D&D 5E Do you find alignment useful in any way?

[Mistwell]

Even in this thread we've seen wide variances in the description of alignments—particularly on the law/chaos axis. Alignment is like a Rorschach test. What it means depends on the individual and their subjective philosophical biases.

If D&D were going to keep the concept, I think it could be replaced by something a little less open to interpretation and better at defining motivations.

Start a thread about what hit points mean and you will see just as much variance.

It's OK if it means different things to different people. It's OK for a rule to be subjective in nature, and open to interpretation.

In other words, I think your lawfulness is showing

 

[Umbran]

Lemon curry.

I think you can have a perfectly decent game in which there's a cosmic force of alignment.

But, for many years I ran campaigns of other systems that have no such thing. When D&D 5e came out and took emphasis off it... I found I didn't miss it, hadn't lost anything, and feel no need to reinsert it.

I am sure someone can run a game where it is a useful, flavorful setting element. I just haven't seen it in a while. So, I am sure it is useful for someone. I just don't care about it anymore.

 

[Aldarc]

The DM's definition of alignment is law for that table, so hours-long debates shouldn't happen unless the DM is unclear on her own definitions.

As for lawful-stupid or chaotic-stupid characters, I can play these just as well without alignments as with.

But players are chaos and they defy the authoritarian forces of law.

 

[Ath'kethin]

The question is not how useful you find alignment. The question is just if you find alignment useful in any way in any of your 5e D&D games?

If you care to comment how you've found it useful, or how you've found it to be no use at all, please do so.

I love alignment. In a game where Good and Evil and Law and Chaos are real cosmic forces, it's a tidy summary of where any character stands relative to those forces.

In games where those ideas are merely theoretical and/or descriptive, alignment is the best two-word summary of how a character behaves I've ever seen. And the descriptions from 3.x are still the best ones for this purpose:

Description :: d20srd.org

Especially the "XXX is the best alignment because" section in reach description.

 

[akr71]

Yes, but not on a character level. Lately I have been gaming with a lot of people new to the game and I give a brief run down, but tell them not to worry about it. That it is more of a tool to think about what kind of character they want to play and how they act.

I do like alignment as a way to broadly characterize cultures. That doesn't mean every individual ascribes to that alignment, but those are the ideals of the society or regime.

 

[Azzy]

Start a thread about what hit points mean and you will see just as much variance.

It's OK if it means different things to different people. It's OK for a rule to be subjective in nature, and open to interpretation.

In other words, I think your lawfulness is showing

Comparing alignment to a rule that doesn't make sense if you put any amount of thought about it really isn't a stellar defense.

Also, how is alignment useful if it is so subject to interpretation? With such variance in its interpretation, it doesn't seem like it would be a useful shorthand.

 

[generic]

I don't see alignment as useful for player characters and their associated motivations, but it's a great shorthand for monster behavior.

I generally assign the most brute and plebian interpretations of alignment to monsters when I'm not prepared for an interaction, and it often serves as a fairly reliable guidepost for interactions.

But, for non-monster, and even NPC, interactions and personality traits, it's pretty much a non sequitur for my playgroup.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Good to see at least some people in the community find alignment useful.

Almost thought I was one of the unwanted undesirables in this community, simply for still wanting to play fantasy games of law-vs-chaos and good-vs-evil.

The big reveal will be the 50th Anniversary of D&D Monsters Manual in 2024. A balance between nostalgia and Generation post-Z

Then will finally know if people who enjoy alignment are still welcome in the hobby.

Bring unwanted is not a good feeling.

Well, look on the bright side... if they remove alignment you'll get to join the hundreds of thousands of other players who have been kicked to the curb over the last 40+ years when their favorite rules got removed from the game. You can join the Vancian Casting devotees, the Non-Weapon Proficiency boosters, the three Three Saving Throws disciples, and the Power Source enthusiasts... all of whom howl into the night sky that D&D doesn't love them anymore.

 

[Yaarel]

Well, look on the bright side... if they remove alignment you'll get to join the hundreds of thousands of other players who have been kicked to the curb over the last 40+ years when their favorite rules got removed from the game. You can join the Vancian Casting devotees, the Non-Weapon Proficiency boosters, the three Three Saving Throws disciples, and the Power Source enthusiasts... all of whom howl into the night sky that D&D doesn't love them anymore.

Heh, sign me up for the Power Source Enthusiasts, tho.

Anyone up for a Bloodied Club?

 

[Helldritch]

Alignments are useful as a tool. They're not there to shoehorn a charcacter into a strict behavior but to give a character a basic behavior. Variance is inevitable and welcomed.

A simple two words/letters descriptor that guides me immediately on how to play an NPC without having to read a wall of text. Especially when this will probably be a non reoccurring NPC that will never be seen again.

Yes, I have seen and witnessed alignments being abused in earlier editions. Most of the time it was simply a misunderstanding of how to manage alignments and players. And abuses were as often on the PC's side as it was on the DM's. I was doing a lot of coaching back then and often, after a few minutes talk with both the DM and his players, it was an easy matter to settle and to set back on the right tracks. The right tracks here being simply a tool to help guide the RP side of things. When everyone agrees on a definition at a table, it makes matters much more user friendly.

From the Lawful Stupid paladin to the Murder hobo CN I have seen it all. Hell, even Kenders were abused by players (and some DMs) at some tables. And Kenders are not related to alignments.

Alignments suffered from a bad reputation because of the abuses they suffered because some players and DM were trying to get an edge (players) or to restrict a powerful class (DMs' side with paladins in mind, mainly). But when taken with a grain of salt and applying common sense and keeping in mind the goal of "fun foe everyone" alignments can and are pretty darn useful. They are a tool, and a tool is as useful as the the one weilding it wants it to be.