D&D General The Problem with Evil or what if we don't use alignments?

[Maxperson]

Well technically I'm one of those previous edition users, but I'd believe there are more new ones especially thanks to stuff like Critical Role for example.

As are most of us in this thread, but I don't think most new players come to these boards to argue these sorts of things. They don't have the vast majority of the problems being stated here, because they don't have the history with mechanical alignment enforcement.

 

[Mistwell]

And while I'm on the subject, D&D is a game that should be entry level. If too many people are hitting their thumbs with it then it's a flaw in either the design of the game or the use of the hammer.

It would be clearer to see with a power tool; if a band saw were to take too many fingers then you could blame the fingers lopped off and some amateurs would. On the other hand any responsible professional environment would do a health and safety check and realise that the whole thing was unsafe and look at installing finger guards.

One person hurts themselves is user error. A substantial fraction of people hurting themselves means that you look at the design of the tool.

I've asked you before and gotten no response to this aspect of the topic so I will ask it directly. SHOW ME THE MEANINGFUL NUMBER OF PEOPLE HURTING THEMSELVES BY ALIGNMENT EXISTING IN THE RULEBOOKS OF THE GAME.

Show me a survey even done on the topic!

You've also assumed that the benefit to some people of alignment is low or that the number of people it's benefitting is low, which also appears to be an unsupported allegation.

BOTH of these assumptions seem unsupported by evidence of any kind beyond your own personal preferences and estimates.

If there is support beyond your opinion, show it. If there isn't then why are you substituting your opinion for fact? Why are you dismissing the preferences (and being dismissive in tone) of your peers in the game for your own personal preferences and claiming you represent some larger group of opinions without meaningful evidence?

 

[hopeless]

Hurt?
Complain yes, but what do you mean hurt?

 

[Neonchameleon]

I've asked you before and gotten no response to this aspect of the topic so I will ask it directly. SHOW ME THE MEANINGFUL NUMBER OF PEOPLE HURTING THEMSELVES BY ALIGNMENT EXISTING IN THE RULEBOOKS OF THE GAME.

I will do that as soon as you show me the meaningful number of people helped by having alignment as a system in the game. Please. Show me those surveys you have. Or is this simply you wanting to put conditions on other people that you can not fulfil yourself.

If a system does not actively help then it is harmful - it takes up space and time.

So. I've shown it to be morally toxic, and, that it is trivial to produce a better system for what its few defenders claim it does well.

And I've said what would satisfy me - making it as optional as feats. Meaning that it didn't exist as grit in my statblocks.

Show me a survey even done on the topic!

Show me one? Or is this you setting challenges you know you can't meet?

You've also assumed that the benefit to some people of alignment is low or that the number of people it's benefitting is low, which also appears to be an unsupported allegation.

BOTH of these assumptions seem unsupported by evidence of any kind beyond your own personal preferences and estimates.

So do you have a single shred of evidence to show anything else that exists beyond your own personal preferences and estimates?

Or is this simply that you have neither a logical or moral argument so you've decided that all you can possibly do is try to put the entire burden of proof on the opposition because you have nothing else to offer?

If there is support beyond your opinion, show it. If there isn't then why are you substituting your opinion for fact?

Pots and kettles spring to mind here. I've given moral arguments. I've given better systems that do what the people who like alignment claim it does - so if that's what's wanted then why not replace alignment with a better system.

Why are you dismissing the preferences (and being dismissive in tone) of your peers in the game for your own personal preferences and claiming you represent some larger group of opinions without meaningful evidence?

Again pots and kettles. You have no meaningful evidence. Yet you are dismissive and claiming you represent some larger group of opinions.

 

[Fenris-77]

I'm not jumping in the middle here, but it's not actually that odd that the burden of proof should be on the person who says it doesn't work, rather than the other way round. The book(s) explain how it works and how it can be used. If you disagree (which is fine) it would seem reasonable that you'd have to be the one to explain how it doesn't work, probably in some kind of more significant way than it doesn't work for me, which isn't a statement that needs proving.

 

[Faolyn]

Has a single person claimed the two letters give as much detail as a few sentences of motivation?

Yes. Here's something Oofta said back on page 8:

They have vague traits, ideals, bonds and flaws that tell you what they do but not why and often give you little or nothing to go on outside of those narrowly defined sentences. So you have to read a couple of paragraphs of lore and try to figure it out for yourself. Because heaven forbid we use 2 letters to give a general moral compass as a default when we can have paragraphs of text that pigeon holes them. I guess.

Other people have said similar things.

Every MM size set of motivation sentences will also leave out a huge variety of situations too. And so we have the multiple page treatment for some creatures given in other sources. And they also leave out how a particular one might react in some situations...

The two letters give a start and are quickly scannable. If they're in the ballpark the few MM sentences give more. What they leave out the DM makes up.

But again, what do those two letters (which are not two letters, but actually the words spelled out) actually tell you? One lawful evil person could always honor the letter and spirit of an agreement, and another could always exploit loopholes. Those are very different things that use the exact same "two letters." And worse, those "two letters" are often very, very different between tables and even players--made even more so when you have players who are obnoxious about alignments or take them to extremes.

Earlier, someone told me that lawful people obey society's laws and honor those of higher rank and authority. I asked, what if it's a lawful good person in society of unjust laws that can't be fixed through lawful actions, and what if the person of higher rank and authority is corrupt or incompetent or got that rank through unlawful or simply stupid means. Is it lawful to honor unjust laws? Is it lawful to not honor them and to engage in nonlawful actions to fix them? Is it lawful to try to remove that individual from authority? I don't recall getting an answer to these questions. Would you be willing to answer them?

 

[Oofta]

Yes. Here's something Oofta said back on page 8:


Other people have said similar things.


But again, what do those two letters (which are not two letters, but actually the words spelled out) actually tell you? One lawful evil person could always honor the letter and spirit of an agreement, and another could always exploit loopholes. Those are very different things that use the exact same "two letters." And worse, those "two letters" are often very, very different between tables and even players--made even more so when you have players who are obnoxious about alignments or take them to extremes.

Earlier, someone told me that lawful people obey society's laws and honor those of higher rank and authority. I asked, what if it's a lawful good person in society of unjust laws that can't be fixed through lawful actions, and what if the person of higher rank and authority is corrupt or incompetent or got that rank through unlawful or simply stupid means. Is it lawful to honor unjust laws? Is it lawful to not honor them and to engage in nonlawful actions to fix them? Is it lawful to try to remove that individual from authority? I don't recall getting an answer to these questions. Would you be willing to answer them?

Why does it matter if people don't have exactly 100% agreement? I don't enforce alignment for my player's PCs. It's up to them whether they care about alignment.

In the real world, it's close enough.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I've just checked something I heard about yesterday and as of Tasha's Caludron of Everything it seems that alignment is dead. There are only a handful of monsters in that book, and all of them are printed without alignment (rather than being unaligned). Candlekeep mysteries also lacks alignment. I was unaware of this.

Seemingly Wizards of the Coast is now on the same side I am - and as far as I'm concerned the world is now in a small way a better place than I previously believed. (And yes I'm serious about that). But there's a significant difference between advocating strongly for a change that I think would be a good thing and in gravedancing - so I'm leaving the thread.

 

[Cadence]

Earlier, someone told me that lawful people obey society's laws and honor those of higher rank and authority. I asked, what if it's a lawful good person in society of unjust laws that can't be fixed through lawful actions, and what if the person of higher rank and authority is corrupt or incompetent or got that rank through unlawful or simply stupid means. Is it lawful to honor unjust laws? Is it lawful to not honor them and to engage in nonlawful actions to fix them? Is it lawful to try to remove that individual from authority? I don't recall getting an answer to these questions. Would you be willing to answer them?

There certainly are various interpretations. Another post before gave some other examples (including xenophobe) - I offered multiple different interpretations and they agreed they would all be described by that. Do you have anything from a few short descriptors up to a few sentences that wouldn't be ambiguous in some situations?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I've just checked something I heard about yesterday and as of Tasha's Caludron of Everything it seems that alignment is dead. There are only a handful of monsters in that book, and all of them are printed without alignment (rather than being unaligned). Candlekeep mysteries also lacks alignment. I was unaware of this.

Seemingly Wizards of the Coast is now on the same side I am - and as far as I'm concerned the world is now in a small way a better place than I previously believed. (And yes I'm serious about that). But there's a significant difference between advocating strongly for a change that I think would be a good thing and in gravedancing - so I'm leaving the thread.

Yeah, their products have not included alignment for a while. I'm really interested in seeing what they will do with it in the next or updated edition. I really hope that it will be gone for good.