D&D 4E Would you have alignment in 4e?

[MerricB]

The responses I'm getting on my alignment mechanics thread are leading me to think that perhaps 4e should lose alignment altogether - people don't want it.

(Quite frankly, if there is no game mechanical reason for alignment to exist, then it should be gone).

Personally, I'd hate to see alignment go. I think it's a great tool - not for restricting player actions, but for giving meaning to the game as part of a struggle between good and evil (or law and chaos).

Cheers!

 

[Crothian]

Yes, the base game is better with them.

 

[Nifft]

Poor question, I refuse to vote!

There should be some sort of faction / taint / "mark" mechanics, but alignment itself should not be it.

-- N

 

[twofalls]

Alignment is a D&D flavor item. I think its an interesting roleplaying guide, and assists in creating the black and white Hero/Anti hero roles that flavor so much of the game. You can play the game without it, and you can argue that the game would be more "realistic" if they didn't exist... However its a weak argument to scream about the fact that your Lawful Neutral wizard shouldn't be penalized xp for breaking the law again after casting that FIREBALL...

Alignments are a D&D convention, keep them.

 

[MerricB]

Poor question, I refuse to vote!

There should be some sort of faction / taint / "mark" mechanics, but alignment itself should not be it.

-- N

That seems to be a pretty clear "No" to me, and you've suggested an alternative in your post.

 

[Nifft]

That seems to be a pretty clear "No" to me, and you've suggested an alternative in your post.

NO! I demand to be heard saying "sorta"!

-- N

 

[MerricB]

NO!

See how easy it is.

Cheers!

 

[comrade raoul]

I'd have alignment, but include variant rules in the DMG for playing without it. I think I'd move away from the increasing importance placed on alignments you see in the BoED or Magic of Incarnum, though, and try to emphasize moral complexity and ambiguity.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

No, except as an optional rule.

Personally, I'd hate to see alignment go. I think it's a great tool - not for restricting player actions, but for giving meaning to the game as part of a struggle between good and evil (or law and chaos).

Plenty of campaigns aren't based on the struggle about good vs evil, however. Sure the PCs are heroes, but sometimes they're more interested in victory for an ideal, nation, their own pocketbook, etc than in the struggle of good vs evil.

 

[Umbran]

I'd say yes, it should be there. The world has many games that don't have moral guidelines, so there's room for one that does. Just don't integrate it any more tightly in teh core rules than what we have currently.

As it is, alignment isn't terribly difficult to remove from the game should the DM so choose. And should the DM want more, it is far easier for them to work with a foundation than to have to craft it anew from whole cloth. Thus, something akin to what's already there is a reasonably happy medium.