D&D 5E RIP alignment

[Maxperson]

Don't worry guys, people like me will still be suffering under alignment's yoke even if it is retiring from its job of shackling sapient beings to stereotypes (an excusing itself by saying you can change it -- like literally everything in the game; which means nothing).

Alignment hasn't been necessary for multiple editions now. In 3e I stopped requiring my players to put down an alignment, because individual alignments were too confining and failed to encompass a detailed personality. However, alignment has been invaluable to me as a DM, because I don't want to have to come up with those personalities for the vast majority of NPCs/Monsters.

Alignment is a tool. Use it or don't.

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
Well, this one has grown quickly. I'd like to make a note or two.

The basic note is: People are allowed to have opinions that differ, and to state them. If you are not up for that, then you are not in a constructive mindset for discussion. You are more likely in a mindset for argument, and that's going to make problems.

Hey, lets panic over a simple stat in a game. And then speculate wildly to confirm our panic. Yea that'll work.

Hey, @darjr, could you be about three steps less dismissive about this going forward? Do remember that some folks like the thing.

Your divisiveness on this topic seems way over the top and trollish in level. Particularly since you repeated it, with increasing snark, as a drive-by.

An you, sir, are making this personal. That's the road to getting booted from the thread. Please stay off that road.

We expect folks to treat each other with a modicum of respect, and to do their best to not escalate when they see an issue. If you aren't up for that, again, perhaps you should disengage.

 

[Charlaquin]

On the surface, perhaps. Dig deeper, though.

For example, compare a D&D species that averages 50lbs weight and tops out under 4’ in height or so to one that 8x more massive and roughly twice as tall. Personally, it bugs me that the latter wouldn’t be much stronger on average than the former.

That is a MUCH bigger difference than the differences due to sexual dimorphism present in pretty much any D&D species in any edition. (If D&D had a sentient species in which the genders were radically different- like ceratioid anglerfish or female Kzinti- there might be a point in gender-based stat mods for it. But you look at documented human history of athletics- even though we see differences, we ALSO see women today matching male performances of just a couple decades ago.

You don’t see 12 year olds anywhere near the powerlifting benchmarks of the 1990s.

Go through the other stats: a race described as being more dexterous, charismatic, intelligent, or durable than others should have that description modeled in its mechanics or those words have lost any meaning. It’s wasted ink and should be tossed along with the absent modifiers.

Also note that there’s a difference between stat limits (which used to be in the game) for gender and race and stat modifiers. The former is a floor or cap, the latter is not. A limit might prevent someone from playing concept X. A modifier is not likely to.

It’s the same fundamental argument, the only difference is of scale.

 

[NaturalZero]

I can't remember the last time I was in a group that used alignment. I had forgotten it was even in 5e.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Alignment doesn't give you details, it's not meant to. But I find it odd that people who don't like find it so offensive that 2 characters must be abolished in all instances. It's like saying "I don't see the point of vanilla ice cream so stores should stop selling it."

It's more like 'I don't see the point of vanilla ice cream and I wish that law that everyone needs to eat a cone every morning before work should be repealed'.

Here's the thing: if you're not the DM, you don't have a choice but to engage with alignment and the stupid moral and ethical arguments it entails. I make a diplomancer who is a pathological liar but is CG. The DM thinks lying is evil because of the BoED 3.5 and they insist I'm CN at best and because of the stupidity around what people think of CN or Evil alignments, my character is banned.

Yay! Taste that history.

Bloodletting used to be a tradition too.

 

[Oofta]

I'm finding myself a bit baffled how other people design their monsters or NPCs, to be honest. When you're putting something in your game, the concept predates the stat block. Does anyone really say 'okay, the stuff's been stolen by goblins. Let me go and look at the Monster Manual to find out what goblins are like'?

On a pretty regular basis I start with "I need a monster that is going to fill in for this role that can be quickly described as LE (and a couple other parameters), I'll limit my initial D&D Beyond search to that alignment". I don't start with "goblins" I start with "LE" humanoid because I want something evil which can be negotiated with, something that can be trusted if you can convince them. So I pull up kobolds and think if it makes sense to use them.

It's just a starting point though, alignment is just a general descriptor and something I may completely ignore depending on what I'm envisioning.

 

[Charlaquin]

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Even if alignment CAN be done well and CAN be useful, it so frequently goes wrong or leads to new and thorny disagreements that it has never seemed worth the effort. If a creature is evil, describe how. If it is good, describe how. Etc.

Well said. For the record, I actually like alignment, when handled “properly” (read: “the way I like to run it”). But, I recognize that it’s more trouble than it’s worth to keep as a part of the core rules. As a descriptive trait to write on your character sheet alongside height, weight, hair, and eye color, or an optional rule? Fine.

 

[Imaculata]

can you give me examples as I am not the best at that sort of thing?

Well, I have a group of druids in my campaign who are seeking vengeance against a town. The town cut down their sacred grove, and cut down their driad mother. So they cursed the religious leader of the town, who gave the order. The curse keeps him alive, but in endless pain (vines grow from his body constantly). They also attempted to poison the town's water supply, but one of the druids got arrested and thrown in jail for his attempt. However, the town-leader's son has now taken his father's place, and continues his crusade against the druids. So the druids have summoned an ancient forest spirit to terrorize the town; the Vindicator of Mepusa. The Vindicator comes at night, and slaughters the innocent lumberjacks, whose lumber the town relies on for their economy.

The druids are justified in their anger, but in lashing out against the regime that wronged them, they are harming innocent people. Are they evil? I don't think they are. But some of their acts ARE evil. Some within their circle are so angry that they believe the end justifies the means. Their self righteous attitude is further fueled by a disconnection from normal human society. They are people of the forest, and consider themselves forest beings, and not humans. In their search for justice, they have gone too far.

 

[loverdrive]

But I find it odd that people who don't like find it so offensive that 2 characters must be abolished in all instances.

That's simple. It doesn't add anything to the game, it doesn't work towards the focus -- so it's only natural to throw it out. That's how design works.

If alignment actually was important (as if, the whole system was designed around a great conflict between the forces of Good and Evil), then it'd be a bad idea to throw it out. But since it is useless, why even have it?

 

[Oofta]

It's more like 'I don't see the point of vanilla ice cream and I wish that law that everyone needs to eat a cone every morning before work should be repealed'.

Which is why I'm happy with how 5E made alignment just one descriptor of many, a completely optional one at that. No one is forcing you to use alignment. You can take whiteout to every mention of it (probably not the best idea if you use online tools) and the game doesn't change.