D&D 5E RIP alignment

[Hexmage-EN]

I like alignment because:

• I like Michael Moorcock's books, which focus on Law and Chaos.
• Law and Chaos give you a tool to use with characterization that could be overlooked otherwise. For example, my own Chaotic Neutral character gave charitably to the poor not necessarily out of the goodness of his heart, but because he was curious to see what the formerly poor would do with their newfound wealth. He also hated the rich and looked for ways to undermine them, not because they exploited the poor but because their wealth maintained a boring status quo.
• If you see that Mind Flayers and Devils are both Lawful Evil you as a DM might be inclined to try and figure out if they'd be inclined to work together and what that might look like. There's also precedent in D&D lore from past editions for Lawful Good, Neutral, and Evil entities being willing to set-aside their differences while Chaotic entities refuse to.
• I focused the tail end of a campaign on an army of Chaotic Good beings who didn't buy the argument that the Blood War keeps the demons of the Abyss occupied. They sought to exploit and a temporary weakness in the planar fabric of the Hells to free damned souls before allowing demons to invade the central layer of the Hells, Stygia, through multiple portals, which spurred other Lawful entities otherwise not aligned with the Hells to try and stop the forces of Chaotic Good.

I'm especially grateful to alignment for the latter to and am glad I started playing and DMing for D&D before its apparent removal from the game.

 

[darjr]

You don't know that. You're assuming. Personally, I think they caved in to pressure over something that could have been resolved with some verbiage at the beginning of the monster books. WotC has a history of over reaction and throwing the baby out with the bath water.

So... I'm not going to agree with you on that one.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes. The outer planes operate on alignment.

Planescape was more than just that. It was all about the alignment belief systems and how it controlled the multiverse. Entire layers of planes moved to other planes via alignment shifts.

 

[Maxperson]

So... I'm not going to agree with you on that one.

You aren't required to. I'm all for letting people have their own opinions, even if they are in opposition to mine.

 

[Charlaquin]

You don't know that. You're assuming. Personally, I think they caved in to pressure over something that could have been resolved with some verbiage at the beginning of the monster books. WotC has a history of over reaction and throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I’m not sure there’s a meaningful difference between “this is what the designers want” and “this is what the designers are doing as a result of external pressure.” In a free market system, the outcome is the same either way.

 

[darjr]

Yes. The outer planes operate on alignment.

And I had outer planes that operated on philosophy and power and political games and magic and faith and belief. Now what?

 

[Faolyn]

The thing is, well designed system is focused. Even better, lazer-focused. Every rule, every word, every setting detail revolves around one, well-defined goal. Everything that doesn't work for that goal should be thrown out, swiftly and ruthlessly.

Say, Blades in the Dark revolves around criminals and their struggles. Monsterhearts revolves around coming to terms with one's nature.

But that runs the risk of alienating the people who don't like that laser focus. Like, I read Blades in the Dark. It was a fascinating world. I wanted to exploring it, learn its history and how that affected the people of the current day. But I have zero interest in playing a criminal in that setting (there's too much else to do in the world interesting), and the game gives me no other choice. Could I reskin? Probably, but for that, I could just as easily take the bits I like into a system that doesn't force my hand. Could I make my own playbooks? Probably, but there's not much guidance on how to do it in a balanced way, and I'm the type of person who likes some guidance at first. Maybe there's guidance in Apocalypse World, but I shouldn't have to go to what is effectively a different game, not just a different supplement--that I also don't like for a couple of reasons--to get that info.

So maybe Blades in the Dark is "well-defined," but it fails as a game for me because of its laser focus.

 

[Scribe]

And I had outer planes that operated on philosophy and power and political games and magic and faith and belief. Now what?

Nice twist, thanks to the openness of D&D you can add, change, ignore, whatever you like.

The outer planes operate on Alignment.

Until the retcon that is coming I guess.

 

[Maxperson]

I’m not sure there’s a meaningful difference between “this is what the designers want” and “this is what the designers are doing as a result of external pressure.” In a free market system, the outcome is the same either way.

The point I was making is that they didn't need to over react the way that they did. WotC has a long history of going too far. Bonuses are out of control, let's bound accuracy(good). Let's bound it to +6 over 20 levels(bad). +10 would have been perfect. As it is, progression on that front is too slow. 4e was itself an over reaction to the issues with 3e. 5e was a re-correction where you see a lot of 4e things at more reasonable levels.

 

[darjr]

Nice twist, thanks to the openness of D&D you can add, change, ignore, whatever you like.

The outer planes operate on Alignment.

Until the retcon that is coming I guess.

Where you'll have Planescape just fine.