They Killed Alignment

[Drawmack]

I know a lot of people had problems with Alignment in previous versions. I know I wrote a couple articles on it myself. However, they neither fixed or removed the mechanic from the game.

Sure the 4 alignment system works better for beginners, but the 9 alignment matrix isn't even in the books as an optional rule, from what I can see. Admittedly I have not read the DMG yet, I only scoured it's index to see if alignment was mentioned there.

The alignment that most people had trouble with was the neutral on either pole. They could have removed that and left any neutral alignment fall into the unaligned category. However, by doing away with LE & CG they are loosing some major role playing aspects of the game. I mean, a Hittlerian character would not be E or CE but clearly LE.

I'm also a little bitter that they killed my CN Rogue!

 

[tombowings]

In 3.5E Hitler is LE; in 4E Hitler is E. Not only did they kill a few alignments, the other's took their stuff.

 

[FourthBear]

I wish they had killed alignment. Perhaps 5e will finally end our long, national nightmare.

 

[Kichwas]

I wish they had killed alignment. Perhaps 5e will finally end our long, national nightmare.

Maybe it will get removed in next month's DDi...

 

[Rechan]

Alignment has been divorced from the mechanics. Now that I don't have to worry about my PCs' alignments from a rules perspective, I don't give a flip about what the book says.

 

[Victoly]

Alignment has been divorced from the mechanics. Now that I don't have to worry about my PCs' alignments from a rules perspective, I don't give a flip about what the book says.

This.

Also, if the new alignment system "killed your CN rogue" then you don't know how to roleplay. You're still fully able to roleplay all of the same personalities and moralities that you played before, you might just have a different name for them now, and there won't be magic circles against your moral choices anymore.

 

[Vanuslux]

Yeah...it's not a big deal, but that's one change I found rather unappealing. I would have much rather them use the DDM alignments (LG, CG, LE, CE) along with unaligned than the ones they went with. I don't like the implication that Chaotic = Evil and Lawful = Good.

 

[MrGrenadine]

I for one love the old alignment system--its robust, clear, and makes sense to me. I know some folks don't like it, but I personally never got confused by the shades of gray, never felt straightjacketed by it, and never used it as a RP crutch. As far as I'm concerned, alignment is quick and dirty shorthand for describing what a character *might* do in the future based on what he or she has done in the past. Not necessary by any means, but not in the way at all, either.

Anyway, I'm still waiting on my books, but the descriptions in the WotC preview posted not too long ago suggest that CG and NG are now G, and NE and LE are now E. (What happened to CN and LN, who knows?) Anyway, the new system just seems illogical to me--if you're going to acknowledge that preferences for Law and Chaos can flavor preferences for Good and Evil, you can't just arbitrarily say that Lawful can only be Good, and Chaotic only Evil. Well, you *can*...but IMO, you shouldn't.

Bottom line--I don't care what the Core books say in 4e, 5e, or 147e. I'm gonna roll up a rogue, put CG down as his alignment, and play him that way.

MrG

 

[Philodox00]

I for one love the old alignment system--its robust, clear, and makes sense to me. I know some folks don't like it, but I personally never got confused by the shades of gray, never felt straightjacketed by it, and never used it as a RP crutch. As far as I'm concerned, alignment is quick and dirty shorthand for describing what a character *might* do in the future based on what he or she has done in the past. Not necessary by any means, but not in the way at all, either.

..snip..

Likewise.

What I plan on doing is just modifying it a bit. I'm keeping Lawful Good and replacing Good with Chaotic Good. I don't like the sound of "unaligned", so I'll just swap that out with "Neutral". I'll keep Chaotic Evil and replace Evil with Lawful Evil.

I consider it a compromise, but since it has zero effect on mechanics and I'm merely calling one thing, something else, I shouldn't get any peeps of protests from my players.

Some cows, I wanna keep in the pasture.

 

[blargney the second]

I actually kind of enjoy it. It feels like a nod back at BECMI's Lawful, Neutral, Chaotic system.