Alignment of Choice!

[UngeheuerLich]

I am a goody, sry.

My favourite alignment would be neutral good, but this is no more...

But in a way it was a good decision to ditch chaotic good and chaotic neutral... especially the last has too long been an excuse to behave like a dick...

I miss righteous evil though... it was a fine alignment for baddies...

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

In earlier editions, alignment meant something so I paid it attention. But in 4e it means nothing, so I don't even bother filling in that entry.

In 4e, I just role play my N/PCs' motivations and personalities. As much as that comment is normally used as a smarmy disparagement of alignments in general, I don't mean it as such. I like alignment, in a general sense, if it matters to anything in a game. I simply don't see the point of even thinking about something which has no impact on anything.

 

[fuzzlewump]

Yes, they wrote it, and re-used the 9-point alignment system from AD&D.

The new crappy 5-point system is their own creation. Hence.

So you agree that they aren't "too stupid" to grasp the concept of 9 alignments since they used it and didn't change it for 3E. Sounds good.

And there is quite a bit of difference between the two, just as much as there is between NG and LG.. If you don't see it, oh well. You're the kind of person the new lame alignment system works for. I'm not.

Cool, but work on not stating your opinions as facts. Good gaming, sir.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Cool, but work on not stating your opinions as facts. Good gaming, sir.

Everything everyone says on the internet, unless clearly stated as a fact, is an opinion. Getting mad because someone doesn't preface everything they say with "In my opinion" seems to be an easy way to get really mad at everyone, always.

I disagree heavily with how 4e did alignment, and leave that as that.

 

[Nai_Calus]

So you agree that they aren't "too stupid" to grasp the concept of 9 alignments since they used it and didn't change it for 3E. Sounds good.

Cool, but work on not stating your opinions as facts. Good gaming, sir.

Cool, but work on not putting words in other people's mouths. I attribute the re-using of AD&D alignment in 3e more to laziness than a lack of durr. When they did un-lazy to make their own alignment system... We got 4e's offensive pile of useless. If they wanted to change it they should have stripped out the Law-Chaos axis entirely, not leave it with this stupid 'People who obey laws are goody good good best of good!' and 'only baby rapers are chaotic teehee' that they have going now.

I like 4e, but the alignment system makes me facepalm so hardcore. (And is still present in stupid ways, like Paladin and Invoker alignment requirements. Why *can't* I, should I choose to, be a Good Paladin of an unaligned god? I don't get my powers from him anyway because 4e makes divine classes lame, so what's stopping me from being Good at character creation? If I change later, I don't fall, apparently, and the guys who trained me and invested me with my power through whatever nebulous mechanic I got it through don't have Detect Good spells to use on me to make sure I'm properly ambivalent, so seriously, what. Invoker kind of makes sense, but Paladin is just 'huh'. I can be a CE cleric of Bahamut, but I can't be a Good Paladin of Corellon? Sense, it is not made. If I help too many people, do Avengers come after me for being too good? Does my god even really give a rat's behind? I mean, what.)