Are you going to limit PC alignments in your 4e game?

[Emirikol]

Most DM's prohibit the evil alignment's from players. Is it because some players wreck it for everyone or is it because DM's are tyrants, or is it because "evil" is unheroic.

What are you thoughts on limiting PC alignments and why DM's do it?

Jay H

 

[Zinovia]

Evil characters do not fit in with the types of campaigns I want to run. I want the characters to be heros, dedicating to making the world better than they found it. I expect them to help the peasants if they run across someone burning peasant farmers out of their homes, not join in on the pillaging.

That said, I find the alignment system in 4E to be odd. Why have LG and CE, but not CG or LE? Why not just go to Good, Unaligned, and Evil if you want to simplify it. The current system lacks the symmetry and tradition of the old one, but isn't a clear simplification either. It's a hybrid that has me puzzled. Why do it that way?

 

[Storminator]

I won't limit my players, but they'll limit themselves. None of them are really looking for evil anyway.

I'm thinking my wife will almost always be Unaligned, and my son will be Lawful Good without exception for a long, long, time.

PS

 

[Nightchilde-2]

Evil characters do not fit in with the types of campaigns I want to run. I want the characters to be heros, dedicating to making the world better than they found it.

This. Or at the very least, Unaligned anti-heroes.

 

[seregil]

I will probably limit to Good or Lawfull Good.

As per the PHB, alignement are about being on a "team". Well, my PCs are supposed to be heroes. Therefore, they should be part of the "good guys".

Mind you, if my players object strenuously, I might let unaligned but I don't like it. I my way of seeing thing, unaligned for PCs is kinda unheroic.

 

[WayneLigon]

Is it because some players wreck it for everyone or is it because DM's are tyrants, or is it because "evil" is unheroic.

All of the above.

If I run 4E, I'll probably limit them to LG and Good. 'Unaligned' may or may not be an option depending on the type of game I want or the player mix. Sometimes I'll allow 'Neutral' in previous editions, most of the time not since most people took N==CE, ie 'I can do anything I want without consequences'.

 

[RabidBob]

Mind you, if my players object strenuously, I might let unaligned but I don't like it. I my way of seeing thing, unaligned for PCs is kinda unheroic.

See I would have pegged Han Solo as unaligned and it was a cool moment when he turned up in the final fight to help his friends. Maybe he even shifted alignments over the course of the story. As long as you trust your players to be sensible I think having fully open alignment can make for some great story stuff.

 

[Ginnel]

So long as the party works together and doesn't try to kill each other any alignment is fine, just point this out to the characters in character creation, just because you are evil doesn't mean you will stab the party members and take their stuff

My last campaign was planescape

NG (human fighter/rogue)
N (halfing Troll/fighter) a magic ring from Yondalla granted troll form 3/times per day giving natural attacks and large size.
LN (Deaths witness mage) deaths witness reanimated undead, brought back to act as witnesses in complex interfamily disputes and the like
N (Thri Kreen mind blade)
E (Succubus/bard/assassin)

and they had their differences but I'd set the group up as part of a society of "explorers" with the human as the leader, meaning they followed his orders, the succubus' orders as such were to help this society by playing along and anything other than that would result in displeasure being expressed by the succubus' master (Corrupting the party members and doing nasty stuff to other people along the way was all fair game though) The Thri Kreen was Psionically altered by a high end psionic to see this new party as its clutch mates. The halfing/troll and the undead were pretty nice law abiding people mostly.

So my point is rather than saying no, build in a reason the evil character won't kill everyone because of plot, this is because although party tension and arguements are great, characters killing each other is less so.

Of course if you don't want to do that saying No, but...can you try and fit that into an unaligned concept can always work as well

 

[Mallus]

Everything is permitted (just play nice w/each other).

 

[wedgeski]

I do not have an inclination to run a game with evil PC's, and never have. Same reason I always choose the heroic conversation options in games like Mass Effect.

That said, I find the alignment system in 4E to be odd. Why have LG and CE, but not CG or LE? Why not just go to Good, Unaligned, and Evil if you want to simplify it. The current system lacks the symmetry and tradition of the old one, but isn't a clear simplification either. It's a hybrid that has me puzzled. Why do it that way?

Because 'Good' is the default alignment of the guy in the street, whereas 'Lawful Good' is literally a paragon of virtue, someone who always puts the needs of others above his own. Few of us can claim to be LG. Same applies on the other end of the scale. I for one think that they could have done with re-naming LG and CE to something else - virtuous/malevolent or something - to avoid exactly this kind of confusion.