D&D General Rethinking alignment yet again

[CreamCloud0]

And then we are back to "DM says kill goblin babies or lose paladinhood" because he thinks Gygax's definition of LG is the true one, and you have to go and atone everyone he thinks you are showing mercy.

I feel like these GM opinions are things that should of come to light in session zero, where they were told and established what each of the alignments meant in the setting

 

[Maxperson]

And yet people think alignments like NG or NE are useful descriptors as play aids. "You believe in laws, but you also believe in not following laws at all". Or Neutral, switching sides constantly to maintain balance- as if the decision of whether you would want your neighbors to be good or evil have the same weight. It's like nobody wants to admit that the designers had a few ideas, and the rest of the alignments are just place fillers to complete the chart.

Does it matter? Alignment quite literally is only an RP aid. What does it matter to you why the player decides to do something? If you get rid of alignment, guess what. A PC can still decide to believe in laws but not following laws at all. That player is not why alignment is there. Alignment is there for the good faith player who is going to look at it and use it to guide his roleplay.

And I do mean guide. A complex personality isn't going to fall within one or probably even two alignments. Alignment is just where most of your actions fall. If most of what you do is NG, write NG down. If there is no category where most of your actions fall, you're neutral. Let alignment give you ideas and leave it at that.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Alignment quite literally is only an RP aid.

You keep saying this, but there are still non-RP elements of it left in the game.

It doesn't matter if they're rare, or that you say to ignore them, or... the amount of damage they do? (I honestly don't know why you're arguing about the built in murder laser; it tries to kill you for being naughty. Attempted murder? What is that, you're honor? Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry?), they're there.

 

[Celebrim]

And yet people think alignments like NG or NE are useful descriptors as play aids. "You believe in laws, but you also believe in not following laws at all". Or Neutral, switching sides constantly to maintain balance- as if the decision of whether you would want your neighbors to be good or evil have the same weight. It's like nobody wants to admit that the designers had a few ideas, and the rest of the alignments are just place fillers to complete the chart.

I assure you, NG or NE is not "You believe in laws, but you also believing in not following laws." NG and NE disagree diametrically about almost everything, but one thing that they do agree on is that law/chaos doesn't really matter and misses the point. Both agree you can't use the law/chaos measuring stick to decide anything. But for that matter, the law/chaos measuring stick isn't so much about following laws or not following laws, but what you consider to be the source of meaning and truth - something internal to yourself or something external to yourself. Is everyone's truth personal or is truth something imposed on you by something greater than you are? The duality here is similar to the argument Newton and Leipzig had over the possible nature of the universe during the foundational days of physics, which is probably best elucidated in this context by reading Neil Stephenson's masterful "Baroque Cycle". Fundamentally it is about what is more important, the individual or the system the individual finds themselves in. Both NE and NG believe that this is a distraction and ultimately a question that doesn't answer any really meaningful questions because NG would say you can't meaningfully have one without the other and be NE would say that both are valueless.

 

[Maxperson]

You keep saying this, but there are still non-RP elements of it left in the game.

Two artifacts(and I think maybe one other minor thing) don't alter what I'm saying. 99.99% of players and tables aren't ever going to find those artifacts, and if they do, they're high enough level to deal with a bit(at those high levels) of damage. None of those items changes alignment to anything but an RP aid.

 

[RuinousPowers]

I assure you, NG or NE is not "You believe in laws, but you also believing in not following laws." NG and NE disagree diametrically about almost everything, but one thing that they do agree on is that law/chaos doesn't really matter and misses the point. Both agree you can't use the law/chaos measuring stick to decide anything. But for that matter, the law/chaos measuring stick isn't so much about following laws or not following laws, but what you consider to be the source of meaning and truth - something internal to yourself or something external to yourself. Is everyone's truth personal or is truth something imposed on you by something greater than you are? The duality here is similar to the argument Newton and Leipzig had over the possible nature of the universe during the foundational days of physics, which is probably best elucidated in this context by reading Neil Stephenson's masterful "Baroque Cycle". Fundamentally it is about what is more important, the individual or the system the individual finds themselves in. Both NE and NG believe that this is a distraction and ultimately a question that doesn't answer any really meaningful questions because NG would say you can't meaningfully have one without the other and be NE would say that both are valueless.

...which demonstrates just how useless this is as an aid to roleplaying.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Two artifacts(and I think maybe one other minor thing) don't alter what I'm saying. 99.99% of players and tables aren't ever going to find those artifacts, and if they do, they're high enough level to deal with a bit(at those high levels) of damage. None of those items changes alignment to anything but an RP aid.

They (and it isn't just the artifact books, the BoED is just the first I could find) require the table to have an understanding of what alignment a character is, which requires an understanding of why you're getting blasticated by a dumb book; what either the game or the DM are judging you for.

 

[Maxperson]

They (and it isn't just the artifact books, the BoED is just the first I could find) require the table to have an understanding of what alignment a character is, which requires an understanding of why you're getting blasticated by a dumb book; what either the game or the DM are judging you for.

Not really. I think there are three objects. The Book of Exalted Deeds, The Book of Vile Darkness, and some third one that I can't remember right now. None of them require you all to be on the same page regarding alignment. If you aren't, you take a bit of damage, heal up and move on. No need to get worked over that any more than you'd get worked up at finding a Staff of Magi as a Champion Fighter.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I mean being a Champion Fighter is punishment enough.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Now I can tell you right now how players that hate alignment want the Trolley Problem solved in game. They want it solved with "Whatever helps the party win. Stop worrying about moral predicaments and just metagame. Be practical. Be ruthless. Don't let the DM keep you from winning."

Nothing could be further from the truth. People dislike alignment because it is a simplistic and incoherent mess of morals/personality system that is hindrance to actually developing nuanced characters with interesting and conflicting motivations.