EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Those alignments are considered part of (plain) Good and (plain) Evil respectively.
D&D General So how about alignment, eh?
- Thread starter Staffan
- Start date
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
One of two options: either no alignment at all, or the alignment you choose and write on your character sheet represents your character’s ideals; what they believe in and at least theoretically strive for. In the latter case, the character’s “true” alignment is determined by their actions, and is not known to them, unless revealed by magic. This “true” alignment is the one that matters for the purposes of effects that care about alignment.
I usually go with the first option, because the second option is a lot more work for me, and in 5e there’s basically no payoff for it since so few mechanics care about alignment. I would probably go with the latter if I was running a game like 3e or PF (1 or 2) where there are a fair few mechanics that care about alignment.
I usually go with the first option, because the second option is a lot more work for me, and in 5e there’s basically no payoff for it since so few mechanics care about alignment. I would probably go with the latter if I was running a game like 3e or PF (1 or 2) where there are a fair few mechanics that care about alignment.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I don’t remember N being one of the 4e alignments. But it has been a while, so I’m probably just misremembering.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Ah, it appears you're correct. I thought there was still a proper Neutral, but I guess that too was considered part of Unaligned.
Hussar
Legend
Conceptually, the idea of alignment in the game isn't necessarily a bad thing. Is your character (or this NPC or whatever) a good guy or a bad guy? It's a bit lacking in nuance perhaps, but, it's not bad on the face of it.
The problem comes when the rubber meets the road though. Because ask three people whether something is good or not and you'll get 4 different answers. And then the endless arguments start. I can't think of another element in the game that has caused more flaming rows at the table than alignment. Not because people are being unreasonable or asshats or anything like that (although that's one aspect too) but simply because trying to neatly categorize morality is something that thousands and thousands of years of some really smart people haven't been able to do and expecting five sixteen year olds hopped up on caffeine and cheetos to figure it out is ... well... let's just say that's not going to happen.
So, we wind up with this very Gordian knot of rules where people can get VERY emotionally invested in the discussion (as is the case in any discussion about morality anywhere, any time) and the game comes to a grinding, crashing halt.
5e has largely avoided this by simply removing any mechanical element to alignment. Which, IMO, is probably all for the best. You can think that my paladin isn't good all you like, fair enough. But, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter because, well, Mr. DM, what are you going to do about it? It gets swept past and largely ignored.
I cannot imagine going back to playing in a game where alignment matters.
The problem comes when the rubber meets the road though. Because ask three people whether something is good or not and you'll get 4 different answers. And then the endless arguments start. I can't think of another element in the game that has caused more flaming rows at the table than alignment. Not because people are being unreasonable or asshats or anything like that (although that's one aspect too) but simply because trying to neatly categorize morality is something that thousands and thousands of years of some really smart people haven't been able to do and expecting five sixteen year olds hopped up on caffeine and cheetos to figure it out is ... well... let's just say that's not going to happen.
So, we wind up with this very Gordian knot of rules where people can get VERY emotionally invested in the discussion (as is the case in any discussion about morality anywhere, any time) and the game comes to a grinding, crashing halt.
5e has largely avoided this by simply removing any mechanical element to alignment. Which, IMO, is probably all for the best. You can think that my paladin isn't good all you like, fair enough. But, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter because, well, Mr. DM, what are you going to do about it? It gets swept past and largely ignored.
I cannot imagine going back to playing in a game where alignment matters.
Andvari
Hero
I've always found the 9-point alignment a useful and simple-to-use tool, especially for how to roleplay any random monster group at a glance. I also find it useful for my own characters as a starting point.
I really like the 3rd edition alignment descriptions. The "random" chaotic neutral always seemed weird to me.
When running a game, I typically don't give thought to player alignments. They can use the tool or not. Though currently I do play Pathfinder 2E, in which there are some mechanical tie-ins to alignment. Though they haven't really come up in a year of play.
I really like the 3rd edition alignment descriptions. The "random" chaotic neutral always seemed weird to me.
When running a game, I typically don't give thought to player alignments. They can use the tool or not. Though currently I do play Pathfinder 2E, in which there are some mechanical tie-ins to alignment. Though they haven't really come up in a year of play.
FrogReaver
As long as i get to be the frog
My players prefer 1 alignment... murderhobo.
CreamCloud0
One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
i've said this before in many a thread but i think the core of the problem lies in basically what you said: people try to interpret the alignments in their own ways rather than using the game-given descriptions and thus end up with different benchmarks, now the official alignment descriptions haven't always been the best but i think 5e's are pretty solid.
it's the "well i was raised in a criminal settlement so my character's interpretation/definition of good and chaotic is actually based on these valu-" NO, stop right there, your cHaRaCtEr'S iNtErPrEtAtIoN nothing, these are solid in-universe defined principles, there are outer planes of Good alignment, your character might have a warped perception of what 'good' is but capital-G Good remains as it ever did and doesn't change because your rogue was raised in an environment that had an absence of a moral backbone.
