PDA

View Full Version : What do you think of the alignment system?



taltamir
2009-10-09, 09:44 PM
Do you like the alignment system?
Do you think it contributes to the game?
Do you wish it was gone?
Did you modify it?

WOTC seems to have progressively cut down alignment with every iteration, yet refuses to let it die completely. Back in the day changing alignment meant severe XP penalties, then that was removed, later alignment restricted your classes, and chaos and law mattered less...
Finally in 4e alignment was reduced further into 5 types, but reinforced the notion that chaos is evil and lawful is good...

So what do you think of alignment?

Temet Nosce
2009-10-09, 09:48 PM
Do you like the alignment system?
Do you think it contributes to the game?
Do you wish it was gone?
Did you modify it?

So what do you think of alignment?

In order...

No
No
Yes
Kind of (I de-emphasize it generally)

I think it's a misbegotten hash of a system which does an incredibly poor job of attempting to mechanically simulate morals in D&D and fails to even maintain an even tone in regards to what each alignment represents. Forget something as difficult as having a clear definition for each alignment.

arguskos
2009-10-09, 09:50 PM
I enjoy the detailed interactions of the 9 alignments to one another. I love the way Spelljammer described them as philosophical ways of thinking, not just ways to define your actions.

So, by your metric,
Yes I like it.
If well reasoned, yes.
No, I don't want it removed.
No, I don't modify it.

BobVosh
2009-10-09, 09:55 PM
Do you like the alignment system?
Do you think it contributes to the game?
Do you wish it was gone?
Did you modify it?

No
Yes
Ish
Too lazy to

I like the concept, but hate the implementation.

oxybe
2009-10-09, 09:58 PM
Do you like the alignment system?
Do you think it contributes to the game?
Do you wish it was gone?
Did you modify it?


nope.
not anymore then fleshing out the character would.
yes.
does not touching it and ignoring it completely count as modifying?

sonofzeal
2009-10-09, 10:02 PM
My variant is a 5 point scale instead of 3, on both axis. Adding "Vile", "Exalted", "Anarchic", and "Axiomatic" makes it a whole lot more expressive and reasonable. Now your average merchant who overprices his stuff isn't the same as a Balor! Yay!


In general, the problem is just that people take the categories as absolutes rather than sliding scales, when even a trivial examination would show that sliding scales are far more reasonable. Keep that in mind, and you're good.

Tavar
2009-10-09, 10:04 PM
One problem is that Law and Chaos aren't defined at all. The same actions with the same intent behind them can be labeled as either one. Plus, alot of people play the Stupid Alignments. you know who I'm talking about, the Chaotic Crazy, Chaotic Stupid, Lawful Stupid, Lawful A******e, Evil Stupid, Etc. Really, I'm always tempted to just drop it, as it doesn't really add to the game.

Tiktakkat
2009-10-09, 10:08 PM
Yes.
Yes.
No.
No.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-10-09, 10:09 PM
Do you like the alignment system?
Do you think it contributes to the game?
Do you wish it was gone?
Did you modify it?

WOTC seems to have progressively cut down alignment with every iteration, yet refuses to let it die completely. Back in the day changing alignment meant severe XP penalties, then that was removed, later alignment restricted your classes, and chaos and law mattered less...
Finally in 4e alignment was reduced further into 5 types, but reinforced the notion that chaos is evil and lawful is good...

So what do you think of alignment?

Is it that time of month again?

taltamir
2009-10-09, 10:24 PM
Is it that time of month again?

I don't understand...

Tavar
2009-10-09, 10:26 PM
I don't understand...

We regularly get thread like this. Maybe not once per month, but often none the less.

arguskos
2009-10-09, 10:26 PM
I don't understand...
These threads seem to crop up like clockwork around here, just like Edition Wars threads do too.

Ninja'd by about 5 seconds. :smallsigh: I was so quick too...

Thajocoth
2009-10-09, 10:27 PM
We use it, but modify it to cover 9 alignments instead of 5. Some PCs use it, that is... None of the DMs do. For a Divine character, I would, personally, remind them of their deity's alignment if they started to stray, but it's never come up.

Ozymandias9
2009-10-09, 10:33 PM
I find that the bi-axial alignment system interesting. It can be particularly useful in a lot of games. But it can also be particularly detrimental to the table: not everyone has the same concepts of morality.

While you can generally refit the basic moral assumptions of the system (Objectivism and Ontological Empiricism) without too much effort, you can't do the same with the players' moral beliefs. When you have a Divine Command Objectivist and a Societal Relativist at the same table, it can cause issues.


I don't understand...

Its a common question in any D&D centric forum, especially this one.

arguskos
2009-10-09, 10:35 PM
I find that the bi-axial alignment system interesting. It can be particularly useful in a lot of games. But it can also be particularly detrimental to the table: not everyone has the same concepts of morality.

While you can generally refit the basic moral assumptions of the system (Objectivism and Ontological Empiricism) without too much effort, you can't do the same with the player's moral beliefs. When you have a Divine Command Objectivist and a Societal Relativist at the same table, it can cause issues.
This is actually easily solved if you have a party willing to hammer out definitions for each alignment that they all can agree on. Yes, people will have to make sacrifices, and no, not everyone will love everything, but, many issues can be solved by discussing what each of the 9 alignments means before the game begins. Really, it works.

I would use this with my own group, but I tend to just sorta gloss over it, and go by the book. It's faster and easier that way (with my group in particular).

RandomNPC
2009-10-09, 10:36 PM
ok, so lets say there's a purse snatcher who steals an old ladys purse and starts running. Slaming a mace into this persons face, then giving the purse back to the old lady is:
A) Lawfull Evil, for punishing the lawbreaker in such an evil way.
B) Chaotic Good, for getting the purse back nomatter what.
C)Chaotic Evil, I got to hit a guy, and gave the purse back because i'm random like that.
D) Lawfull Good) Pally smite, then return belongings.

I would accept any of these depending on how the character was played previously, however C comes really close to me asking them to leave the game.

Kylarra
2009-10-09, 10:38 PM
You're just all over explosive topics today aren't you?

On topic,

I don't particularly like the alignment system, but as long as it's used as a guideline for creation/personality rather than a mechanical straitjacket it isn't too bad.

arguskos
2009-10-09, 10:40 PM
I don't particularly like the alignment system, but as long as it's used as a guideline for creation/personality rather than a mechanical straitjacket it isn't too bad.
See, this is what it was always MEANT to be. Alignment, as defined by the older editions where it mattered more (and esp Planescape) is a way of thinking about the world, not something that straitjackets you into a course of action.

Roland St. Jude
2009-10-09, 10:58 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: This seems to be one of a number of threads attempting to stir up a flame war. This topic has been done over and over and while I'm sure it will come up again, hopefully the OP then will have some point in raising it so that the discussion can be had in the context of, well, something.