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

[Maxperson]

IF there is nothing to much to abuse, and there is nothing much to go on... wouldn't alignment be... nothing much?

I mean, you are stating it right here, "one sentence isn't going to be much help" and "it will work, just not very well". Seems like if I was talking to a new DM I'd be best off telling them to ignore alignment entirely, they aren't losing much and it can prevent them from falling into pits they can otherwise avoid

They went too far and should bring more description back to make it more helpful. So long as they leave out the mechanics that were associated with alignment and stress that it's simply a roleplaying aid and not a straightjacket, there's absolutely nothing wrong with doing that.

 

[Maxperson]

The people who post to this forum are most likely to be people that have been playing for a long time. So I can only base it on my personal experience: it's not an issue for new players. I honestly don't care how anyone else uses alignment, I know how I use alignment for my monsters, PCs and NPCs. I don't know or care about the alignments of my player's PCs because it's their tool to use or not.

It's not my job as DM to police anyone else and tell them whether or not they're using alignment "right". If alignment helps them, great. If not, they don't need to use it. All I will tell them is that I don't want murder hobos, insane PCS, antisocial loners that hate everyone else or evil PCs.

Yep. I don't even ask my players what alignment their characters are. I just have the world react to the PCs' actions. Alignment is primarily a DM tool in my game.

 

[Chaosmancer]

They went too far and should bring more description back to make it more helpful. So long as they leave out the mechanics that were associated with alignment and stress that it's simply a roleplaying aid and not a straightjacket, there's absolutely nothing wrong with doing that.

Why? What benefit is there to giving us more alignment when it seems pretty clear we don't need it in the game? After all, this is an edition that has done incredibly well with basically no alignment, and nobody before this point has been advocating for MORE alignment.

So, what's the advantage of getting more alignment when it seems like it isn't needed?

 

[Cadence]

Why? What benefit is there to giving us more alignment when it seems pretty clear we don't need it in the game? After all, this is an edition that has done incredibly well with basically no alignment, and nobody before this point has been advocating for MORE alignment.

So, what's the advantage of getting more alignment when it seems like it isn't needed?

I thought a few people on hear had said the current descriptions were unclear?

And he's not advocating for any mechanical heft, right?

 

[Maxperson]

Why? What benefit is there to giving us more alignment when it seems pretty clear we don't need it in the game?

Your conclusion is faulty. I mean, we don't need hit points or any other rule in the game, either. You can always come up with something else. Need isn't the criteria to use. Whether it's useful to people or not is the criteria, and it is useful to a great many people.

After all, this is an edition that has done incredibly well with basically no alignment, and nobody before this point has been advocating for MORE alignment.

Again, it could have and would have done well with lots of rules changes other than what we got. That it can do well without alignment is not a great metric to use for whether alignment is useful or should be included.

So, what's the advantage of getting more alignment when it seems like it isn't needed?

Usefulness to lots of people.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I thought a few people on hear had said the current descriptions were unclear?

And he's not advocating for any mechanical heft, right?

No, he isn't asking for more mechanics. But it is still taking up space that doesn't need to be taken up. After all, many people have said that if you don't understand the current version of alignment, don't use it. So, what value is there in taking up more space for alignment text, if it is just as good to not use it?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Your conclusion is faulty. I mean, we don't need hit points or any other rule in the game, either. You can always come up with something else. Need isn't the criteria to use. Whether it's useful to people or not is the criteria, and it is useful to a great many people.

Again, it could have and would have done well with lots of rules changes other than what we got. That it can do well without alignment is not a great metric to use for whether alignment is useful or should be included.

Usefulness to lots of people.

Useful to a great many people as currently written, correct? I mean, it is useful to you, Oofta, Helldritch, and many others exactly as it exists. You have said so repeatedly that you find great use in it. So, you already have your use, why should we expand on alignment then? It isn't useful to you for us to do so. And you have told many people that if they don't see the use in alignment as currently written, to simply not use it. So, expanding it won't give them any more use.

So, you don't gain any more use if we expand alignment, those of us who get by without alignment don't get any more use, so there is no reason to expand alignment.

 

[Maxperson]

Useful to a great many people as currently written, correct?

That isn't what I said.

I mean, it is useful to you, Oofta, Helldritch, and many others exactly as it exists. You have said so repeatedly that you find great use in it. So, you already have your use, why should we expand on alignment then?

Because it's only really useful to us because we KNOW the expanded version. New players don't and need it expanded so that they too can get the full use out of alignment.

It isn't useful to you for us to do so. And you have told many people that if they don't see the use in alignment as currently written, to simply not use it. So, expanding it won't give them any more use.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

So, you don't gain any more use if we expand alignment, those of us who get by without alignment don't get any more use, so there is no reason to expand alignment.

And a false conclusion based on something that made no sense is of course wrong. Many new and less creative players would in fact get far more use out of expanded alignment. For those of you who dislike alignment or don't get use out of it, you don't need to use it. Your lack of ability in using alignment does not equate to expansion not giving other people increased aid from alignment.

 

[Maxperson]

No, he isn't asking for more mechanics. But it is still taking up space that doesn't need to be taken up. After all, many people have said that if you don't understand the current version of alignment, don't use it. So, what value is there in taking up more space for alignment text, if it is just as good to not use it?

Because your inability to use it does not equate to most of us not being able to use it or being as good not to use it. Alignment has a great deal of use to a great many people, and not only should be included, it should be expanded to help the newer players more.

 

[Chaosmancer]

That isn't what I said.

Because it's only really useful to us because we KNOW the expanded version. New players don't and need it expanded so that they too can get the full use out of alignment.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

And a false conclusion based on something that made no sense is of course wrong. Many new and less creative players would in fact get far more use out of expanded alignment. For those of you who dislike alignment or don't get use out of it, you don't need to use it. Your lack of ability in using alignment does not equate to expansion not giving other people increased aid from alignment.

Because your inability to use it does not equate to most of us not being able to use it or being as good not to use it. Alignment has a great deal of use to a great many people, and not only should be included, it should be expanded to help the newer players more.

I know that isn't what you said, that's why I added the bold and the underline. Because now we have a problem with what you have been saying.

See, now we have that alignment is useful... to the people who know how to use alignment from older editions. It isn't currently useful to those people who are new and are coming into it. Which is a weird pivot from earlier claims that you made that there are no problems with new people coming in an using alignment. You and others have claimed that they do perfect fine understanding it... but now they need an expansion of alignment, to get full use out of it.


But at the same time, those people who don't get a use out of alignment as currently written, don't need to use it. I bolded you saying that so those are your words. I added currently written because in the previous connected sentence you were talking about expanding it. But, new players aren't getting a use out of alignment, which is why you want to expand it, but they don't need to use it? That is confusing and a bit nonsensical.

Because, one of the core debates is that alignment isn't making sense. And the response has pretty consistently been "It does make sense, you just don't understand it, and if you don't understand it, you don't need to use it." You wouldn't say that the game doesn't work if you don't use alignment. So, what is the usage on expanding it? You, Oofta, Helldritch and others don't need it expanded. You already understand it. Those new players and others who don't understand alignment? You've already dismissed them as not needing to use something that they don't understand. So, it would only be an expansion for "less creative" players (by the way, kind of a subtle insult there) who understand alignment but aren't getting full use out of the current alignment? And if they understand it... why aren't they getting full use out of it?


I know you said it didn't make sense before so I'll rewrite some of this in a simpler format.

1) You and other people who use alignment say you get great use out of alignment.
2) You and the people who use alignment have stated that if we don't understand alignment, then we don't need to use it.
3) You would not claim that not using alignment breaks the game or makes it unplayable. Not using alignment is a viable way of playing.
4) The currently written system of alignment is inadequate, unless you understand it from previous editions. (Your claim)
5) The people in point 1 are still getting use out of the currently written system of alignment.
6) If point 3 is true, then no expansion of alignment is necessary, because not using alignment is viable, and in point 2 we have established that you believe those who don't understand alignment should just abandon it.