[d&d] How do aligments work?

[neosisani]

Simple question: Who is good, and who is evil? Is killing good? Is killing Asmodeus good? Is torture good? Is torturing BigBunny good?

I define good as selfless, one who will do anything (even kill) for others. On the other hand evil, need not do anything bad, do be evil, he just needs to be selfish.

Still i have problem on Law vs Chaos axis?

So, how do you define law, good, chaos, evil?

Neosisani

[Inevitable]

I always tried to skip meditating on d&d's whole idiotic concept of alignments.

Good characters are those in whos actions virtues like compassion, friendship, love, generosity etc. are dominant. When theyre faced with hard decisions theyll put goodwill of others in front of their own.

Evil characters are those who center on flaws like greed, hate, lust and everything else that would make one good christian wrinkle his nose in disgust ;} This kind of characters wont give thought to others feelings, goodwill etc and will have only their own profit in mind. Now this is not set in stone, there are exceptions of course.

Law and Chaos is what defines appropriate decisions of their alignment. So lawful characters are those who will usually suggest solving a problem traditionally, by the book, while chaotic characters will try doing things their way, taking some different, usually untraditional, kind of approach.

Im not sure how well works this theory of mine, but in a nutshell Chaotic characters are more free of mind in a way, while lawful characters rely on existant ways.

Well...thats how i understand it.

Oh and while torturing BigBunny may not be the most virtous thing in the world, it sure is fun :P

[UncleDave]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I dont like (A)D&D's alignment system. In fact I think having a 'system' to dictate your characters motivations is inherently stupid. It is a leftover from the transition from wargames to roleplaying games that D&D represented: A quick way for players to codify their loyalties and then set it aside and get on with the more important activities of hacking and slashing.

If you're interested in a hack and slash game, by all means use the alignment system, although frankly I think you could just as easily do without it. If, however, you're more interested in social gaming, the alignments are too restrictive, too simplistic, and generally largely useless as anything other than an extremely rough yardstick.

I think you're better off picking one or two words to describe your character's most important points. Instead of being 'Lawful Good', just write that your character is 'compassionate' but 'retentive'. It tells you more about your character, in just as many words.

thats my 2cp anyway.

Cheers!

[BigBunny]

I too am fierce opponent to the aligment system.

I think its totally useless.

People ( characters ) change, they act differently on situations and how something like 'Evil' is viewed is just stupid. People just in different cultures have totally different views about it. Just consider how a suicide bomber is viewed in random .eu country and in Palestine.

[zergnase]

yep this aligment thingy is in D&D not one of the best aspects

for some spells it is needed (holy, unholy word etc), if you are going to skip the aligment, make sure to tell your players how you will handle those

[Inevitable]

Well the problem is that Alignments system is one of the core aspects of the system. It can be changed but its rather painful, due to crapload of magical effects, creatures, gods, etc. that need to be changed too...

Im not saying it cant be done, just that its not worth it.

[neosisani]

Dave, however, then i will have problem with casting protection from "Compassionate but fearful". So, i'm thinking how to adapt adjectives into 5 meaningless words (good, neutral, evil, chaotic, lawful).

Neosisani

[UncleDave]

I thought the new edition had categories of beings like 'outsider' and stuff? "Protection from evil" would just be the church's name for spells that ward off demons and undead and related types of magic, that'd be my take on it anyhow.

Cheers!

[BoosterDK]

I know it's an old post, but I just stumbled upon it

I would say that the alignment system does have some pointers. For one it simplifies the whole moral and ethics concept into a few boxes. For some good, neutral and evil would be enough, others like the whole law vs. chaos concept.

For me, and some of the ppl I play with, the system serves as a guideline for the players. Their char description usually handles all the subleties (I ain't no spelling bee ), quirks and what not. So when a moral or ethical question arises the chars usually act out of some combination on background and alignment.

As to the meaning of it all, someone earlier hit the good vs. evil dead on. Virtues vs. Flaws. It doesn't have to be black and white. evil people can still be compassionate, and good people can still be a little greedy. Usually people have a pretty good idea about these concepts

Law vs. Chaos is a little more though (for me)
In a world of conflict like the Warhammer settings, Law/Chaos is as much as an alligiance as it is a mental guideline. Here smite alignment and Law/Chaos aligned items make sense.

For more nuanced settings I see the law vs. chaos more as a personal demeanor. The well organised type vs. free spirited treehugging hippie (I tend to play one of those darned treehuggin' hippies ).

Some of my friends see it as political/social marker. Laws and Beaucracy of sentient and "civilised" nations/kingdoms vs. the more chaotic ways of tribes/loners/beasts and Survival of the fittest (which is sort of a law but don't dwell on that ).
The whole concept of Entrophy could also be dragged into this, but the discussion would vary a whole lot between gaming groups. ( In my case one of my groups is blue-collar/service sector jobs vs. the other consisting of engineers and one computer programmer )

Just my two cents ... and ... pocket lint ...

[tauknight]

I agree with everyone who says D&D's alignment system is bad - its intentionally like that. Its only there to oversimplify the deep topic of ethics, morals, philosophies etc for kiddies.