D&D General Which edition handled alignment best?

[Minigiant]

So what. That's meaningless.

If I don't have the monster, I can't use it

No in my experience. I've used and been in games where they have been used quite often. I've also seen them mentioned here a fair amount

I almost never see Slaadi ran. Just referenced.

Inevitables, in my experience yes. Modrons are popular from what I've seen on forums. I personally don't like them because walking shapes are too silly. However, a lot of folks online like them and talk about the Great Modron Race as a good thing.

Again. I almost never see modrons ran outside of WOTC IP washing or random forced quirkiness.

False. They have distinct differences. They are no more barely distinguishable outside of a heavy RP session than any other alignment

They have distinguishable differences.

Again my point is until you are heavily roleplaying, the differences don't really come up.

Organized crime is far more common than either one of those in my experience. Thieves guilds are all over the place.

Must be my luck.

I haven't run into a LE organized crime ring as a player in decades. It's more often me as a DM and the situation surpassing simple LE alignment.

 

[Mannahnin]

I prefer a single axis alignment system reflecting cosmological factions. Keeps it simple. That's why B/X and 4e win for me.

Same.

Alternatively, The Nightmares Underneath does a fun job of reconceptualizing alignment, as it does with so many other D&D systems.

 

[SkidAce]

1990's Rifts Alignment

 

[Minigiant]

I think my problem with alignment is that it both feels half done cosmically and badly done on a more mortal scale.
it should be clearer what the four poles even are.

In my opinion modrons and slaadi are the lamest and least sensible complements for law and chaos in a dungeon grinding game.

 

[Mannahnin]

1990's Rifts Alignment

Those ones were, as I recall, universal through the Palladium games. Thanks for the reminder. In contrast to a lot of their other designs, I think these did a superior job explaining the ethical/moral/behavioral side of alignment as characterization compared to AD&D.

 

[Nikosandros]

For me, the best version by far, is AD&D 1e (yes, that includes alignment languages). 5e, IMHO, is the worst version and, for that reason, I never use alignment in 5e at all. As a descriptor I find it useless.

 

[Clint_L]

To drill down a bit: the big thing PS did was it made monsters into characters first. Those monsters included, for instance, fiends. Any D&D player can tell you that fiends are always evil...

Not mine, and not even in 5e in general, where all fiends are not listed as "evil."

 

[Clint_L]

View attachment 401289

View attachment 401290
1990's Rifts Alignment

So this is a list of virtues ethics. Which really is a more clearly explained example of what D&D already did. My issues with alignment are just as strong here as in any other version: real people are more complicated. For example, attacking and killing an unarmed foe is here listed amongst "diabolical" traits, but it is not difficult to come up with scenarios where we feel that attacking and killing an unarmed foe would be entirely morally justified by most people's standards.

 

[Mannahnin]

So this is a list of virtues ethics. Which really is a more clearly explained example of what D&D already did. My issues with alignment are just as strong here as in any other version: real people are more complicated. For example, attacking and killing an unarmed foe is here listed amongst "diabolical" traits, but it is not difficult to come up with scenarios where we feel that attacking and killing an unarmed foe would be entirely morally justified by most people's standards.

True. And this is, I think, why folks who use alignment often emphasize that it's important for is to be DEscriptive rather than PROscriptive. To be tool to guide roleplaying, rather than a set of shackles.

I do think there's something kind of neat and of possible value in how OD&D and AD&D connected it to metaphysics and external forces, though. Like with the (dis)ability of a Paladin to fall and lose their powers by not living up to their principles.

 

[Nikosandros]

True. And this is, I think, why folks who use alignment often emphasize that it's important for is to be DEscriptive rather than PROscriptive. To be tool to guide roleplaying, rather than a set of shackles.

I do think there's something kind of neat and of possible value in how OD&D and AD&D connected it to metaphysics and external forces, though. Like with the (dis)ability of a Paladin to fall and lose their powers by not living up to their principles.

Personally, I find the descriptive version of alignment completely useless. As a descriptor it is very weak. Alignment must have cosmological and rules oomph or I'd rather not use it.