What Alignment system do you use now?
- Thread starter weem
- Start date
Aus_Snow
First Post
Since others are ignoring the 4e prefix (oh noes!) 
I might as well too. . .
The whole nineyards alignments. This is for house ruled 3e. Also, like the Prof, these alignments mean something, above and beyond the personal level. They are cosmic forces, directly and indirectly affecting lives in every plane of existence.
I might as well too. . .The whole nine
Dragonhelm
Knight of Solamnia
I use the traditional 9-alignment system. I don't feel that the 4e system is fully descriptive enough.
Most of my games are Dragonlance games. One of Dragonlance's big themes is the Balance between Good, Neutrality, and Evil. This concept fascinates me, as the good guys don't always win. Neutrality and Unaligned, as many point out, are not the same beast. It seems odd to me that from a 4e standpoint, you have the LG alignment for the Knights of Solamnia, but their counterpart, the Knights of Takhisis, are just Evil.
Two of Dragonlance's gods, Shinare (LN) and Sirrion (CN), are a couple. That dichotomy of alignments in their relationship is highly understated if they're just Unaligned.
And though Dragonlance is mainly about the struggle between Good and Evil with Neutrality in between, there is a secondary theme of Law/Order (High God) vs. Chaos (Chaos).
Can Dragonlance be run with 4e's alignment system? Sure. I just think you'll miss out on some of Dragonlance's finer points in the process.
Like many here, I prefer that alignment not be tied to mechanics. It's a nice, traditional flavor piece. I see it as a guideline rather than some hard-and-fast rule on how to roleplay.
Agreed. There are times when a LG and CG character might butt heads, kinda like Superman and Batman. Then there are times when your LG and LE characters might fight together on the same side due to a common affiliation or due to honor.
I've never used this system, but it strikes me as something different. So in this system, does Law = Good and Chaos = Evil, or is it literally order vs. chaos?
Oriental Adventures 3e had this nifty rule in it that was kind of an alignment system. It dealt more with your social station, IIRC. I thought that was a nifty flavor piece for OA games.
You know, I hope that maybe the next PHB will present alternative alignment systems, including the traditional 9-alignment and the OD&D 3 alignment systems, amongst others. The Great Wheel was provided as an alternate cosmology section already, so why not? Let's show some more customization options.
Most of my games are Dragonlance games. One of Dragonlance's big themes is the Balance between Good, Neutrality, and Evil. This concept fascinates me, as the good guys don't always win. Neutrality and Unaligned, as many point out, are not the same beast. It seems odd to me that from a 4e standpoint, you have the LG alignment for the Knights of Solamnia, but their counterpart, the Knights of Takhisis, are just Evil.
Two of Dragonlance's gods, Shinare (LN) and Sirrion (CN), are a couple. That dichotomy of alignments in their relationship is highly understated if they're just Unaligned.
And though Dragonlance is mainly about the struggle between Good and Evil with Neutrality in between, there is a secondary theme of Law/Order (High God) vs. Chaos (Chaos).
Can Dragonlance be run with 4e's alignment system? Sure. I just think you'll miss out on some of Dragonlance's finer points in the process.
Like many here, I prefer that alignment not be tied to mechanics. It's a nice, traditional flavor piece. I see it as a guideline rather than some hard-and-fast rule on how to roleplay.
Agreed. There are times when a LG and CG character might butt heads, kinda like Superman and Batman. Then there are times when your LG and LE characters might fight together on the same side due to a common affiliation or due to honor.
I've never used this system, but it strikes me as something different. So in this system, does Law = Good and Chaos = Evil, or is it literally order vs. chaos?
Oriental Adventures 3e had this nifty rule in it that was kind of an alignment system. It dealt more with your social station, IIRC. I thought that was a nifty flavor piece for OA games.
You know, I hope that maybe the next PHB will present alternative alignment systems, including the traditional 9-alignment and the OD&D 3 alignment systems, amongst others. The Great Wheel was provided as an alternate cosmology section already, so why not? Let's show some more customization options.
malkav666
First Post
I use the 9 point system when I run my 3.x/PF games. Often I find myself frowning on the do as you want alignments (like CN). But I realize that is just a personal preference.
I am not big on policing the characters to make sure they act within their alignments. I use a sliding scale and just slowly change their alignments to reflect how they are playing over time (it is inspired from a system I saw in a 2e source..The Dragonlance adventures I believe, minus the exp loss for transition).
One of the coolest ideas I have seen in play dealing with alignments for D&D comes from one of the groups I play a monthly game in. She uses a houseruled system based on the OWOD Humanity system. Basically an evil transgression (with what is considered evil depending on what your humanity score is) will provoke a will save with a DC of 10+ your current humanity score+ situational modifers DC save (making it easier to lose the first few points but harder to lose the last few). It actually worked VERY well in play. She even had some sort of inverse system in place for regaining humanity. And just like in OWOD when your score reached zero the character became an NPC.
I have also played in games with no alignment at all. It really just depends on who is running the game and what kind of story they are trying to tell IMO.
love,
malkav
I am not big on policing the characters to make sure they act within their alignments. I use a sliding scale and just slowly change their alignments to reflect how they are playing over time (it is inspired from a system I saw in a 2e source..The Dragonlance adventures I believe, minus the exp loss for transition).
One of the coolest ideas I have seen in play dealing with alignments for D&D comes from one of the groups I play a monthly game in. She uses a houseruled system based on the OWOD Humanity system. Basically an evil transgression (with what is considered evil depending on what your humanity score is) will provoke a will save with a DC of 10+ your current humanity score+ situational modifers DC save (making it easier to lose the first few points but harder to lose the last few). It actually worked VERY well in play. She even had some sort of inverse system in place for regaining humanity. And just like in OWOD when your score reached zero the character became an NPC.
I have also played in games with no alignment at all. It really just depends on who is running the game and what kind of story they are trying to tell IMO.
love,
malkav
amysrevenge
First Post
I think what folks are saying here (at least it's what I'm saying and how I understand the others) is that you can still have this dichotomy under the Unaligned umbrella. If one of them acts in a way consistent with the old description of LN, and the other with CN, then the conflict is still there, even if both say Unaligned next to their names.
In my games, people are aligned with factions rather than abstract moralities on a good-evil, law-chaos grid. If you serve the Temple of Elemental Evil than you act how someone who worships elemental evil and abyssal powers would act. If you are aligned with the church of Bahumut, you follow the edicts of that church. People still act according to an ethos, or code of ethics, but it isn't categorized by the D&D alignment system. Since 4e doesn't have alignment as any part of the game mechanics, it was easy enough to chuck it out entirely.
I think Dragonlance can still be played fine with the 5 alignment system instead of the 9, there are just more shades of grey. The Knights of Takhisis are LE as opposed to LG, but a)they came along much later in the canon and b)now there is no descriptor needed for them, nopne of this Lawful Evil. They are just plain EVIL! This actually works well IMO.
While Takhisis wants to rule among the gods, she also knows that true chaos was something that had to be stopped. Remember that all the gods teamed up to defeat Chaos originally.
There are many shades of evil. Chaotic Evil feels like it is reserved for the mad, lashing out at everyone, wants to destroy for the sake of destruction kind of malice, not your everyday backstabbing and skullduggery. Few people in life go to true extremes, this is why we see such large percentages in Unaligned, followed by Good an Evil. The Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil factions are true extremists and not representatve of the whole.
Paladine knew that what was being done with Raistlin was rough and Raistlin was clearly not doing things in a way that lined up with Paladine's preferences, but he realized that good was being wrought by his actions in the end. Really the biggest lesson from DL seems to be "the ends justify the means".
howandwhy99
Adventurer
Good and Evil are not used as a default system in OD&D, but can be included as long as they don't interfere with the Alignment relationship map. This is primarily because moralities vary widely while order and chaos are regarded as universally guessable concepts.I've never used this system, but it strikes me as something different. So in this system, does Law = Good and Chaos = Evil, or is it literally order vs. chaos?
Oriental Adventures 3e had this nifty rule in it that was kind of an alignment system. It dealt more with your social station, IIRC. I thought that was a nifty flavor piece for OA games.
You know, I hope that maybe the next PHB will present alternative alignment systems, including the traditional 9-alignment and the OD&D 3 alignment systems, amongst others. The Great Wheel was provided as an alternate cosmology section already, so why not? Let's show some more customization options.
Neither are Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral alignments "play your character this way" admonitions in OD&D, but rather team designations like Red team, Blue team. Depending on one's behavior a PC or NPC can be kicked off a team or join the opposing team. Think of it as a 2-player game of Risk. Two teams are opposed on the board, but a neutral, primarily inactive set of troops in a third color populate the map as well. In Risk, these only defend and never attack. In OD&D they generally behave the same way, but can also be hirelings or henchmen to either side with Loyalty scores, Morale, and other factors adding into their behavior during play.
The alignment descriptor (e.g. lawful, chaotic) does hint at the likely tactics of NPCs who are on those teams, but alignment and its description is never a restraint on PCs or Players' choices. Players must be capable of attempting any action they desire or I don't think OD&D could rightly be called a game. As such there is no such thing as "playing your character wrong" by a Player.
As you say, it would be nice to see previous alignment rules brought back into D&D. By my reading I think 4E's currently published version of alignment has no mechanical ramifications at all on the game. I may be wrong though as I haven't read all the books on the game. But bringing back Alignment and Attitude tracking would help immensely in returning at least one element of the core game rules of previous versions of D&D. Game Turns, time tracking, scenario determination, and campaign world as dungeon design could actually make D&D a strategy game again, but I'm not holding my breath for those either.
Last edited:
If I may ask, what is the point of having an alignment system if it doesn't impact the game?
Similar Threads
