D&D 4E Notes from the 4E Corebooks: Alignment, Monsters, Artifacts and More

[Fallen Seraph]

What? Gah! Just when they'd started making sense as being expressions of pure "divine power" and fitting in with the idea that all gods had the same Angels serving them and so on, they come and undermine things with this. Maximum facepalm.

Ehh, I doubt it is that bad. I think they mean more visually then anything else. The idea of a guy's sword glowing white doesn't strike some people as being evil. So a swirling mass of purple and black smoke seems better to them.

 

[Kordeth]

What? Gah! Just when they'd started making sense as being expressions of pure "divine power" and fitting in with the idea that all gods had the same Angels serving them and so on, they come and undermine things with this. Maximum facepalm.

It's a suggested option, not a mandate--and notice that they suggest changing the energy type to necrotic or simply changing the SFX. Some people (as evidenced on this very forum) want distinct damage types for good and evil deities, so they give a suggestion for those people. And really, there are some gods (Orcus, Vecna, heck, maybe even the non-evil Raven Queen) for whom necrotic cleric powers just make thematic sense.

 

[M.L. Martin]

It's interesting that Evil characters apparently do consider who they hurt. I guess that's a little more realistic. Oh well, irritating that they kept the names and whilst dumping two meaningful alignments, but at least it's less irritating than had been implied.

I think I phrased that poorly. The impression I got was that Evil was more 'ruthless and self-centered', while Chaotic Evil was more 'impulsive and utterly sociopathic'.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I think I phrased that poorly. The impression I got was that Evil was more 'ruthless and self-centered', while Chaotic Evil was more 'impulsive and utterly sociopathic'.

Hehe, I likey.

 

[Fiendish Dire Weasel]

It's interesting that Evil characters apparently do consider who they hurt. I guess that's a little more realistic. Oh well, irritating that they kept the names and whilst dumping two meaningful alignments, but at least it's less irritating than had been implied.

What? Gah! Just when they'd started making sense as being expressions of pure "divine power" and fitting in with the idea that all gods had the same Angels serving them and so on, they come and undermine things with this. Maximum facepalm.

Just going to agree here. I find this dissapointing.

 

[La Bete]

I think I phrased that poorly. The impression I got was that Evil was more 'ruthless and self-centered', while Chaotic Evil was more 'impulsive and utterly sociopathic'.

Charwoman Gene FTW!

 

[AndrewRogue]

I think the general implication with the radiant thing is that, in addition to being pure, divine energy... it is also bright and shiny, which is why some people may feel at odds with it being used for evil powers. Hence the suggestion for necrotic use or reflavoring.

 

[Ruined]

It's essentially the same alignment system from Warhammer FRP from years ago.

Lawful <- Good <- Neutral -> Evil -> Chaotic


Thanks for the scoop!

 

[M.L. Martin]

It's essentially the same alignment system from Warhammer FRP from years ago.

Lawful <- Good <- Neutral -> Evil -> Chaotic


Thanks for the scoop!

Nope. Lawful Good is still decidedly Good, and not as amoral as Lawful is in WFRP 1E; Chaotic Evil, likewise, is still Evil.

 

[Wolfspider]

The art's recycled from the 3.5E MM, so yes, the example vampire lord is using a spiked chain.

What? Recycled from the v3.5 MM?

Speaking of Orcus, he gets four pages in the MM. One of those pages is a reproduction of the cover art

This seems like a waste.