that is totally fine, and works perfectly well for an opt-in system provided by the rules but not required by it.

You have repeatedly argued to me that it is necessary for alignment to remain an inherent default. That means all creatures must either be classified under it, or explicitly opted out of it (e.g. "Unaligned").


Since I apparently haven't communicated this with all the other stuff, let me do so in the most succinct and direct manner possible:

YES.

As demonstrated by actual player behavior, actual DM behavior, continuing discussion on AND off forums, actual play experience from myself and numerous people whose judgment I trust, and repeated muddling and confusion from the writers themselves, yes. It really is that hard. I don't know why. It shouldn't be. It should be trivially easy. But it isn't. I've tried to give you demonstrations of and hypothesized justifications for this inherently unreasonable thing. None of them have stuck, and at this point, I feel I've done my due diligence.

Way to quote only part of what I said. I do think most monsters should have a default alignment. I also think it should be emphasized that it's just a default.

I don't have time to read thousands of lines of fluff text to filter out every single monster to try to find something that fills a role in the story. Alignment helps me do a first pass filter and gives me a starting point for how they act.

 

[Aldarc]

Why would that change? If grue are always eating people when there is no light, people aren't going to suddenly change their opinion of grue based on lack of alignment.

So clearly alignment doesn't add anything. So why bother with it at all then? How is it an added tool if the grue are always eating when there is no light. What does adding alignment affect how you run it apart from the abject horror of reading the monster entry?

Besides, if there's an expectation of that green dragon always being evil, it gives me an option to surprise players when the green dragon is good.

Which again doesn't require alignment.

There will always be "bad guys" in a game that largely revolves around combat.

There will also be strawmen like this too, but working to remove them from discussion when we can should still be our goal.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Way to quote only part of what I said. I do think most monsters should have a default alignment. I also think it should be emphasized that it's just a default.

I don't have time to read thousands of lines of fluff text to filter out every single monster to try to find something that fills a role in the story. Alignment helps me do a first pass filter and gives me a starting point for how they act.

"I don't have time to read the monsters I intend to use" isn't a very persuasive argument. It's a bit like a legislator saying they don't have time to read the laws they pass. If you're using a monster, I personally think you really should actually read the associated text--including fluff text. Unless you intend to ignore it and do whatever you intended to do anyway, at which point the presence or absence of alignment would have no effect anyway.

 

[Helldritch]

1) This must be how horrific it must have felt for all those people who were forced to put Comeliness or sex-based stat adjustments back in their games.


2) One issue that you are not taking into account is what the enculturation of alignment in the game does for players and GMs. It creates and establishes play expectations as a meta-awareness of the foes: e.g., "Oh. It's a Green Dragon, so it's LE, which means..." or "It's an orc, so it's CE, which means..." So it's not necessarily as easy as "ignoring" alignment that's in the game, as it also involves unlearning and disassociating alignment from various monsters and ancestries. It's easier to do this when alignment is not there for people to make shorthand stereotypes about them.

1) I happily ignored those as early as they have been printed. Guess what? I never forced others that liked these to remove them. Easy to ignore, hard to put back.

2) That never came up in any games that I have been aware of. And over the years that is hundreds of players and groups. 40 years and that never came up.

Also. Craps happens in all games, even in those without alignment. How do you explain this? Easy, a bad player/GM that want to abuse something or to pervert it into something that it isn't can always do it.

And all of a sudden, a rule is hard to ignore? Come On! This is literally the first rule in the game. Don't like it? Don't use it. Your game your rule. At the very least, let others that want to use their toys use their toys.

 

[Helldritch]

"I don't have time to read the monsters I intend to use" isn't a very persuasive argument. It's a bit like a legislator saying they don't have time to read the laws they pass. If you're using a monster, I personally think you really should actually read the associated text--including fluff text. Unless you intend to ignore it and do whatever you intended to do anyway, at which point the presence or absence of alignment would have no effect anyway.

Nope you get it all wrong. I want to use a LE monster? Easy, use the filter LE and you get a bunch of them in a click. It is then a simple matter of choosing the appropriate monster for the environment/goal you want to achieve. Then you read the fluff to be sure your choice is valid. That was not hard to understand. I know I saw that as soon as I read it. And it is not the first time this is brought up. And everyone people go and say Oofta is too lazy to read. No, he will read the fluff of the relevant monsters he chose. He will not be forced to read the whole MM for what two letters can give him.

Also, with no LE filter; You have to literally read every single monsters you are not familliar with which will lead you to use more or less, the same monsters again and again... And yes I have seen that problem in many alignmentless games. Those two little letters are more helpful than you think.

 

[Maxperson]

See @Flamestrike upthread: if a player character is evil rather than good then various magical effects (eg the Talismans of Pure Good/Ultimate Evil) behave differently. And the question of a PC's alignment (as determined by their conduct) seems to me to be a matter of adjudication by the GM.

Dude. There are very few items that use alignment in 5e and I have yet to see any of them actually used in the game. However, even if a DM does use them, they still don't need to use alignment in the way you mentioned. Hell, even if you take alignment out of the game, those talismans stay in, and if used the DM just has decide whether someone has generally been good or bad, which doesn't require alignment.

Alignment hasn't been used the way you stated since 3e. It's just a general RP aid now and a very few exceptions don't change that.

 

[Maxperson]

To me, that suggests a weakness in trying to integrate those PC build elements into predominantly GM-driven play.

In Burning Wheel there is no connection between Beliefs and other PC elements that earn artha and the spending of it. But because of the whole set-up of the game, there is basically no action which is not oriented towards or framed having regard to those build elements.

If you've read the threads, they're generally because people forget to use the inspiration mechanic and/or the inspiration mechanics is boring. It's the fault of inspiration, not DM driven play or the traits system. But hey, I guess you got another piece of ammo to misconstrue and use in your quest to prove your way the best way and DM driven play sucks.

 

[Aldarc]

And all of a sudden, a rule is hard to ignore? Come On! This is literally the first rule in the game. Don't like it? Don't use it. Your game your rule. At the very least, let others that want to use their toys use their toys.

Sorry, but it's high time to put such childish things away.