Chaotic Neutral Copper Dragon?

[Wombat]

Since I don't use alignments...

But more realistically, in the games other people have run, I have rarely seen (only amongst beginning GMs, and not even always there) a rigid adherance to the concept of all monsters of a given type are of a single alignment. If elves can be of multiple alignments, why not dragons or even illithids? It just makes sense. There is always variation in Nature.

 

[lukelightning]

I do have a problem with neutral monsters that seem to be evil. Take doppelgangers, for example. Technically they default to neutral, which is fine, except that virtually every time you encounter them they've murdered someone and taken their place. Doesn't sound remotely neutral to me.

Same with slaad and formians. They are neutral, yet almost always attack on sight. Formians take slaves...hardly a neutral act. Slaad implant their eggs in other sapient beings to reproduce. Sounds downright evil to me. If it's ok for formians to take slaves and slaad to use people as hosts for their parasitic lifecycle, then mind flayers should be neutral as well.

Have no problem with flexible alignments, but when every third orc is good, then you have to rethink the D&D world. If alignment matters then make it matter. Orcs aren't evil because their daddies didn't love them and they just need a hug, they are evil because they have an inherent tendency to react violently and aggresively.

I am particularly strict with outsiders. There is no such thing as a non chaotic-evil demon; Chaos and Evil are part of their type. A demon that somehow ceases to be evil is no longer a demon, much in the same way that demons/devils are often thought of as "fallen angels." The angel becomes evil and is cast out of heaven and transmogrifies into an entire different being.

 

[RuminDange]

Dragons IMC are never conveniently color-coded so a player can tell good vs evil.
Others creatures can be just as varied in alignment with only Outsiders sticking to the supposed alignment...most of the time.

RD

 

[Treebore]

Always by the book. As has been pointed out, the book lets you change monsters' alignments. The stated alignment simply represents the majority for that monster type, or the most frequent alignment when "often" is used as a describer.

Oh, I know that. I also know a couple of other things. One, DM's rarely read that part of the MM more than once and soon forget, so monsters are always of that alignment.

Two, only Dungeon magazine has ever published a monster that didn't follow the default alignment. At least that I remember. If WOTC, or even TSR, did break the mold in a module please remind me.

 

[Odhanan]

Well, its nice to see the rules finally go here, but how many of you are like me and been having Dragons, and all monster types, running the full range of alignment for most of your DMing career?

Practically since day 1.

 

[Jhulae]

2/ Dragons IMC can have any color and alignment combination.

Cheers, -- N

Wrong, wrong, wrong! Come on, Nifft... This is the first time I've seen one of your posts let me down..