Alignment of Choice!

[Wik]

I'm curious about how alignments play out in 4th edition. Has there been a shift from trends in earlier editions?

So, yeah, answer the poll. While a lot of us play in multiple campaigns, or have played multiple PCs, or have only GMed 4e, I would say "Answer as if you were in an open campaign, with evil alignments allowed, what your ideal alignment choice/playing style would be".

 

[Umbran]

With no mechanical impact to speak of, I find alignment in 4e to be merely a role-playing guide for the DM. Monsters and NPCs have alignments to give me a quick idea of how they'll behave. Beyond that, it has no real meaning.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

In 3e, alignment is somewhat important in our games and is usually (for good or ill) taken into consideration. In our 4e games, alignment has been non-existent. Everyone is unaligned and we don't bother. How alignment was altered from 3e to 4e was just odd.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Nai_Calus]

Nearly all of my characters are Chaotic Good. Including the 4e ones. Just because WotC is apparently too stupid to grasp the concept of someone being simultaneously chaotic and good doesn't mean I'm going to stop using my favourite alignment.

The only one currently who isn't CG is a Paladin of 4e core's Corellon, who has to be Unaligned per the alignment restrictions on Paladins.

...Much like what's been implied about Corellon himself, he's not that 'unaligned' either and leans good.

Even my 'evil' characters aren't. The Cleric of Vhaeraun(CE drow god) I made but never got to play in 3.5 was CN.

I've never had a Lawful or Evil PC, come to think of it. Never even made one. Neither alignment component has ever appealed to me. *shrug*

 

[fuzzlewump]

Just because WotC is apparently too stupid to grasp the concept of someone being simultaneously chaotic and good doesn't mean I'm going to stop using my favourite alignment.

What? WotC wrote third edition, by the way, which had chaotic good in it. If you mean you don't like that that alignment choice was taken out, I think "Good" was meant to encompass both "Chaotic Good" and "Neutral Good." Maybe there is a huge distinction between the two, but I'm not seeing it. Maybe ideally, but not in play at my table.

 

[Perun]

In previous editions of the game, I usually played Neutral Good, Lawful Neutral or True Neutral characters. Other alignments never appealed to me, and I just never could role-play Chaotic or Evil characters. Most could be called Neutral with Good tendencies.

Nowadays, in the rare instances I get to play, I usually go with Unaligned, mostly because there's a relatively recent (say, the last two years) trend in my group to play the non-good characters. But I'd say my "comfortable zone" would be Unaligned (Good).

Regards.

 

[Wepwawet]

Unaligned. Definitely.

In the end it doesn't matter much, but all my characters are unaligned

 

[avin]

We don't use alignments on our games.

 

[Blackbrrd]

We don't use alignments. I got tired of comments like "I did it because I am lawful good", "I can't do that because I am lawful good". Now you have to explain the direct reason for action or inaction.

 

[Jhaelen]

We don't use alignments on our games.

Which is, imho, the best solution. In games which still use alignments, I'd always pick unaligned.