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

[pemerton]

I am shocked by the shared "right" of any individual to seize their need from the collective ownership of resources. That is the part that I am characterizing as D&D LG.

But, it is probably fairer to characterize the Aquinas text as balancing the needs of the individual and the collective, in which case it is probably fairer to describe it as D&D NG.

Again, I ask: how would CG look any different on this issue?

 

[Voadam]

Orcs have gone from Chaotic (OD&D and Basic) to LE (AD&D 1e and 2e) to Chaotic Evil (3, 4, 5e).

Quick correction OD&D orcs go in both the Chaos and Neutrality columns of the three alignment assignments.

Elves, Dwarves, and Gnomes go in the Law and Neutrality columns, Men go in all three, and Halflings go in just Law.

The differences in OD&D alignment and most of the rest of D&D is pretty interesting.

 

[Yaarel]

Again, I ask: how would CG look any different on this issue?

As individualism, Chaotic can make private property and the noncoersion with regard to its use trump any collective obligation.

Chaotic Good is altruistic and makes a strong effort to help those in need, especially help individuals in need (rather than donate to an agency), such as inviting people into their homes and so on.

Nevertheless, for the CG each individual is sovereign and no one can be compelled to help unwillingly.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm with BookTenTiger here. What does adding evil tell me, if I already know that they're hateful hermits?

There are different ways and different levels of hateful. Whether the creature is lawful, chaotic, neutral or evil helps inform you of how to play the hateful trait.

And I would add: why are hateful hermits NE rather than CE? If they're hermits, aren't they committed to going it alone?

Nothing says that they are alone because they hold a belief in individuality and individual rights. They might be alone just because they hate other people and feel that they are forced to live alone.

 

[Yaarel]

Quick correction OD&D orcs go in both the Chaos and Neutrality columns of the three alignment assignments.

Elves, Dwarves, and Gnomes go in the Law and Neutrality columns, Men go in all three, and Halflings go in just Law.

The differences in OD&D alignment and most of the rest of D&D is pretty interesting.

Yeah, I still marvel that the original Elf is a Lawful Strength-Intelligence race.

 

[Sithlord]

How are they getting enough for it to be the signature weapon of their species? Why do they pick over all the swords and daggers and clubs to pick the spikey balls?

IT's not each individual, it's each role. You get stats for the rank and file footsoldier, the scouts, the leaders and a few outliers to 1) make the species more viable as a full encounter and 2) better represent what that species is fielding.

YES! TEN BILLION PERCENT, YES!

Racial stats, especially mental stats, are awful.

You can’t just imagine another race or species that has by biology a higher intelligence. A brain that works faster or processes information more quickly with better working memory. Maybe a species or race that has an IQ that is naturally between 300-400 or even 1000. Numbers a human can’t even hope to have.

 

[pemerton]

As individualism, Chaotic can make private property and the noncoersion with regard to its use trump any collective obligation.

Chaotic Good is altruistic and makes a strong effort to help those in need, especially help individuals in need (rather than donate to an agency), such as inviting people into their homes and so on.

Nevertheless, for the CG each individual is sovereign and no one can be compelled to help unwillingly.

So how is this different from CN?

And why do "chaotic" people have a stronger enforcement of law against trespass than "lawful" people?

 

[Yaarel]

So how is this different from CN?

The altruism is what makes CG differ from C.

Something like:
G altruism
N negotiation or apathy
E predation

And why do "chaotic" people have a stronger enforcement of law against trespass than "lawful" people?

Because Lawful≠"laws"

Lawful laws enforce the collective. (Compare Scotland right to roam, thru other peoples property.)
Chaotic laws enforce the individual. (Compare some locales in US with right to shoot any trespasser on private property.)

Lawful Evil preys as a group (such as racism or a mafia family).
Chaotic Evil preys as an individual.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

I find Alignment to be useful to grossly characterize a creature. For example, it's much easier to explain the difference between devils and demons when the person understand the alignment system. Also, a someone that uses the Great Wheel cosmology, the resemblance between the cosmology and the alignment system also allows me to very easily convey the general gist of it.

However, it's been a long time since I played it, but I remember D&D 3E having a ton more spells and abilities interacting with the Alignment system. Detecting good and evil, protection from evil, etc. I thought these were neat spells and I wish 5E had more of that.

 

[transmission89]

This claim actually isn't true. There have been various posts/threads on this: here's one.

Two thoughts in response:

(1) Arguing that a game would be better if a certain aspect of it were removed is not a call for censorship. It is a call for improvement of the game. On a website dedicated to discussing said game it seems to me well within the bounds of permissible comment.

(2) Can't responsible adults make their own decisions about what is good and what evil, without needing game authors to tell them?

1) You didn’t read the whole sentence in context here. People calling for the removal of alignment for the betterment of the game has ever been thus and part of the traditional nerddom debate. What’s new now is some are wrapping it up within the wider new moral panic and are making the argument for removal on the grounds that it is harmful for others. That is the censorship I’m calling out here.

2) Responsible adults can indeed. But I’ve already explained why it’s in D&D as that meta physical construct, informed by the literature. Responsible adults/children/whoever are and have been free to ignore/revise this for their table or particular setting away from the baseline.