Metallic Dragons: Unaligned!?

[keterys]

I want to know what it is about crossbows that makes the Dwarven Bolter Unaligned instead of Any

My theory is that it depends on the designer or editor more than it depends on an actual alignment concept.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I want to know what it is about crossbows that makes the Dwarven Bolter Unaligned instead of Any

My theory is that it depends on the designer or editor more than it depends on an actual alignment concept.

Seems plausible.

 

[Derren]

How exactly do good-aligned metallic dragons make your game better?

There have been examples given in this thread already on "how exactly" does unaligned metallics make the game better. Just as there have been examples put forth showing how good metallics can be "better". Seems a wash to me.

You prefer good-aligned metallics, I prefer unaligned metallics. I don't reject that part of your opinion. I disagree with it, but as long as we're both having fun in our games I really don't care.

What I have issue with, and I think I'm not alone, is the idea that the change from good-aligned to unaligned has somehow lessened the game. It has certainly changed the background assumptions of the core setting . . . but has hardly weakened it.

I think I'm done in this thread. While there has been some good discussion of alignment, we're mostly at the point with one side repeating, "I'm okay with the change, but whatever floats your boat" and the other side repeating, "THIS IS WRONG! DESTROYS THE SETTING OF D&D! ACK! STURM! DRANG!" (sorry about the bias that just popped up there, but . . .)

Good aligned dragons, or generally good aligned creatures, allows me to give the PCs allies they can turn to, gives them a different kind of adventure in the case that the goals of a good aligned creature runs against their own goals as now the PCs have to decide how to oppose this creature (moral dilemma) and good aligned creatures invoke more mystery when one of them turns bad.

When I have just unaligned creatures than, when one of it opposes the PCs, its very easy for the PCs to simply decide to kill it. No dilemma at all or even just a break from the usual modus operandi. It is also no surprise when this creature opposes/attacks the PC as it is just another monster to kill like half of the MM.
And finally, having no good monsters fosters the believe in new players/DMs that everything in the MM is just there to be fought.

 

[Obryn]

When I have just unaligned creatures than, when one of it opposes the PCs, its very easy for the PCs to simply decide to kill it. No dilemma at all or even just a break from the usual modus operandi. It is also no surprise when this creature opposes/attacks the PC as it is just another monster to kill like half of the MM. And finally, having no good monsters fosters the believe in new players/DMs that everything in the MM is just there to be fought.

Have you noticed yet that you're saying the same three things over and over again?

And have you noticed that you haven't provided anything other than your say-so as far as evidence? Or even any logical connections? You're going straight from "Gold Dragons are unaligned" to "Adventurers will wantonly slaughter Gold Dragons" and skipping every point in the middle. Namely - whether or not routine and regular slaying of Unaligned or Neutral creatures actually occurs in anyone's games.

So let me ask again - Is it normal in your games for PCs to wantonly slaughter non-aggressive Neutral-aligned creatures?

If it is not normal, why should you expect that it will occur in other peoples' games?

If it is normal, can you accept that you're maybe running different sort of game than others might be, wherein Neutral creatures aren't just slaughter-bait?

-O

 

[Zaran]

I've given a reason why their should be good aligned monsters in the monster manuals already. So the GM can create a world and not just conflicts with monsters that are out to get the PCs. And while you might not need their stats , you would need their capabilities and power level so you can make reasonable choices on how to use them. Also, there is no reason why good creatures can't fight along side the PCs as NPCs. I've come to the conclusion that this isn't just about alignment though. There should be more background information as well.

 

[Bumbles]

There should be more background information as well.

I'd rather make up my own background information, thank you very much. Please don't make WOTC waste space on something I consider junk.

 

[Derren]

I'd rather make up my own background information, thank you very much. Please don't make WOTC waste space on something I consider junk.

I'd rather make up my own soulless statblocks, thank you very much. Please don't make WOTC waste space on something I consider junk.

What is "junk" in an Monster Manual is highly subjective. I rather have interesting background stories which spark my imagination than combat stat block #94 which are easily generated by yourself (Wasn't that one of the advertised advantages of 4E? How easily you could create monsters?)

To answer Obryns question.

Apart from my recent post not saying anything about slaughtering everything unaligned I do have noticed that players do have certain predispositions when it comes with interacting with monsters. Not having any good monsters enforces the image that everything in the Monster Manual is an enemy. Sure, experienced players know that this isn't so (generally), but what about new players? Many new players will be influenced by MMOs which have exactly that mindset. How should they know that not everything in the Monster Manual is supposed to be an enemy by default? Because the DM tells them? What if he is also new?

 

[Gort]

I'd rather make up my own soulless statblocks, thank you very much. Please don't make WOTC waste space on something I consider junk.

Maybe you're making bad statblocks. I love flicking through the monster manual and going, "I can't wait to use that on my players!"

Seriously, though, I don't play D&D because it has a good implied setting, I play it because it has a robust rules set I can turn to my own purposes.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

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

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

-- 77IM

A) There has been a Good lich since 2nd ed Spelljammer: the Arch Lich
(Spelljammer monster compnediums gave us Neogi, Giff, and Giant Space Hamsters, which makes it the most awesome monster volumes since the original Fiend Folio!
"Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!! Raaaaaargh!" )

B) The Arch Lich is an epic destiny in Arcane Power, so yes you CAN be a good aligned lich in 4th ed!

 

[Obryn]

To answer Obryns question.

Apart from my recent post not saying anything about slaughtering everything unaligned I do have noticed that players do have certain predispositions when it comes with interacting with monsters. Not having any good monsters enforces the image that everything in the Monster Manual is an enemy. Sure, experienced players know that this isn't so (generally), but what about new players? Many new players will be influenced by MMOs which have exactly that mindset. How should they know that not everything in the Monster Manual is supposed to be an enemy by default? Because the DM tells them? What if he is also new?

I think you're leaping to a lot of assumptions about new players, not all of which are warranted, IMHO.

For one thing, I don't know that anything will keep brand new young players from slaughtering everything in sight. How many times have you heard people talk about running through the Keep on the Borderlands and killing everything in there for treasure? I've heard it several times. Not every group does - but it happens!

For new adult players, I have no idea what they'll do. Probably the same thing they've done in the past - whatever's appropriate for the situation and adventure. If a DM sets up a gold dragon as dungeon dressing, I expect it will be killed. If a DM sets it up as an NPC, I expect it won't be.

-O