D&D 4E Alignment, 4e, you, and your paladins.

[Kzach]

"It's good that you wished it into the cornfield, Anthony. Everyone, don't you think that was good?"

I think about four people and me will get that.

I'm sure it does, but having that as a poll option makes this poll pretty well useless.

Meh, just ignore the last line and the results are still valid.

Besides, this is turning out to be my bestest poll evar!

 

[Frostmarrow]

If the monsters aren't evil we can't terminate them with prejudice. In fact we only need two alignments, unaligned and evil.

 

[OakwoodDM]

If the monsters aren't evil we can't terminate them with prejudice. In fact we only need two alignments, unaligned and evil.

Or, even better than that, PC, Townsperson and Evil

 

[FourthBear]

I don't think alignment brings much to the table in D&D. I've never found a compelling design purpose for it. Is it to help the DM understand the motivations of NPCs? Is it a way of labeling monsters as "OK to kill"? Is it there to promote the kind of cosmic conflicts seen in the Elric stories? Is it there to encourage players to define their PCs' philosophies? Is it a tag to be attached to characters for spellcasting purposes? Why did the system carry around that two letter code for all PCs, NPCs and monsters? If alignment had a better defined purpose, I think the game could actually work to create a much better system for accomplishing that purpose. But most of the time it seems to me to be a soft blend of many different design goals, most of which aren't very well articulated.

 

[robertliguori]

Or, even better than that, PC, Townsperson and Evil

"Waitaminute, there's 50 of you, you're all burly farmers with ready-made polearms in your barns, and you can't deal with six lousy kobolds on your own?"

"Well, we could but that would be an alignment violation. I mean, no one expects you to leave the dead alone or pay taxes on your adventuring proceeds, right?"

"Good point! Off to kill and loot!"

 

[hong]

"Waitaminute, there's 50 of you, you're all burly farmers with ready-made polearms in your barns, and you can't deal with six lousy kobolds on your own?"

"Well, we could but that would be an alignment violation. I mean, no one expects you to leave the dead alone or pay taxes on your adventuring proceeds, right?"

"Good point! Off to kill and loot!"

Okay, now I'm confused.

 

[Mallus]

[edit]oops.

 

[hong]

Why? Does the absence of 'lawful' and 'chaotic' somehow interfere with your ability to create interesting personalities and/or motivations for your PC's and NPC's?

"Chuffed" means he was happy....

 

[Mallus]

"Chuffed" means he was happy....

I hate it when words mean something other than what they sound like...

 

[robertliguori]

Okay, now I'm confused.

Acting civilized (paying taxes, not pilfering magic and treasure from the recently- and long-dead, treating ancient dungeons full of eldritch horrors and deadly traps as things to be avoided rather than your 9-to-5) is contrary to the Adventurer alignment. Conversely, engaging in deeds that obliviate the need for heros is contrary to the Townsfolk alignment.