D&D 4E Alignment in 4e

[KingCrab]

I've been trying to keep reading up, but so far I haven't seen anything about alignments mentioned in 4e. Anyone know if they're keeping the alignment system? Jumping to a new edition would give them a great opportunity to get rid of a part of the game that very few seem to totally agree with.

Assuming I haven't just missed something and 4e alignment hasn't yet been spoken of: Are people hoping the alignment system is the same as in 3.x, or are people hoping for a change?

 

[Baron Opal]

I've read something along the lines of "alignment is a guideline, not a straitjacket. And this time we've come up with some new things so that concept will stick." I'll see if I can track that down.

 

[KingCrab]

I've read something along the lines of "alignment is a guideline, not a straitjacket. And this time we've come up with some new things so that concept will stick." I'll see if I can track that down.

That would be a nice change. I specially object to spells that deal damage based on alignment (specially since many DMs have different opinions of where the lines are drawn). I disliked the whole "I'm Netural Good instead of Lawful Good so I get blasted with 1d8 per 2 caster levels worth of damage from Order's Wrath" deal.

 

[JoeGKushner]

That would be a nice change. I specially object to spells that deal damage based on alignment (specially since many DMs have different opinions of where the lines are drawn). I disliked the whole "I'm Netural Good instead of Lawful Good so I get blasted with 1d8 per 2 caster levels worth of damage from Order's Wrath" deal.

Bingo.

Ditto for intelligent magic weapons, etc... Overcoming damage reduction, detection spells, etc... all too meta in feel. "Ah ha! You are CE orcs and as a palad1in, I can smite your children!"

 

[Mistwell]

I've never been a fan of alignment. I don't even like detect evil. Most evil isn't evil all the time. I'd prefer a system where evil was based on actions, not auras.

 

[Delta]

I've read something along the lines of "alignment is a guideline, not a straitjacket. And this time we've come up with some new things so that concept will stick." I'll see if I can track that down.

Actually, what you're remembering is the 3E PHB. I see it on 3.0 PHB p. 87:

Alignment is a tool for developing your character's identity. It is not a straitjacket for restricting your character.

Here is what "ashockney" reports from the 4E Q&A seminar (ENWorld front page, August 18th):

Will alignment be a factor in the new edition? It’s not going to be what it is now. Alignment is part of the story, part of the character. It is a useful shorthand, but too many books and too many players mistake it for limitation. We want to treat alignment as something bigger than that. We won’t get rid of it, but we don’t want it to be a replacement for character and personality.

For which, frankly, I don't see what the difference is.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Here is what "ashockney" reports from the 4E Q&A seminar (ENWorld front page, August 18th):

Will alignment be a factor in the new edition? It’s not going to be what it is now. Alignment is part of the story, part of the character. It is a useful shorthand, but too many books and too many players mistake it for limitation. We want to treat alignment as something bigger than that. We won’t get rid of it, but we don’t want it to be a replacement for character and personality.

For which, frankly, I don't see what the difference is..

Because that quote says nothing about what the changes ARE, only that there will be change to prevent the common mistakes on how/why to use it.

 

[Randolpho]

So... bottom line:

Alignment is in, but hopefully without alignment-based effects.

 

[Keldryn]

I quite like the "Taint" variant rule in Unearthed Arcana (and Oriental Adventures) for creating that "tangible evil" in games. Taint being not simply philosophical evil but corruption and evil manifest in the physical world. I think it's in the SRD as well.

 

[Pale]

I bet ya it'll now work like "factions" in a certain MMO.