Well, it is largely gone from 5e as it is...
D&D General The Problem with Evil or what if we don't use alignments?
- Thread starter hopeless
- Start date
Well, it is largely gone from 5e as it is...
Oofta
Legend
Which, for me, is the best use. A general descriptor with little or no mechanical impact but that can be useful for broad ideas on how someone is going to approach the world and implement those traits and bonds.
Mannahnin
Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
I enjoy using it as a descriptive (not proscriptive) tool for shorthand of part of a character's personality, and a general roleplaying guideline.
I've also enjoyed it used as a keyword for what side a character stands on in the great cosmic metaphysical conflict, and having that sometimes have a mechanical consequence. For example, in Graphite Prime's excellent module Praise the Fallen, there are a couple of effects which treat Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic characters differently. Even though I ran that in 5E, it was fun thinking about how this supernatural effect reacted differently to the different characters.
That being said, I have also enjoyed games which don't feature it. Or like my current 5 Torches Deep game, where characters have no alignment; the closest thing is that some monsters or magical effects are supernaturally Evil.
I've also enjoyed it used as a keyword for what side a character stands on in the great cosmic metaphysical conflict, and having that sometimes have a mechanical consequence. For example, in Graphite Prime's excellent module Praise the Fallen, there are a couple of effects which treat Lawful, Neutral, or Chaotic characters differently. Even though I ran that in 5E, it was fun thinking about how this supernatural effect reacted differently to the different characters.
That being said, I have also enjoyed games which don't feature it. Or like my current 5 Torches Deep game, where characters have no alignment; the closest thing is that some monsters or magical effects are supernaturally Evil.
If you observe that a player hates NPCs who act on intuition, you don't need the label "lawful" to make use of that observation.
If you observe that a player behaves in some other way that you deem "lawful," and assume that the player in question must also hate NPCs who act on intuition, you are setting yourself up for failure when it turns out that isn't the case.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
What if the person believes in in some greater good for altruistic reasons, but thinks that achieving that good requires harming others? Whole eggs and omelettes or 'needs of the many outfighting the needs of the few' thing. Are they good or evil and how does labelling them either way helps us to understand them better?
Whose tradition? What if they respect the traditions of their religion and think all other laws are wrong and need not to be obeyed? Also certainly one can easily be reckless and unpredictable and still have honour and respect traditions. Like think of Klingons, super honourable traditionalists, also unpredictable hotheads. Lawful or chaotic? And again, how does labelling them either way make understanding them easier, instead of just confusing and dumbing down things?
Aging Bard
Canaith
I like alignments and have always used them. I even like alignment languages, which make even more sense to a modern mind (they're moral meme-speak, basically). I like campaigns with religions and religious conflict (and covert religions--great idea!).
And I totally understand why alignments are problematic and being de-emphasized today.
And I totally understand why alignments are problematic and being de-emphasized today.
Oofta
Legend
I would represent that as someone with an ideal of "greater good" with an evil (or perhaps neutral) alignment.
If my ideal is just greater good with no alignment I have no idea how they're going to attempt to achieve their ideal without other knowledge or making assumptions.
Voadam
Legend
I generally either go with 1) play your character how you want, alignment descriptions are broad and vague enough to accomodate most situations, or 2) house rule alignments to be Cosmic supernatural forces so mortals are unaligned unless specifically tied to a supernatural cosmic force (like clerics and paladins) which are separate from morality and such ([GOOD] being more like holy/ritual purity than moral goodness).
I find the latter view allows things like plots where a LG church can house corrupt individual priests or overzealous inquisitions without the problems of their supernatural power being cut off and the error of their ways being manifest immediately, or requiring things like them being secretly powered by fiends.
I find the latter view allows things like plots where a LG church can house corrupt individual priests or overzealous inquisitions without the problems of their supernatural power being cut off and the error of their ways being manifest immediately, or requiring things like them being secretly powered by fiends.
Flamestrike
Legend
Theyre evil. Full stop.
I find it useful for the religious type of characters. It's definitely not a one size fits all type of thing. They could replace it with something else but it is useful to save space. With hundreds of monsters, npcs, etc. - a detailed description of culture and ethos for everyone would be too much. A culture could be very violent and "evil" - yet heroic and honorable (like the Spartans in 300). Personally, I find it more interesting when "evil" monsters are more complex and not one-dimensional. Two "lawful good" paladins of opposing kingdoms could be mortal enemies, etc. Being "evil" does not mean you are a serial killer who can just wantonly and justly be slain on sight. Tony Montana or Michael Corleone were definitely evil and probably chaotic yet they were protaganists and likeable.
Vaalingrade
Legend
Don't use it because it is vague, subjective and personal. Might as well demand you assign a poltical party to your character for all it actually describes and objectively means.
As for the false agenda gods thing, I've used it. In fact, in my campaign setting, the Big Bad of the planet took advantage of the gods going distant to play this two ways:
First is the Church of the Threefold Moon, his actual church that professes to be an organization based on Might Makes Right. The lay people think they're doing the right thing by promoting the strongest to lead in the Death World they live in, but the actual point is sowing conflict by pitting people against each other to prove themselves and condition them to accept more and more power from the Big bad until they become literal monsters in his service.
Second, he invented a member of the pantheon, masquerading as a god of Community when he's actually spreading xenophobic and isolationist views to again sew conflict (his deal is he can't bring his lost essence together with all this dirty 'life' on the planet, but he can't act to nuke it himself).
And then he's being subverted because the world runs on Pratchett's Narrative Causality and the belief the people have in both these fake gods has spawned actual Small Gods, both of whom are subverting his efforts but building groups dedicated to the strong uplifting the weak and actual communities rooted in inclusivity and togetherness.
As for the false agenda gods thing, I've used it. In fact, in my campaign setting, the Big Bad of the planet took advantage of the gods going distant to play this two ways:
First is the Church of the Threefold Moon, his actual church that professes to be an organization based on Might Makes Right. The lay people think they're doing the right thing by promoting the strongest to lead in the Death World they live in, but the actual point is sowing conflict by pitting people against each other to prove themselves and condition them to accept more and more power from the Big bad until they become literal monsters in his service.
Second, he invented a member of the pantheon, masquerading as a god of Community when he's actually spreading xenophobic and isolationist views to again sew conflict (his deal is he can't bring his lost essence together with all this dirty 'life' on the planet, but he can't act to nuke it himself).
And then he's being subverted because the world runs on Pratchett's Narrative Causality and the belief the people have in both these fake gods has spawned actual Small Gods, both of whom are subverting his efforts but building groups dedicated to the strong uplifting the weak and actual communities rooted in inclusivity and togetherness.
Flamestrike
Legend
Im not understanding the religious distinction.
Why are people struggling to comprehend an evil cleric of a good church?
A LE inquisitor type of a Good religion etc?
Why are people struggling to comprehend an evil cleric of a good church?
A LE inquisitor type of a Good religion etc?
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him)
It would, in that case, give an incomplete picture. The kind of person you're talking about is like the Operative in Serenity. He knows what he's doing is cruel and, from a personal moral perspective, wrong. But he's doing it for a higher ideal. That makes him evil, knowingly so, even if the ultimate goal is something higher.
Alignment is never a complete picture - never has been a complete picture any more than a set of rolled stats is a complete picture. But, if used well, it can help give you ideas where someone fits in the society around them.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
So adventurers killing monsters (i.e. harming others) to stop said monsters rampaging countryside (protecting the countryside being the greater good) are evil?
Flamestrike
Legend
Honourable but Evil is LE.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
No. Most of use use alignment properly and without problem now that it has had all of its teeth removed. It's simply an aid to roleplay to use or not as you see fit. Removing it from the game would harm more than it helps.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
This is an objectively false statement, as many people here have offered benefits that it gives them. To declare that it provides not a single benefit(and there are in fact multiple benefits) is flat out wrong.
payn
Legend
Thing about Klingons is they are just as variable as anyone else. To Worf, honor is honor and its achieved by following traditions and tenets. Many other Klingons see honor as more of a malleable concept shaped to the situation and decided by the victor. The Alignment system helps know which is which in shorthand.
Flamestrike
Legend
Killing in self defence or the defence of others is not evil, when no other option presents itself, the threat is imminent and the force used is proportionate.
This is why such killings are not sanctioned in any criminal code anywhere, ever, through time immemorial.
We don't call cops who are forced to shoot gangsters shooting at them (or others) evil. We do call cops who intentionally gun down unarmed criminals in their home who are posing noone any threat evil - and we imprison them for murder.
An adventurer that rides out to a living creatures home, where it presents no threat to anyone, and kills it for no other reason than existing, is evil.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Yep. This is the way.
