Alignment Issues!

[Raith5]

I think alignment is useful and has a place in the game but the rules need a much better writing of how and why to use it - and how and why NOT to use it.

Personally I dont like using alignment, but like the consensus here I think it should and will be an option in 5th ed.

But it needs to be clear what alignment is (or could be). I have seen too many arguments over alignment as a guide (straitjacket?) for roleplaying to think it is good for that. In fact I think one can go so far to say that the traditional D and D alignment system is fairly cartoonish - in that it can create some simplistic moral judgements about how PC must act.

I think the best system for alignment stemmed from one of the later 3rd ed book a system of allegiances which was more nuanced and political.

 

[Storminator]

This is one of those times where I feel it would be easier and more palatable to the preferences of those who like it (i.e. not me) to have the mechanics for alignments be "on" by default, but VERY clear that they are easily removed/disconnected, and spelled out as to how.

I think the default position on all optional subsystems should be "off". I'd rather have advice that consistently describes how to add systems than advice that's a hodgepodge of how to add and remove systems. Seems like cleaner modularity to me.

PS

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I really like Nivenus' proposal, as it accounts for multiple historical styles of D&D play. You can use it for the AD&D nine, the BECMI law-chaos, and pure good-evil, or other axis.

But also important is the amount alignment is integrated with the other mechanics. I don't think it should be. A gaming group should have the option to delete alignment completely without having any other game mechanics be affected. Alignment-dependent mechanics (detect whatever spells, aligned magic items, etc) should be present, but optional and severable. For example, as a result paladins should not have a "detect evil" basic ability, nor should cleric powers/spells/domains have an inherent alignment alignment.

 

[hemera]

In 1/2e neutral was the total balance help one side, then help the other kind of alignment, but it changed in 3rd to a more self interested do the right thing if it's not out of the way, or it's in your best interest alignment. Similar to 4's unaligned. Ever since that change in 3rd, I believe I've seen only a handful of non neutral characters in our groups. I think we're all a bunch of self serving jerks. Back in the old days though, of the nine alignments I think we only saw 4 get any use. LG/CG/NG/and ugh CN. I don't mind if the 9 nine come back, but I will say I was kind of happy with the 4th edition change just so I never had to see a CN character for a few years.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I certainly want the 9 original alignments back, even if the only alignments I play for my PCs were TN, CG and CN. I never had much of a problem with the classic alignments before, and I never had the wrong idea about what Chaotic Neutral was about either. As my most recent CN character was a drug-addicted reluctant (anti-)hero who was a quite a spoony Bard. Though things about that personality can definitely be for characters of other alignments too, including with some work for LG.

The problem with alignment from before is some people definitely felt that it should be a description of ones personality, and a straightjacket. How many LG characters are uptight and boring, because that's how they people felt they should be. While that moral outlook would have more people like that, it's not what that alignment or any would be like.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

I actually think there should be 10 alignments: the told 9 alignments plus 4e's Unaligned.

Why you ask? Because Unaligned really covers different ground then True Neutral does. Neutral, as it existed in editions prior to 4e, always came in basically two flavors: characters who were actively neutral and seeking to avoid being "overly" good, evil, lawful, or chaotic, and those who simply didn't care.

The "didn't care" flavor meshes well with the Unaligned alignment, while True Neutral doesn't really.

Indeed. "Neutral" should be the militant neutrality espoused by characters like Mordenkainen. Animals and adventurers who just don't care should be Unaligned.

I'd actually like the act of choosing an alignment to be something of great cosmic significance. That is, most characters would start out Unaligned, but as time goes on they can "align" themselves. Their behavior wouldn't matter so much, so someone could act in a manner consistent with traditional takes on Lawful Good (uses laws for the good of all, etc.) while still be Unaligned. Indeed, I was thinking the other day that while people seek to align themselves with an alignment matching their personality and outlook, it could be possible for someone to behave in a lawful good manner but be aligned to Chaotic Evil - perhaps as a curse or something.

I don't know what powers/drawbacks this would create, or how characters would align themselves, but I like the idea.

 

[darkwing]

I say get rid of them... or at least move the tracking from the players to the dm "behind the screen". Alignment is something your characters do by the choices they make, not a stat on a character sheet. There should be hints to DMs on how to make good/evil/lawful/chaotic choices meaningful though. Even if there are no witnesses to your acts, the gods are watching and judging.

 

[Aldarc]

I certainly want the 9 original alignments back, even if the only alignments I play for my PCs were TN, CG and CN. I never had much of a problem with the classic alignments before, and I never had the wrong idea about what Chaotic Neutral was about either. As my most recent CN character was a drug-addicted reluctant (anti-)hero who was a quite a spoony Bard. Though things about that personality can definitely be for characters of other alignments too, including with some work for LG.

And that character could just as easily simply be declared as "Unaligned" and presumably work just as well.

 

[keterys]

10 alignments (old 9 + unaligned) with no mechanical impact unless you use that module sounds perfect to me.

 

[DonTadow]

I like the idea of certain spells only giving enhancements to attributes.

Like a wisdom score to detect evil would get a +10 or a +20 and even then there are degrees.