D&D 4E Poll for 4e DMs: Alignment System

[Nemesis Destiny]

It is also worth noting (as I think Dannyalcatraz is getting at here) that 4E's adjustment of alignment involved two things:
1) Removing direct connections between alignment and the game mechanics.
2) Switching from the 9 point system to the 5 point system.

The latter is trivial to 'bolt-on' - it takes literally a single sentence from the DM to just say, "Yeah, use the classic alignments instead of the new ones."

The former, on the other hand, does require a bit more work to reintegrate alignment mechanically. And it sounds like that is more of the area of concern in this case, rather than the change in the alignments themselves.

In my case... I like the removal of mechanics (for the most part). I understand the logic behind the new 5 point system, but don't find it particularly compelling, so I tend to use the old alignments. Mostly - I do like the addition of 'unaligned' as opposed to 'true neutral'. I've also found alignment most useful as a tool for the player rather than DM, so I don't feel too strongly either way.

It's shocking how often I agree with you, MrMyth.

Since 4e doesn't care about what you write in that space (for the most part), we don't pay much attention to that. While I find 9-point system to be more descriptive than the 5-point, the old one had a lot of baggage that some of us were sick of, and I for one, found it pretty annoying most of the time, though I did run a campaign where it was important in 3rd.

That said, our group would be pretty ok with leaving the space blank or writing in whatever.

If I were going to use an alignment system as a tool for shaping personality and behaviours, I'd be tempted to go with the Palladium system, which is excellent.

 

[JeffB]

I don't think an alignment system ever really factors into my love or hate for any version of D&D that I have run- Its something that really doesn't matter much come table time. However I like 4Es system the best- nice and neat without being too much of a blanket statement like OD&D/MCM/BECMI. I think Holmes' system also is just right.

 

[Traveon Wyvernspur]

I've run 4E a few times and have always gone with the RAW alignment system in that edition. My personal preference is the older 9 alignment system, I felt like it added more realism and more room for role playing alignments as opposed to what 4E has. They both work, just personal preference is all I'm speaking to here with regards to editions.

 

[Mengu]

I haven't paid any attention to alignments in years.

 

[OnlineDM]

I chose the first option, although like others I wasn't sure whether to pick it or the 4th since there's no mechanical impact in the game.

However, I don't totally ignore alignment - my own as a player, or my players' when I'm the DM. When a player says that their PC will do something that seems out of character for the way they've been playing the PC, I'll sometimes ask, "What's your alignment?" And in those cases the player might re-think their action choice or perhaps their alignment choice.

I'm definitely in favor of ditching any mechanical connection to alignment, but I do think it's a useful guide for role-playing. It's not required, but it can help you get into your character's head.

 

[Larrin]

I've never enforced Alignment when i play, but if a character wants input i ususally say that Good and Evil are the views of mortals, so humans, dwarves and halflings are the most likely to worry about that. Fey races (elves, gnomes, etc) in my mind are less concerned with that and more concerned with wether they make the world a more beautiful place, or a more frightening place and use Seelie vs Unseelie to represent those views (To me, faeries in stories seem to have one or the other as their goal). For the more brutal races (orcs, goblins, minotaurs, some goliaths) I like the idea of strength Vs weakness, wether they believe they should meet conflict with strength (the belligerent or noble Orc), or wether they should avoid it and just try to survive by any means necessary (think cowardly goblin). Law Vs Chaos is optional, but applicable to all depending on whether they have a method/code/law/compulsion to their actions. Immortals (angels, demons, etc) have a creed that dictates their actions and is written by the one that made them, and can include any allignment.

Again, i never enforce this (they can write anything on their sheet they want), but its how i motivate my NPC's, and put it out there for the players to ponder.

 

[Riastlin]

Technically, I suppose I use the standard 4ed alignment system though I agree with the above posters who said that the standard system really doesn't have much, if any, mechanical effect. I don't think I've ever asked my players what their alignments were due to some in-game event. I merely noted them when they made their characters because I didn't want them running evil PCs.

In my opinion, this is a bit better than it was in older editions (though I certainly think there's an argument to be made for doing away with alignments altogether). With the 9 different alignments, there simply were too many disagreements about the difference between the various alignments and the mechanical impact of alignment lead to many disputes between DMs and Players. I see the usefulness (particularly for divine characters) but am just all too aware of the potential problems.

Ironically though, as a player I do always put my alignment down. The main reason for this is to let the alignment guide my character's actions. Certainly this could be done without an alignment system easily enough but its just a quick one or two word description of my character's outlook.

/shrug to each their own.

 

[Dragonhelm]

This is a topic we discussed quite a bit over at The Piazza.

I find that I'm divided on the issue of alignment in 4e. I see why the designers did what they did. The new system is much simpler to grasp, and not having much of a rules impact is a huge bonus. I love that certain classes are not bound by alignment. Having paladins who aren't LG solves a lot of issues.

At the same time, the old system is much more descriptive. The new system has Evil, but it doesn't have LE. Now, really, Evil is the same thing. But when I think of villains such as the Knights of Takhisis, I think LE. I also really dig the symmetry of the 9-alignment system.

I like how certain alignments that were already close together got merged in the new system (i.e. NG and CG). I know that some folks feel that LE and NE were combined, but I see it as NE and CE being combined.

I really like the new term Unaligned. It's simple to grasp, and doesn't have the baggage of some of the neutral alignments. LN just took orders. That's no fun! TN tended to be recorders of history, or would be obliged to maintain a balance, switching sides. Or they just sat on the sidelines. CN was the "excuse to be a jerk while not evil" alignment. Unaligned's stance of "just let me go about my business" covers a lot of ground. To me, the neutral alignments were the hardest to play.

Alignment, to me, is a general guideline to help a person figure out their moral code. It's not a hard-and-fast rule, nor do I see it affecting how we play the game. It's not for everyone, and that's cool. But I like it as a legacy item. And while I've waffled some over which system to use, I find myself liking the simplicity of the 5-alignment system more and more.

 

[S'mon]

I use the 4e system but I don't see how it's a 'mechanic' in 4e?

 

[I'm A Banana]

There is Order and Chaos and Good and Evil. These are cosmic forces that have existed since before the dawn of time. They power the most powerful magic in existence, define the layout of the cosmos, and may affect you, on a daily basis, as you go about your business of being a hero. You can tap into one or two of these eternal forces by picking an Alignment. You can choose one from the first bit and one from the second bit. You could also choose none from any bits ("unaligned"/neutral) or one from one bit and one from the other ("Ordered" or "Good").

These are mostly character traits, but a few supernatural elements can and do depend on your alignment. For instance, an artifact that radiates Evil like the Book of Vile Darkness will be more effective in Evil hands than in unaligned hands, and may actively hurt Good characters. These great treasures are manifestations of these moral forces in the world. Certain meaphysical creatures, such as devils, demons, angels, and the like, also use alignment to determine their powers -- though only the most powerful and unique of them. Alignment-based effects are truly rare and ancient effects, the underpinnings of reality itself shaken with their use or misuse.

There's no bonus or penalty for changing alignment. You should pick the alignment that best represents your idea of your character based on a few questions. You may change alignment over the course of the adventure, and that's OK. You may not, and that's OK, too. The DM cannot change your alignment any more than he can change your race (e.g.: maybe its the result of some curse or plot device, but he has no authority to tell you how you have been acting), though he might suggest an alignment that might be more appropriate to your style.

The following are useful questions for determining your character's alignment. If you wind up with some contradictory or complex answers, consider leaving that part of your alignment "unaligned," since you likely have a blend of the ideas.

"My character enjoys the safety and social life of a city."
If True, consider being Ordered.

"My character values the input of others, and works well in a team, especially with a good plan."
If True, consider being Ordered.

"My character wants to contribute to something greater than themselves."
If True, consider being Ordered.

"My character enjoys the freedom and isolation of the wilderness."
If True, consider being Chaotic.

"My character does his own thing, even if no one else agrees with it, and prefers rapid action to intricate planning."
If True, consider being Chaotic.

"My character mistrusts authority, and doesn't take orders very well."
If True, consider being Chaotic.

"My character thinks that life is cheap -- people die all the time, from a variety of causes, or for no reason at all, so there's little value to it."
If True, consider being Evil.

"If presented with a chance to get something my character wants, my character takes that chance, even if the consequences may be dire."
If True, consider being Evil.

"My character thinks that those who stand in their way deserve what they get."
If True, consider being Evil.

"My character feels that every life is important to save, from the poorest plague-bearing beggar to the highest noble king."
If True, consider being Good.

"If someone asks my character for help, they will probably give what help they can."
If True, consider being Good.

"My character is concerned for the weak and defenseless."
If True, consider being Good.

...etc....

This sets up how the game defines alignments (which isn't really how the Real World uses the terms), and it stresses that every choice -- even unaligned -- has consequences. It roots alignment in the player's concept of the character, rather than the DM's impression, which might provoke discussion, but would rarely cause much debate. The line of authority is pretty clear, and its not based in your actions. You can burn down an orphanage and still be Good if you think your character did so in a manner respectful of life and others. That might be a pretty hard sell for most orphanages, so clearly if you're regularly doing this, you might want to re-examine your alignment.

I also think "lawful" carries some unnecessary baggage (though to be fair, Good and Evil probably do, too), so it would help to call it something else. Very few people would say "I like Law!", a lot more would say "Yeah, I want to be part of a team, not a crazy lone wolf."

So if I am a guy who works well with a team and wants to help others, I'm probably Lawful Good. If I'm a loner who thinks that life is cheap and I will kill easily to get what I want, I'm probably Chaotic Evil -- that's what orcs do, after all.