Do you find Alignments useful in your games???

[Leopold]

alignments are like motivations for actors it tells a player how to think and act in accordance with their motivation. If i feel a PC is playing more Evil than good i change their alignment after a few sessions and be done with it. I move it as i see fit in accordance with how the PC's are acting. I have a staunch bunch of CG people who REALLY play CG rather well and i have some that couldn't do lawful even if they had a guidebook on all the rules. It's all on how I as the DM view how their pc is playing.

 

[candidus_cogitens]

It is a DMs job to define what evil/good is in their games, this sets the benchmark for the alignments. It also removes a lot of the views on what is right and wrong because you as DM have wrote it in stone! There is only one interpretation and that is the story tellers.

I agree. While alignment may or may not be helpful for helping you roleplay, it is still an essential game mechanic. There are so many spells, magical effects, and class and prc requirements, that it would create a lot of problems to do away with it altogether. (Although some DM's might succeed in doing it, if they put a lot of careful thought into an alternative system that can serve the same function as a game mechanic.)

If the DM is capable and willing to articulate what the alignments represent, and if the players are willing to accept that as the last word, then there should not be any problem, because vagueness is the fundamental issue with alignment to begin with.

 

[maddman75]

I like alignments. I really don't understand why so many people on the net take issue with them. I remember one arguement about alignment in fifteen years of gaming. It lasted maybe ten minutes.

Here's my take. Good/evil reflect selflessness/selfishness. If you do something to benefit yourself no matter how it screws someone else over, its evil. If you generally do things to benefit yourself, so long as you aren't hurting anyone else, its neutral. If you do things to benefit others, and benefitting yourself is either a bonus or not a concern, its good.

Law and chaos are order/freedom. It doesn't have much to do with following laws. More with how you think and react with the world.

Furthur, the characters write down what they think is their alignment. Only I know for sure. With classes that may lose class abilities for behaving inappropriately, I give ample warning.

With this guide, alignment has never been a problem in my game.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

My view is that alignment is most useful when dealing with extremes, or differences of extremes.

For example, devils and demons in 3e. Both are the epitome of evil outsiders, but they have very different methods. The same with slaad - a DM's chance to show off what a REAL CN character could be.

That's why it's most useful for Paladins, Druids and Clerics. For those characters, it's a concrete force that drives their lives. For your average fighter, being LG or NG isn't going to make that much of a difference. Rogues tend to take an even more liberal view of the whole thing - which is why they have a tendency towards neutral alignments when I play them.

Of course, all the above is IMHO, but then, you knew that anyway.

 

[KB9JMQ]

I never make my players pick alignments. But their actions in game create them.
I then use that information for whatever reason I need it.
Basically, I don't worry about it until it comes up then I (or we) judge the alignment based on previous actions.

Darrin

 

[Umbran]

...I basically told him that in some ways alignments are a waste of paper space and time and effort because each single person will have his or her own interpretation and can justify almost any action within almost all the alignments ...

True, but a bit beside the point.

I think people tend to go wrong a bit here - in thinking about alignments and justifying single actions. Alignment isn't really about individual actions, it's about patterns of behavior. Alignment is the result of the characters long term behavior and motivations.

The PHB mentions this - the basic difference between someone who is "neutral" and one who sits an extreme (law, evil, good, or chaos) is commitment (be it conscious or unconscious) to an ideal. If overall, the record shows that the character hurts others when they could choose not to, he or she is Evil. If they regularly stick their necks out to make life better for others, they're Good. Similarly for Law and Chaos. It's far less a matter of individual instances, and more a matter of what happens in general.

Players and DMs would have fewer disagreements on the matter if they approach it this way. If the DM can say - "Look at how many people Joe Hero has harmed for his own profit," Joe Hero's player will have a much harder time justifying it as non-evil. And if the DM can't come up with a list of misdeeds long enough to make justification seems silly, then he probably doesn't have a strong enough case for a general change in behavior and alignment.

 

[KnowTheToe]

Being s stickler on allignments is a waste of time and energy, but they do give two important bennies in my opionion. first, as mentioned above it sets a goal of behavior for the player, a rimnder of who they are outside of their stats and awesome spells and weapons. Second, they can be a tool to the DM to set motivations and set the mood of the campaign.

 

[Arnwyn]

Of course our group uses alignments. We've never had much of a problem with them.

There's some great posts here, and some of the above posters really have hit the nail on the head as to why alignments have worked well in my group:

Umbran wrote that alignment is long term behavior and motivations, and is inappropriate to apply to single actions.

Tom C. noted that it is not a straightjacket, but a guideline (as per the PHB).

And finally, I quote Hand of Evil: "It is a DMs job to define what evil/good is in their games, this sets the benchmark for the alignments. It also removes a lot of the views on what is right and wrong because you as DM have wrote it in stone! There is only one interpretation and that is the story tellers."

I can't agree with that enough. The DM will define "morality" in a game/campaign world, and that is what the players have to go by. Personal interpretations are right out.

While I'm not saying that this will work for everyone, it's been a no-brainer for our group.

 

[Bonedagger]

Do you find Alignments useful in your games???

No.

 

[EarthsShadow]

I like all of these views on alignments and I am already going to have each player in my group read this thread before we begin play. I think it will help.

What about keeping alignments from players altogether and keep a DM only record of them? Would this possibly work?