Chaosmancer
Legend
The reasons alignment is bad that I recall:
That last one is about the only one I agree with. It's also besides the point. Of course a short story about how a person (or monster) ticks will tell me more than something I can glance at.
- It's a trash fire, for unspecified reasons other than the appeal to authority that a lot of people think it is.
- The definition of good and evil vary (e.g. "no evil PCs") so getting rid of alignment would somehow resolve it even though alignment doesn't really have anything to do with it.
- People argue about it, therefore it's bad. Even though most arguments were from issues of how alignment was implemented a few editions ago.
- It's not important, but a DM mentioning that a PC is not following their alignment (if they even know what it is) is violating a core game principle.
- We aren't playing Fate.
- We can't agree on the alignment of a villain that had a half hour of screen time over the course of 3 movies so therefore it's pointless.
- Alignment is too restrictive and dictates behavior.
- Alignment is not restrictive enough and doesn't dictate behavior
- It's been replaced lock, stock and barrel by ideals, bonds and flaws even when the single sentence we're given for those can be interpreted and implemented in multiple ways
- Having several paragraphs to explain who a person (or monster) is will tell you more than an alignment.
For me, I like the definition we currently have. Alignment broadly describes its moral and personal attitudes. For monsters and NPCs it provides a clue to its disposition and how it behaves in a roleplaying or combat situation. Very few people, or monsters, adhere 100% to their alignment.
Which I just copied and pasted from the PHB and MM. I think it's just a victim of being blamed for every negative trope and description that people take offense at. It's the easy target.
I'm so glad that you don't descend to twisting people's words to make them look bad. I mean "We aren't playing Fate" such a powerful claim