D&D 4E Are there still going to be Alignment requirements for core classes in 4E?

[MoogleEmpMog]

I have to disagree with MoogleEmpMog and CleverNickName. I want them all gone. I don't see why I should be any happier about some asinine restriction when it cuts me off from a talent tree rather than a class. People's views on things don't have anything to do with their personal capacities. Let that entire idea rot into dust.

I'm not advocating the 'restricted talent tree' approach, per say. I certainly wouldn't design a game with an alignment system and have not IIRC written any mechanics that interacted with alignment for D&D.

With that said, if you define Undead as Evil-by-default, as D&D currently does, USING the latter talent tree is going to MAKE you turn technically Evil, so it's at most a semantic difference.

If D&D dumps the 'Undead R teh Evilz' and Deathless for 4e, that's a different story.

On the gripping hand, I've seen really cool "alignment"-based restrictions and 'if you take x, you can't take y' dichotomies in console Tractics/RPGs over the years, so I'm not going to cut off that entire area of game design on principle.

 

[Nikosandros]

I have to disagree with MoogleEmpMog and CleverNickName. I want them all gone. I don't see why I should be any happier about some asinine restriction when it cuts me off from a talent tree rather than a class. People's views on things don't have anything to do with their personal capacities. Let that entire idea rot into dust.

I disagree with your disagreement...

Unless alignment is completely removed, I would like it to have some kind of effect in the game. The idea of certain talents trees that characterize characters of different alignment sounds a good idea to me.

 

[KrazyHades]

Agreed.

 

[Snapdragyn]

I would like to see alignment completely removed. Complex characters are far more interesting IMHO than 'you can't do that because of your alignment'. Let DMs run games with ingame consequences & rewards for ingame actions rather than metagame straitjackets.

 

[Alceste]

I would like to see alignment completely removed. Complex characters are far more interesting IMHO than 'you can't do that because of your alignment'. Let DMs run games with ingame consequences & rewards for ingame actions rather than metagame straitjackets.

Agreed, it is time to slaughter this cow. Alignment is way too limiting. A PC should be able to have various ideas on playing their character. If a DM wants to limit his campaign in this way that is fine, but do not force it upon the rest of us.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

I am fully behind dropping alignment entirely - or at least from a mechanical standpoint. I don't mind having LG or CE on a character sheet to help myself and others have a starting point for 'who the PC is'.

If it must have something mechanically relavent to the game I wouldn't mind PrCs or Talent Trees saying that you must have a said alignment. It may help to differentiate Lawful and Chaotic on a mechanical standpoint. A Lawful Paladin gets abilities X and a Chaotic Paladin gets abilities Y. I'm guessing about 75% of the abilities can be 'against a target of different alignment' but something along the lines of "Lawful Paladin can take 15 on one attack" and "Chaotic Paladin can reroll damage dice that rolled max and add them together" wouldn't be so easy to have on the same tree.

That said, this is want I really want to see: Only gods have an alignment. This will help DMs and players get a quick handle on who a god is but not limit character and class types for the players. Then talent trees can be limited to those who worship a god of a particular alignment (or even a particular god). That will let clerics and paladins get Lawful or Good abilities but not give Lawful abilities to those who worship a Chaotic god.