+50 | +25 | 0 | -25 | -50 |
Lawful Good | <-Good | <-Unaligned-> | Evil-> | Chaotic Evil |
But wait, what about Chaotic Good??Using a morality line, like in 4e, works well for those kind of things:
+50 +25 0 -25 -50
Lawful Good
<-Good
<-Unaligned->
Evil->
Chaotic Evil
I think that despite what we see on forums, most people understand the general difference between evil and good. So the DM just have to track the points (karma, fate, whatever) and choose the appropriate unlockable bonus with each category.
its just Good now. You know, those passively good people, like most of us. You dont put a incredible amount of effort at enforcing goodness, but your are still interested in promoting the good sides of humanity. In this here case, lawful good is when you go out of your way to stay loyal to your principles or those of a party you have faith and conviction in. The extremes (LG and CE) are what I like to think of as ''actively engaging in your alignment''.But wait, what about Chaotic Good??
I use alignment as it's intended in 5E.
This seems like a pretty obvious contradiction.So I guess you could say I don't see a need for any alignment system.
I may well have said that wrong. I view alignment as practically optional for PCs is all.This seems like a pretty obvious contradiction.
You're suggesting the game designers created a mechanic that they didn't intend to be used?
Ah, thanks for clarifying. I was genuinely confused there.I may well have said that wrong. I view alignment as practically optional for PCs is all.
I do think it's useful for NPCs and monsters as a general indicator of morality. I think D&D's alignment system works well enough for that.
I haven't had time to watch, I'll make time tomorrow.