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

[Maxperson]

Advanced Google Search, domain 'reddit.com', search terms "Alignment" and "RPGhorrorstories"

Limits it to the r/rpghorrorstories subreddit

Okay. Thanks.

So I looked at the first page highlights and didn't see any groups that broke up. I took in depth looks at the top 3. Two of them had players that didn't know how to use alignment, and the third had a DM who broke the social contract and just up and killed a PC.

Alignment wasn't even responsible for any of the first three I looked at, and I doubt that those were isolated examples. I suspect that there will be a recurring theme of not knowing what they are doing with alignment and social contract violations. Not knowing what you are doing with any rule can ruin a game.

I see nothing there to indicate that alignment and not the players/DMs is the problem.

 

[transmission89]

<snipped for brevity: essentially more missing what is being said by arguing about the contents of the literature and the tired argument that Tolkein was racist using the letters as evidence.>

His Elves are akin to powerful angelic beings. Orcs are the corrupted elves, broken and fallen. If anything, it’s evoking Christian imagery of angels and the fallen ones rather than any ethnicities or sub cultures.

If you’re going to use the letters to support the idea of Tolkein racism don’t bother. This is the lack of context that I’ve been talking about. You have to look at those within the context of the day.
Certainly he uses language that is crude and offensive to modern ears and would be completely unacceptable today. It was the talk of the time, you can’t divorce things from their context.
Ive also seen claims of his being anti-semetic, which, given his response to the Nazi regime when they questioned if he had Jewish heritage before they published his works, is absolutely hilarious.
But I’m not going to bother going further into this, nor continue to discuss it. It’s become evident that a reasoned, discussion with nuance has become difficult as even just referring to literature itself has already become a quagmire of selective points.
So I shan’t even entertain the road here that will lead to ridiculous hyperbole from this.

 

[pemerton]

If you’re going to use the letters to support the idea of Tolkein racism don’t bother. This is the lack of context that I’ve been talking about. You have to look at those within the context of the day.

I didn't assert that JRRT was racist. Nor did I deny it. I referred to the tropes that he used in his work.

It’s become evident that a reasoned, discussion with nuance has become difficult as even just referring to literature itself has already become a quagmire of selective points.

You're the one who introduced a discussion of "the literature" with the claim that posters who disagreed with you were ignorant of it. To no one's surprise it turns out that in fact they're familiar with it and read it differently from you. This is not uncommon in discussions of cultural artefacts and their many meanings.

I should also add: you can't show that someone wasn't racist, or that an author's work was not racist, by pointing to the fact that it was conventional for its day. Perhaps the conventions of the day were indifferent to racism, or even embraced or at least normalised it.

I also reiterate that alignment does not actually serve any useful function in producing a LotR-ish FRPG experience. As I posted, LotR is a story that is rich in its moral and human sensitivity, and in its presentation of the fallibility of human judgement (especially rash moral judgement). How does alignment facilitate anything like that in a RPG?

 

[transmission89]

I didn't assert that JRRT was racist. Nor did I deny it. I referred to the tropes that he used in his work.


You're the one who introduced a discussion of "the literature" with the claim that posters who disagreed with you were ignorant of it. To no one's surprise it turns out that in fact they're familiar with it and read it differently from you. This is not uncommon in discussions of cultural artefacts and their many meanings.

No, I’m just consistently surprised that it’s being taken as it is. I mentioned the literature in reference to what is being drawn from and inspired much of D&D, not as being replicated one for one in D&D. You are arguing the latter, and successfully because you are correct in this. But at no point had I made that argument. I don’t understand how you keep missing this?

 

[pemerton]

No, I’m just consistently surprised that it’s being taken as it is. I mentioned the literature in reference to what is being drawn from and inspired much of D&D, not as being replicated one for one in D&D. You are arguing the latter, and successfully because you are correct in this. But at no point had I made that argument. I don’t understand how you keep missing this?

Is your argument, then, that it is important to keep alignment to make sure that D&D doesn't better emulate the works that notionally inspire it?

If so, that's a strange argument.

 

[transmission89]

Is your argument, then, that it is important to keep alignment to make sure that D&D doesn't better emulate the works that notionally inspire it?

If so, that's a strange argument.

No, my argument has never been emulation. My argument has always been along the traditionalists lines, of keeping alignments (which were informed by the fiction, but not seeking one for one emulation, and making clear that there is no, ulterior, judgemental value on real world peoples from them because it drew from that fiction, not real world issues) because it’s part of D&D.

Most people’s healthy debate about anything D&D related really boils down to “what is D&D“ for them. I will always put forward the traditional lines and differ in opinion with the more game progressive side (but respect the difference in opinion).

For me, alignment and actual meta physical concepts of Good and Evil, Law and chaos (again, no relation or judgement on any real world groups) are intrinsic parts of D&D. I appreciate that opinions differ on that, and it’s really a case of ymmv at your table.

Edit: Which takes us back full circle to my original point. As recently, some of the new debates are that it’s “problematic to label entire groups with an alignment”. No it’s not. It’s not trying to drawl parallels to real world issues, it’s drawing from these fictional sources.

 

[pemerton]

No, my argument has never been emulation. My argument has always been along the traditionalists lines, of keeping alignments (which were informed by the fiction, but not seeking one for one emulation, and making clear that there is no, ulterior, judgemental value on real world peoples from them because it drew from that fiction, not real world issues) because it’s part of D&D.

<snip>

Which takes us back full circle to my original point. As recently, some of the new debates are that it’s “problematic to label entire groups with an alignment”. No it’s not. It’s not trying to drawl parallels to real world issues, it’s drawing from these fictional sources.

If someone presents, as the epitome of evil, non-white people with non-European eyes who wield scimitars and are mostly famous for having sacked the cities of European-like peoples, then it's facile to assert that there is no, ulterior, judgmental value on real world peoples. JRRT didn't just wake up one day with the idea that this is a good way to depict evil. He drew upon tropes - racialised tropes - that were readily available to him.

Once we recognise this, we can respond in various ways. One of those is to keep the tropes, but drop the alignment label evil. That's not the only one, but it's one.

Most people’s healthy debate about anything D&D related really boils down to “what is D&D“ for them. I will always put forward the traditional lines and differ in opinion with the more game progressive side (but respect the difference in opinion).

For me, alignment and actual meta physical concepts of Good and Evil, Law and chaos (again, no relation or judgement on any real world groups) are intrinsic parts of D&D.

So this leaves me puzzled about the need for your detour through "the literature" and the allegation that people are ignorant of it.

For my part, I am very familiar with D&D tradition and also am familiar with a good range of "the literature". I think that D&D alignment tradition doesn't support RPGing that emulates the literature. I think it also gives rise to the various other problems identified in this thread (connection to racial stereotypes; conflict at tables; etc); and I think the only way to make it coherent is to drop the approach to planer metaphysics that was hinted at in Appendix IV of Gygax's PHB and that was fully crystallised in MotP.

I don't see that tradition is a good reason to keep something that bring all this unhelpful baggage with it.

 

[Aldarc]

Edit: Which takes us back full circle to my original point. As recently, some of the new debates are that it’s “problematic to label entire groups with an alignment”. No it’s not. (1) It’s not trying to drawl parallels to real world issues, (2) it’s drawing from these fictional sources.

There is a lot to unpack in such a short snippet, because I think that point (1) is not really the argument being put forth, but, rather, it's the implications from point (2). To summarize: it is more about second-hand racism that D&D unintentionally inherited (and propagated) through its adoption of the various tropes from those fictional sources* of fantasy, science-fiction, and westerns that the wider D&D community has only really recently begun to self-reflect upon. The additional layer of alignment (and the moral judgments it contains in its framing of peoples) in conjunction with the aforementioned doesn't really help matters any.

* Themselves (e.g., John Carter of Mars) rooted in 19th and early 20th century Euro-American adventure stories and narratives with some heavy-handed racist, colonial, imperialist, and White Man's Burden overtones.

 

[transmission89]

There is a lot to unpack in such a short snippet, because I think that point (1) is not really the argument being put forth, but, rather, it's the implications from point (2). To summarize: it is more about second-hand racism that D&D unintentionally inherited (and propagated) through its adoption of the various tropes from those fictional sources* of fantasy, science-fiction, and westerns that the wider D&D community has only really recently begun to self-reflect upon. The additional layer of alignment (and the moral judgments it contains in its framing of peoples) in conjunction with the aforementioned doesn't really help matters any.

* Themselves (e.g., John Carter of Mars) rooted in 19th and early 20th century Euro-American adventure stories and narratives with some heavy-handed racist, colonial, imperialist, and White Man's Burden overtones.

Right, absolutely. I fully understand that creative works are not created in a vacuum and of course meta influences at the time impact on writing.

Racism is obviously the big thing at the moment (for very real, concerning real world events). This textual analysis is fine for University level discourse, But to apply this lens to the game and it’s fictional creatures is an over reaction and not needed. Because if you apply these concerns equally, the whole house of cards comes falling down.

A university level critique will certainly find themes of colonialism, western perspective, an application of the American Dream expressed as wealth is power etc.

The problem then is if we remove elements from the game, we are left with very little game.

Why are our characters resorting to violence? Extra judicial killings are certainly relevant to today’s issues and draw uncomfortable parallels if we look for them.

Exploring tombs and taking their riches casts shades of colonialism.

The Barbarian class is problematic upon these lines for the very imagery and name.
Are any of these less relevant? Are these all issues that every table wants to explore? To only selectively apply this deep critical analysis to one aspect and ignore the others is just a well intentioned over reaction and not a meaningful change, just a level of convenient hypocrisy.

Of course, real world racism is bad. We can absolutely always do better with our portrayal of human cultures and ethnicities in the game. But in seeking to draw out the constant parallels and meaning and interpretations of text, it continues to create these problems.

I’m not blind to these readings and understandings of text. But on some level, for me at least, I’m happy to just enjoy them for what they are, works of fiction and the game that explores those fictitious ideas. I’d much rather spend energy fighting problems in the real world and enjoy the games for what they are.

 

[Aldarc]

Right, absolutely. I fully understand that creative works are not created in a vacuum and of course meta influences at the time impact on writing.

Racism is obviously the big thing at the moment (for very real, concerning real world events). This textual analysis is fine for University level discourse, But to apply this lens to the game and it’s fictional creatures is an over reaction and not needed. Because if you apply these concerns equally, the whole house of cards comes falling down.

A university level critique will certainly find themes of colonialism, western perspective, an application of the American Dream expressed as wealth is power etc.

The problem then is if we remove elements from the game, we are left with very little game.

Why are our characters resorting to violence? Extra judicial killings are certainly relevant to today’s issues and draw uncomfortable parallels if we look for them.

Exploring tombs and taking their riches casts shades of colonialism.

The Barbarian class is problematic upon these lines for the very imagery and name.
Are any of these less relevant? Are these all issues that every table wants to explore? To only selectively apply this deep critical analysis to one aspect and ignore the others is just a well intentioned over reaction and not a meaningful change, just a level of convenient hypocrisy.

Of course, real world racism is bad. We can absolutely always do better with our portrayal of human cultures and ethnicities in the game. But in seeking to draw out the constant parallels and meaning and interpretations of text, it continues to create these problems.

I’m not blind to these readings and understandings of text. But on some level, for me at least, I’m happy to just enjoy them for what they are, works of fiction and the game that explores those fictitious ideas. I’d much rather spend energy fighting problems in the real world and enjoy the games for what they are.

This is a bit of a gish gallop that would take way too much time and effort for me to unpack here, though they have been addressed by myself and others in past discussions here, which I would I would highly recommend you check out at your leisure. Furthermore, it would be incredibly off-topic to matter of Alignment's usefulness and already skirting with the limits of the mod warning. I think it's better for everyone if we move on from this particular line of discussion.