Defense of Paladins: feedback please?

354 posts / 0 new
Last post
But the mechanics that used to go with it have been wiped. And good riddance.
Back to Basics - A Guide to Basic Attacks You might be playing DnD wrong if... "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Alignment is going to stay, because you know tradition. 

Yeah, we know. Fourth Edition showed Wizards that making a good, balanced game isn't enough. They have to kowtow to tradition, or the fanbase will make them regret it. Now they're trying to build their new game by committee, and intend to make it modular so everyone can get support for what they want. I don't envy the position they're in, and I wouldn't be surprised if they wind up pulling the plug on the new edition in three years when it's horribly behind schedule due to the impossible task of both fixing flaws and sticking with tradition.

If I have to ask the GM for it, then I don't want it.

Alignment is going to stay, because you know tradition. 

Yeah, we know. Fourth Edition showed Wizards that making a good, balanced game isn't enough. They have to kowtow to tradition, or the fanbase will make them regret it. Now they're trying to build their new game by committee, and intend to make it modular so everyone can get support for what they want. I don't envy the position they're in, and I wouldn't be surprised if they wind up pulling the plug on the new edition in three years when it's horribly behind schedule due to the impossible task of both fixing flaws and sticking with tradition.




I already made 5th edition my favorite. Once it comes out, I wont touch the other editions and 
forget that 4th edition ever exist. 

5e got my full support, because I got high hopes for it. 

Alignment is going to stay, because you know tradition. 

Yeah, we know. Fourth Edition showed Wizards that making a good, balanced game isn't enough. They have to kowtow to tradition, or the fanbase will make them regret it. Now they're trying to build their new game by committee, and intend to make it modular so everyone can get support for what they want. I don't envy the position they're in, and I wouldn't be surprised if they wind up pulling the plug on the new edition in three years when it's horribly behind schedule due to the impossible task of both fixing flaws and sticking with tradition.

I already made 5th edition my favorite. Once it comes out, I wont touch the other editions and 
forget that 4th edition ever exist. 

5e got my full support, because I got high hopes for it.

Ah, hope. What would the geek community be without it? Happy, I suppose.

If I have to ask the GM for it, then I don't want it.

The devs have said that alignment mechanics won't be in 5e either.
Alignment is going to stay, because you know tradition. 



Alignment is going to stay, because you know tradition. 

Yeah, we know. Fourth Edition showed Wizards that making a good, balanced game isn't enough. They have to kowtow to tradition, or the fanbase will make them regret it. Now they're trying to build their new game by committee, and intend to make it modular so everyone can get support for what they want. I don't envy the position they're in, and I wouldn't be surprised if they wind up pulling the plug on the new edition in three years when it's horribly behind schedule due to the impossible task of both fixing flaws and sticking with tradition.




I already made 5th edition my favorite. Once it comes out, I wont touch the other editions and 
forget that 4th edition ever exist. 

5e got my full support, because I got high hopes for it. 




The devs have said that alignment mechanics won't be in 5e either.



**adds salt to popcorn**
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
*Sips his tea and raises his hand*

I still advocate a subjective evil in regards to spellcasting, but removal in every other sense.  By that I mean alignment-based spells still exist for spells and such (e.g. Smite Evil), but it would be those that the one granting the power considers evil.  That means it may work against a lawbreaker (in the eyes of St. Cuthbert), but not against the tyrant who has legally risen to power (again, in the eyes of St. Cuthbert). 

It should have no place determining class availability or features (although I still believe in a cut-and-dry Paladin's Code with Greater Good Exception (e.g. sacrificing an innocent to save a village when all other options are exhausted.  Not to be confused with racketeering for personal gain in his quest or something similar)).  Alignment is definitely an old mechanic that should be removed--it is too subjective for actual alignment purposes (e.g. the Troll vs. the Wolf.  They both kill a man to eat--why is the Troll evil?)   
(e.g. the Troll vs. the Wolf.  They both kill a man to eat--why is the Troll evil?)   

One might say because the troll is a reasoning creature, and no more needs to eat humans than other humans do. But taboos against eating other intelligent creatures are likely to involve a fair amount of interpretation anyway.

But, yeah, alignment is relative, and poorly written. Groups can make it work, but the same can be said for any other aspect of the game. It's time to change it. Unfortunately, it's not likely to change, so it's time to houserule it, or get rid of it.

If I have to ask the GM for it, then I don't want it.

*Sips his tea and raises his hand*

I still advocate a subjective evil in regards to spellcasting, but removal in every other sense.  By that I mean alignment-based spells still exist for spells and such (e.g. Smite Evil), but it would be those that the one granting the power considers evil.  That means it may work against a lawbreaker (in the eyes of St. Cuthbert), but not against the tyrant who has legally risen to power (again, in the eyes of St. Cuthbert).  



This still puts a bit too much 'DM subjectivity' into it for me.
This still puts a bit too much 'DM subjectivity' into it for me.



So this means you support alignments? 

This still puts a bit too much 'DM subjectivity' into it for me.



So this means you support alignments? 




This looks like he pretty clearly says he does not support the partial pro-alignment post he is quoting.  But nice try
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
NOTE: None of Mr Customer's valid points in his intelligent, articulate post have been addressed. At all.

Because they're correct. And one cannot argue againts them.

Oh..well Fardiz tried and invoked two clearly incorrect things.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

NOTE: None of Mr Customer's valid points in his intelligent, articulate post have been addressed. At all.

Because they're correct. And one cannot argue againts them.

Oh..well Fardiz tried and invoked two clearly incorrect things.



His points are similar to the same old same old.  If I thought actually arguing against them would  do anything for changing minds such as yours and crows i'd give it a go.  Cause the arguments against his points are easily made.

The problem is that all those arguments have been made.  The burden doesn't really always fall on one side if two sides are represented.

The main example being this argument in 3e.  The status quo was that alignment based spells existed.  So in order to go for change the argument had to be made that these alignment mechanics were not good in order for there to be change away from it.  In this situation, the burden is on the "anti-alignment" side.

Since 4e and the break from "alignment as mechanics", which is what the core of this argument is about, you don't have a ready base to work from.  Instead you have two sides and the burden of argument is on both sides.  Or, if you are of the mindset that 4e represents a furthering of the game from 3e, what you have is the inverse effect.  If arguing in the 4e mindset alignment doesn't exist in mechanical form and so you have to make the argument for why it should exist.

The key here is that it is nobody's responsibility to phrase things that have already been presented in a way that you like.  Especially if you are so entrenched on your own side that "what you like" is for people to agree with your "sagely" advice.  Have his comments been directly rebuffed?  No.  Have they been indirectly rebuffed by the rest of the thread? Yes.  It's no ailing of anybody here to want to gather the information, rephrase it and present it to him.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
stuff



Huh what?

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

stuff



Huh what?



Basically "He talk directly to me" is not a lack of response to issues.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
stuff



Huh what?



Basically "He talk directly to me" is not a lack of response to issues.



Also no one ever bothers to address the fact that peoples ACTUAL issue with alignment always occur when they fail to realize the objective nature of Good & Evil in the game.

That is universally the case as far as I've seen. It's also pretty much the starting point of every argument I've seen regarding alignment. One side (typically anti-alignment) are immediately wrong because they don't even start from a correct premise...they start with the faulty notion that Good & Evil are subjective somehow in the game world when they clearly never have been.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

stuff



Huh what?



Basically "He talk directly to me" is not a lack of response to issues.



Also no one ever bothers to address the fact that peoples ACTUAL issue with alignment always occur when they fail to realize the objective nature of Good & Evil in the game.

That is universally the case as far as I've seen. It's also pretty much the starting point of every argument I've seen regarding alignment. One side (typically anti-alignment) are immediately wrong because they don't even start from a correct premise...they start with the faulty notion that Good & Evil are subjective somehow in the game world when they clearly never have been.



Except that Good and Evil are subjective.   It might be easier to make an argument off the inverse, or easier to base your decisions on the inverse, but it also is untrue.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Except that good and Evil are subjective.   It might be easier to make an argument off the inverse, or easier to base your decisions on the inverse, but it also is untrue. 



You're pretty much clearly wrong. I mean you might as well argue that magic in the game isn't divided into schools that's how fundamentally misinformed you are.

Here I'll prove it...in-game is Orcus labeled as Evil? If so, then Evil cannot be subjective as the game has DEFINITIVELY labeled something as Evil. If Evil were subjective this would be impossible.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Except that good and Evil are subjective.   It might be easier to make an argument off the inverse, or easier to base your decisions on the inverse, but it also is untrue. 



You're pretty much clearly wrong. I mean you might as well argue that magic in the game isn't divided into schools that's how fundamentally misinformed you are.

Here I'll prove it...in-game is Orcus labeled as Evil? If so, then Evil cannot be subjective as the game has DEFINITIVELY labeled something as Evil. If Evil were subjective this would be impossible.



Using subjective descriptors for things with no mechanical meaning isn't difficult or impossible.

If the rules called one character "beautiful" that doesn't mean it is objectively pretty.  It means from the perspective of the descriptor it is beautiful. 
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here


Using subjective descriptors for things with no mechanical meaning isn't difficult or impossible.

If the rules called one character "beautiful" that doesn't mean it is objectively pretty.  It means from the perspective of the descriptor it is beautiful. 



If there were codified rules for Beauty then yes, it absolutely would. That there are not rules for such a thing nor labels for them probably means that they are subjective. Just guessing.

However, since there ARE rules and labels for Good & Evil it's probably safe to say they're hard-coded and objective. Care to point to any other parts of STATBLOCKS of monsters that are subjective? After all, Orcus being evil is part of his STATS not a part of his flavor text.

So, again, you're wrong. Obviously wrong.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.



Using subjective descriptors for things with no mechanical meaning isn't difficult or impossible.

If the rules called one character "beautiful" that doesn't mean it is objectively pretty.  It means from the perspective of the descriptor it is beautiful. 



If there were codified rules for Beauty then yes, it absolutely would. That there are not rules for such a thing nor labels for them probably means that they are subjective. Just guessing.

However, since there ARE rules and labels for Good & Evil it's probably safe to say they're hard-coded and objective. Care to point to any other parts of STATBLOCKS of monsters that are subjective? After all, Orcus being evil is part of his STATS not a part of his flavor text.

So, again, you're wrong. Obviously wrong.



Except there is a lot of fluff in the statblocks.  Like "evil".  It has no mechanical effect.  And it shouldn't.  Its one of the best things about 4e.

Edit: Actually looking at Orcus' Stat block it is the only piece of fluff left still in the batch.  I hope it gets removed come 5e and we don't have a mechanic-useless relic sitting in the corner still.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Except there is a lot of fluff in the statblocks.  Like "evil".  It has no mechanical effect.  And it shouldn't.  Its one of the best things about 4e.

Edit: Actually looking at Orcus' Stat block it is the only piece of fluff left still in the batch.  I hope it gets removed come 5e and we don't have a mechanic-useless relic sitting in the corner still.



Excuse me while I LMAO.

This is really transparently an attempt to save face. You're blatantly wrong.

Your example of other subjective material in statblocks other than alignment is a "lot of fluff"...like what? Oh...like "Evil"...alignment...the very thing we're discussing. So, in other words, in the stat blocks of monsters there is a lot of subjective stuff other than alignment...like...uh...alignment! Yeah! That'll show me...

Wow...

The game OBJECTIVELY labels things as Good & Evil as a part of monsters statistical, mechanical nature...and you still want to shove your fingers so far into your ears that blood gushes out while pretending that it's "fluff". Please. At least have the brass to admit you have no ability to refute what I've said.

Good & Evil are objective in Dungeons & Dragons. Stat are tied to it. Labels are used for it. It is as plain as day.

Oh no wait I'm sure that in the block of MECHANICAL INTERACTIONS the designers forgot to take out the "subjective" "fluff" of EVIL when labeling Orcus. Uh huh. Sure. Start a thread selling bridges in San Fran and I'll rush over to start bidding.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

First off, I was assuming there was fluff description for abilities in monster stat blocks like the fluff in spells.  In this case I am incorrect.  So I editted to note that it was incorrect to imply there was more fluff.

What mechanical effect does the "evil" descriptor in the statblock have on the game.  I'm interested to hear*.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out here
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
...Maybe we should just entirely remove alignment or have an entire book devoted to explaining it. 
Yes, Sir-Zalphon, and wizards should hire Yagamifire to write it! I bet it will be half as long as his posts and or this thread. 

Or we could spend that same money on cool artwork for enlightened editions which have no alignment mechanics! 
...Maybe we should just entirely remove alignment or have an entire book devoted to explaining it. 



Just pick an alignment, dude. What's more to explain?



You're pretty much clearly wrong.


Define Good.

Define Evil.
You're pretty much clearly wrong.


Define Good.

Define Evil.



Would you like a definition from an in-game stand-point or a purely mechanical gamist definition? I can do either.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

First off, I was assuming there was fluff description for abilities in monster stat blocks like the fluff in spells.  In this case I am incorrect.  So I editted to note that it was incorrect to imply there was more fluff.

What mechanical effect does the "evil" descriptor in the statblock have on the game.  I'm interested to hear*.



If something is listed as "Evil" those things that harm/detect/benefit "Evil" will harm/detect/benefit said Evil thing where as if it said anything other than Evil it would not. There, a mechanical effect. Awesome, no?

Also the point is you insisting that it IS fluff when clearly it isn't. There is no fluff in statblocks because they're STAT blocks.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

Yes, Sir-Zalphon, and wizards should hire Yagamifire to write it! I bet it will be half as long as his posts and or this thread. 

Or we could spend that same money on cool artwork for enlightened editions which have no alignment mechanics! 



Wizards would benefit greatly from hiring me.

I like how your post, however, boils down to "No! No want read explaining things! Want pretty pictures!"

Yeah, that's a great bit of argument there. As we all know, the best games and works are sold, not on how well the game system is designed or explained, but on how purdy the picsurs r init. Right?

Great idea for a use of money.

I'm on a journey of enlightenment, learning and self-improvement. A journey towards mastery. A journey that will never end. If you challenge me, prepare to be challenged. If you have something to offer as a fellow student, I will accept it. If you call yourself a master, prepare to be humbled. If you seek me, look to the path. I will be traveling it.

 

Proudly playing in many wrong ways. I'm not afraid of playing wrong according to the rules. Why are you?

 

100 Crack Reply of the Yagamifire. You are already wrong.

Detect evil no longer exists.
Back to Basics - A Guide to Basic Attacks You might be playing DnD wrong if... "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Art is better than alignment. It is more useful and causes no problem at the table. 4e has shown alignment mechanics is not needed.
NOTE: None of Mr Customer's valid points in his intelligent, articulate posts have been addressed. At all.

Because they're correct. And one cannot argue againts them.



Yes, well, it appears that people like crzyhawk can't have a discussion about alignment.  He thinks it's the worstest most baddest idea EVAR and that all should bow down to his opinions on the subject.

Founder and figurehead of Just Say Yes!

Member of LGBT Gamers

Odds are, if 4-6 people can't figure out an answer you thought was obvious, you screwed up, not them. - JeffGroves
Which is why a DM should present problems to solve, not solutions to find. -FlatFoot
A game is a fictional construct created for the sake of the players, not the other way around. If you have a question "How do I keep X from happening at my table," and you feel that the out-of-game answer "Talk the the other people at your table" won't help, then the in-game answers "Remove mechanics A, B, and/or C, add mechanics L, M, and/or N" will not help either.
You're pretty much clearly wrong.


Define Good.

Define Evil.



Would you like a definition from an in-game stand-point or a purely mechanical gamist definition? I can do either.


The definition you use when trying figure out whther or not Smit Evil/Good and Detect Evil/Good works.
NOTE: None of Mr Customer's valid points in his intelligent, articulate post have been addressed. At all.

Because they're correct. And one cannot argue againts them.



Yes, well, it appears that people like crzyhawk can't have a discussion about alignment.  He thinks it's the worstest most baddest idea EVAR and that all should bow down to his opinions on the subject.


The fact that every topic about alignment and Paladins causes a major argument about what exactly each alignment really means, it does deserve at least making sure it's really needed.
To be fair, the misuse of allignment is more a case of a lousy DM (or players as the case may be) rather then a fault of the allignment system. In general if there is an issue it is with the DM being an idiot and the allignment issue is simple a symptom of the problem and not the cause.
 
A DM that is going to railroad his players is going to railroad his players regardless of the system, don't blame allignment, blame the railroading DM.

Alignment works, in the system it was designed for. In 3.5 it had a mechanical function that worked. other systems have different rules don't need 3.5's system.

4th edition's paladins for example are not restricted to Lawful Good and thus have more variety in concept. In 3.5 the Paladin concept only worked in a setting that supported it, that is one with plenty of Evil and that he could freely smite said evil without reprecussions. Image how poorly a 3.5 paladin in a Lawful Evil society at war with a NG coutnry would be? It's inapropriate for the setting.

The problem I have with the (ditch allignment) arguement is because it  A: doesn't adress the issue of a lousy DM and B: is useless advice in most cases as the DM and/or Player can't drop it from their system so easily.

A single player is not going to be able to dictate to his group or DM, much less a railroading DM, to drop allignment from the game.

On a simular note, I've not encountered a single player that wanted allignment taken out of the game outside of these forums. And for those few that don't want an allignment for their characters then simply have written neutral on their sheets.

It's not rocket science, I've played back in AD&D and purchased the 3.0 books when they came out. And never in any of my groups as DM or Player was there ever an issue over allignment.

Now that is just me, perhaps it is because I don't hang out with the sort of crowd that beleives that **** and Murder is a matter of subjective morality, and maybe I don't play with 5 year olds who think that all Evil peoplewear top hats twirl their curled mustaches and have goaties, so the fantasy concept of Good and Evil aren't confusing to us.
That was a really sensible and mature post (which I pretty much agree with). Shame it was ruined by the last paragraph.
Back to Basics - A Guide to Basic Attacks You might be playing DnD wrong if... "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Personally, I have absolutely zero problems with alignment until it starts affecting my character. If alignment is supposed to be a roleplaying guide, it should stay out of the mechanics.
To be fair, the misuse of allignment is more a case of a lousy DM (or players as the case may be) rather then a fault of the allignment system. In general if there is an issue it is with the DM being an idiot and the allignment issue is simple a symptom of the problem and not the cause.
 
A DM that is going to railroad his players is going to railroad his players regardless of the system, don't blame allignment, blame the railroading DM.

This doesn't hold water. Alignment was a source of tremendous numbers of arguments. When it all but went away in 4th Edition, those arguments all but died out, resurfacing primarily in posts about earlier editions.

Yes, there are still DMs who railroad their players, and we still see questions about those. Alignment was different. I think it's because misuse of alignment isn't just about not giving players choices, but giving them choice and then punishing them for it, or players and DMs blocking character choices and using alignment as an excuse. Yes, they might still block without the excuse, but let's take away the excuse, which can be done either by eschewing alignment, or by fixing it.

Alignment works, in the system it was designed for. In 3.5 it had a mechanical function that worked. other systems have different rules don't need 3.5's system.

I don't think we care about mechanics that work. We care about those mechanics being so easily misused. Yes, ok, fine, it is misuse. Please either get rid of or fix something that's so easily misused and so fractious when it is misused.

4th edition's paladins for example are not restricted to Lawful Good and thus have more variety in concept. In 3.5 the Paladin concept only worked in a setting that supported it, that is one with plenty of Evil and that he could freely smite said evil without reprecussions. Image how poorly a 3.5 paladin in a Lawful Evil society at war with a NG coutnry would be? It's inapropriate for the setting.

Yet 3.5 and even 2nd edition supported such settings.

The problem I have with the (ditch allignment) arguement is because it  A: doesn't adress the issue of a lousy DM and B: is useless advice in most cases as the DM and/or Player can't drop it from their system so easily.

A single player is not going to be able to dictate to his group or DM, much less a railroading DM, to drop allignment from the game.

Then maybe it will spark conversation and get people thinking about making longer term changes. One player can convince the rest of a group. No one is suggesting that anyone "dictate" anything. "Dictating" occurs when alignment is (as it so easily is) misused.

On a simular note, I've not encountered a single player that wanted allignment taken out of the game outside of these forums. And for those few that don't want an allignment for their characters then simply have written neutral on their sheets.

It's not rocket science, I've played back in AD&D and purchased the 3.0 books when they came out. And never in any of my groups as DM or Player was there ever an issue over allignment.

So what? There are other groups, and problems with alignment, whatever their cause, are a known issue. Don't try to pretend it's not, just because you haven't encountered it.

Now that is just me, perhaps it is because I don't hang out with the sort of crowd that beleives that **** and Murder is a matter of subjective morality, and maybe I don't play with 5 year olds who think that all Evil peoplewear top hats twirl their curled mustaches and have goaties, so the fantasy concept of Good and Evil aren't confusing to us.

This has nothing to do with alignment, and everything to do with your repeated demonstration that you think it's about how people rationalize evilness. It's not. It's about DMs and players telling people how to play their characters. That's not only to do with alignment either, but alignment is a big part of it. If your group doesn't tell each other how to play their characters, doesn't manipulate them, then good for you. Mine doesn't either, because I won't play with people like that. But alignment is easily seen to be about telling others how to play. Even though I can avoid the issue in my own group, I'd like to see it fixed in the game as a whole. 4e did a lot, but that might all be undone, in the name of pointless tradition. Fine, keep alignment. Just fix it, make it less easy to misuse, and reduce the impact when it inevitably is misused.

If I have to ask the GM for it, then I don't want it.

I fine it very easy to add Detect Evil in 5e. I think they might add  it later in the playtest when the
paladin comes out.  
Sign In to post comments