Metallic Dragons: Unaligned!?

[Zaran]

Why do the 4e developers refuse to add Good Aligned creatures in their monster manuals? I can tell you why. Because players aren't suppose to play evil characters so they shouldn't have to fight them. I know that's their reasoning.

The thing is Metallic dragons have always been good aligned creatures in past editions. There is no reason to change this. Metallic dragons and other good aligned creatures should be added to the game to aid the players. I was annoyed at this when they changed Angels. I'm twice as annoyed now.

WotC, stop changing what isn't broken! I'm willing to bet you guys had some part in the rewriting star trek canon as well. I hope the creators of DND haunt you with their Unaligned ghosts!

 

[Hjorimir]

This is easy to fix in whatever campaign you're running. Just wave your hand and declare that metallic dragons are good. I don't see the real issue here.

 

[webrunner]

There's no "Alignment: Any" any more in 4e.

If the alignment is good it means they're all good
If the alignment is evil it means they're all evil

However, "unaligned" in a monster entry does not necessarily mean "every metallic dragon is unaligned" it means "metallic dragons have no inherent alignment" - they could be good or evil or unaligned.

Making creatures inherently good severely limits what you can do with them a lot more then making them inherently bad, so they just say, well, they can be good, but not always.

 

[chaotix42]

I'm down with metallic dragons being unaligned. I like the idea that metallic dragons can do good in the world while still being greedy, selfish, slothful, eccentric, single-minded, or perhaps just bad tempered.

Unaligned just makes it even easier for a DM to say this particular monster is an enemy or ally (beyond the simple fact that DMs can do anything already). Look at the alignment and flavor text and its easy to come up with ideas about how a group of PCs could both cooperate or come into conflict with a metallic dragon. This increases the monster's versatility in adventure design and makes them far more than an enemy - something far more dynamic. To make them Good would be just like making them Evil only placed at the opposite end of the specturm. Unaligned provides DMs with the maximum range of options when fitting metallic dragons into their adventures. For some reason a lot of people equate Unaligned with Enemy. Funny, that.

 

[Regicide]

Why do the 4e developers refuse to add Good Aligned creatures in their monster manuals?

Aren't gnomes in the MM? Anyway, alignment has no meaning in 4E, ignore it. No spells trigger off it, no penalty for changing it, no protection from it, no detecting it, no classes require it, not even paladin, no magic items I can think off that cause extra damage or require the wielder to be of an alignment, and of course if there was, then players would just change their alignment to match.

I don't even bother including it on the character sheet.

 

[Majushi]

Aren't gnomes in the MM? Anyway, alignment has no meaning in 4E, ignore it. No spells trigger off it, no penalty for changing it, no protection from it, no detecting it, no classes require it, not even paladin, no magic items I can think off that cause extra damage or require the wielder to be of an alignment, and of course if there was, then players would just change their alignment to match.

I don't even bother including it on the character sheet.

Actually, Clerics and Paladins are required to be an alignment that is compatible to their chosen Deity. (you can't be an evil servitor to a good god, but you can be unaligned...)

And Avengers must be the exact same alignment as their deity.

 

[stonegod]

And Avengers must be the exact same alignment as their deity.

Or unaligned.

 

[KarinsDad]

Got my book today. Thumbed through it. Saw the exact same thing. Thought the exact same thoughts.

Fan boys can justify it anyway they want, but the BBEGs have taken over.

It's one thing to change game mechanic sacred cows, but they keep insisting on changing game flavor staples of the game and that's just evil/wrong/bad/silly. YMMV.

 

[77IM]

First the unicorn, and now the gold dragon???

What will they come up with next, a good-aligned PC lich?

-- 77IM

 

[Bumbles]

There's no "Alignment: Any" any more in 4e.

The Dwarf, Elf, Human and probably several other entries say Any.

Making creatures inherently good severely limits what you can do with them a lot more then making them inherently bad, so they just say, well, they can be good, but not always.

Now this is true, and I've had discussions over it long before 4E or even 3E.

A lot of folks will just have a hissy fit over something good doing something wrong. It's supposed to be GOOD!

Ah well, my only real concern would be...is the description of the dragon an acceptable one, in terms of its behavior? Don't have the book yet, but I did look through it, and I don't recall anything wrong about it.

What will they come up with next, a good-aligned PC lich?

I'm pretty sure somebody tried to do that with the Jedi.