Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 fey_feline Jan 20, 2009 18:55:31	Chaotic Good: Order and organization are counterproductive to life and freedom. You are goodly willed, but think that freedom, not constictive laws and the crush of society are the best ways to live. At best, you are a rebel, at worst; an anarchist. Examples: A wizard like those in the FR town of Longsaddle, a freedom fighter, Lawful Evil All shall bow to my rules, and nothing shall be stonger than an army of my well organized troops! You are evil, corrupt, and mad with power. If you were a king, your edicts would keep the people in check. Your army would be rank after rank of warriors honed to perfection. At best, you are cruel, at worst you are a tyrant. Examples: Efreets, Szass Tam, Drow, :3
#2 vebrandsson Jan 20, 2009 19:00:53	Now we bring back the 3 neutral alignments and reassign all the dieties alignments to revert back to the 9 alignment system and we're good
#3 fey_feline Jan 20, 2009 19:06:13	Now we bring back the 3 neutral alignments and reassign all the dieties alignments to revert back to the 9 alignment system and we're good Unaligned Lawful Chaotic Good Evil Lawful Good Chaotic Good Chaotic Evil Lawful Evil. Useful, to me at least. I have a Chaotic Good NPC already, and a Chaotic character.
#4 rickiel Jan 20, 2009 19:34:53	I personally welcome the idea of Chaotic, Lawful, Chaotic Good, and Lawful Evil alignments. I don't see Chaos as being inherently evil by itself, nor do I see Law as being inherently goody-goody. It's true that a lot of great adventures and stories include 'restoring order to a world torn by chaos', but we also have lots of stories and fun with rebelling against unjust law, uncomfortable partnerships between the lawer and the free-thinker, and more! Unaligned is alright when describing a moral and ethical neutrality, and I'm content with its existence. I do, however, find that a lot of characters could fit the Lawful, Chaotic, Chaotic Good, and Lawful Evil alignment rather than seemingly be shoved into Unaligned.
#5 vebrandsson Jan 20, 2009 19:43:33	Unaligned Lawful Chaotic Good Evil Lawful Good Chaotic Good Chaotic Evil Lawful Evil. Useful, to me at least. I have a Chaotic Good NPC already, and a Chaotic character. Not familiar with the older dnd alignment systems are you? Neutral Good (good) Neutral Evil (evil) Lawful neutral (lawful) Chaotic neutral (chaotic) Lawful good Lawful evil Chaotic good Chaotic evil True Neutral (which was if played right, and not mistaken for what chaotic neutral should be, is radically different from what unaligned is now. Back in the older editions true neutral was NOT avoiding taking a moral stand but instead going out of your way to make the moral choices to balance the universe as you saw it in respect to law, chaos, good, and evil) Bringing all this back into 4e would be a lot more dificult than I think you all realize given rewriting the dieties and realigining alot of monsters. Plus powers and effects that only effect or are better against creatures of good or evil alignments could be dodged by simply choosing lawful or chaotic neutral (though unaligned does still have that issue, and I don't like it anyway, aside from non sientient beings its hard to really throw morality out the window)
#6 rickiel Jan 20, 2009 19:54:58	True, Neutral was not automatically a passive non-stance. It covers those who wish to enforce a 'balance', along with those who simply seek to exist and have no strong moral or ethical lean, and it certainly covered those who enforced or supported a natural order (I'm looking at you Druids). I do not believe that adding four more alignments would be a difficult thing for 4e. As for the 'dodging of powers' bit, I don't see why powers wouldn't develop (or be developed or reflavored) that target the strictly Chaotic, Lawful, or even those without a strong stand (Unaligned). Not EVERYTHING has to be rewritten. Deities, maybe. I believe, for instance, that the Raven Queen is alright as Unaligned. However, Kord seems quite Chaotic Good to me, and Asmodeus needs his Law bit back, if only to allow him to once again invoke the terror of tyranny!
#7 Fallstorm Jan 20, 2009 20:09:20	I also think Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil should be a part of the DnD alignment system (and no I don't hate 4E. I like it a lot...I just don't think every change made was perfect). I read a designer state somewhere the alignment changes were made because the differences between chaotic good and neutral good were very minimal and likewise with neutral evil and lawful evil, thus these aligments were simplified into Good and Evil respectively. I disagree I think there is a substantial difference between CG and NG and NE and LE, or at least enough of a difference for them not to be lumped together. Still, I do agree it would take a lot of work to go back and add them in and adjust the game accordingly...or maybe I'm just too lazy Peace, Fallstorm
#8 rickiel Jan 20, 2009 20:15:06	Perhaps I'm partial to Lawful Evil and Chaotic Good due to my D&D experiences beginning with Planescape. It provided such rich and diverse examples of each alignment, nuances between them, and so much more. So perahps I'm just nostalgic WotC doesn't have to 'go back and redo it'. A free online optional supplement would be handy, yes. However I believe it's up to the individual and the group with which he or she games that must do the footwork.
#9 tequila_sunrise Jan 20, 2009 20:26:18	Bringing all this back into 4e would be a lot more dificult than I think you all realize given rewriting the dieties and realigining alot of monsters. Plus powers and effects that only effect or are better against creatures of good or evil alignments could be dodged by simply choosing lawful or chaotic neutral (though unaligned does still have that issue, and I don't like it anyway, aside from non sientient beings its hard to really throw morality out the window) I think you're being a little melodramatic. I myself don't have any interest in the law/chaos axis, even as it exists in 4e, but adding four new old alignments to the game will require approximately five minutes of work. Seriously, alignment doesn't even matter in 4e, so Fey_Feline could literally just say "all these nine alignments are open to everyone" and it'd work just fine. TS
#10 fey_feline Jan 20, 2009 20:33:02	I think you're being a little melodramatic. I myself don't have any interest in the law/chaos axis, even as it exists in 4e, but adding four new old alignments to the game will require approximately five minutes of work. Seriously, alignment doesn't even matter in 4e, so Fey_Feline could literally just say "all these nine alignments are open to everyone" and it'd work just fine. TS Thar we go. I DM for a reason. I'm love controlling a little world, mixing it up, and making changes as I see fit.
#11 Daybreaker Jan 21, 2009 3:03:59	I still don't get the reasoning behind removing Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil. Besides, they were my favorite alignments. Can anyone explain to me why they were removed? I mean, what's the logic? The new system seems less consistent and intuitive.
#12 vebrandsson Jan 21, 2009 8:25:53	Can anyone explain to me why they were removed? I mean, what's the logic? The new system seems less consistent and intuitive. In wizard's, in a design and development article said they changed the old alignment system to what it is in 4e because they "felt" that the earlier system was too much of a "moral straight jacket" and hindered the character's personality. I personally believe thats a load of crap but after everything else Wizards has done I've come to expect that. But back on point, do you really find a reason to bring back all the alignments if you are only going to change the dieties and ignore all the monsters? We'd have to change all or near all devils to lawful evil to match what Asmodeus should be, and that's just to start. And what about others? Are Dark Ones really unaligned or would it more suit them to be lawful, or chaotic, how about the sorrowsworn? I think it'd be a lot mor than you realize to do it properly. Now if you don't really want to do it properly, I suppose you could half-*** it, change the dieties, make all the alignments available to players, and be done, but I'd opt for something a little more complete if I were to do it.
#13 erk_ Jan 21, 2009 8:55:45	Easier, in my opinion, to make your own deities. I'm surprised how many people use the ones from the core books, honestly! Whence the homebrew worlds of 2e? In my game world, I don't let players choose alignments. Supernatural beings, however, are aligned along these two axis pretty much exactly as in previous editions. It has worked well so far... I just check a supernatural creature's alignment before putting it into the game, and pencil in adjustments then if needed.
#14 jimprofit Jan 21, 2009 22:14:38	I don't miss alignments. Just raised a bunch of crappy internet arguments. Like we don't have enough of those... My friends always claimed I was lawful evil. Not the fascist kind, more of the Dexter Morgan kind they say. IE: Stops the bad guys, by doing bad things. And it's not just "ends justifies the means". I like doing the bad things.. I'd do bad things anyway, so be thankful I'm on your side. For example, drow societies are matriarchs. Theoreticaly then there would be no greater psychological and fitting toture against some important drow figurehead then to kidnap her and sell her to the sex trade. Ofcourse that takes alot of planning and risk, so unless we're kindapping like their kid or something. I'm not going to do something like that.. lol!
#15 alchemyprime Jan 22, 2009 19:02:40	My alignments as used in my game. Lawful Good Good Chaotic Good Lawful Balanced Chaotic Lawful Evil Evil Chaotic Evil Unaligned TN is Balanced (which is how I like it) and Unaligned is "I don't care." Chaotic Neutral is just that: Chaotic, but not good or evil. That's how I look at it anyhow.
#16 Daybreaker Jan 23, 2009 0:36:46	I think it'd be a lot mor than you realize to do it properly. Now if you don't really want to do it properly, I suppose you could half-*** it, change the dieties, make all the alignments available to players, and be done, but I'd opt for something a little more complete if I were to do it. I would just do it on a case-by-case basis whenever I was adding creatures to an adventure.
#17 Daybreaker Jan 23, 2009 0:41:05	Actually, I've always liked the idea of alternative systems of measuring a character's inner qualities. Like in Ultima, where they have principles and virtues and such. I've always wanted to try to adapt that (or something like it) to a tabletop RPG. I just still don't get the logic of the exclusion. If alignment is a straightjacket (and it never seemed that way to me before), how is it less of a straightjacket minus chaotic good and lawful evil?
#18 Einlanzer Jan 28, 2009 16:17:28	While I'm not one to tell people what they should and shouldn't do, particularly when they have no effect on game mechanics.. I've come to prefer the new alignment system better than the old. Something that a lot of people don't seem to get: Good = chaotic/neutral good evil = lawful/neutral evil Literal "chaotic good" and "lawful evil" don't make any sense. "Good" presumes you're the kind of person who is good natured but not driven or affected by mores and folkways. "Evil" presumes you are are selfish and greedy by nature but don't make a habit of arbitrarily sowing chaos. However, no good natured person intentionally causes chaos and no evil person is totally concerned about maintaining laws and custom, and if they were it's covered in the generalized "evil" category. So really, "good" is really "neutral to almost chaotic good" while "evil" is "neutral to almost lawful evil". They're just simplified in a common-sense manner, which is a good thing because it reduces the restrictions on a player's morality and decision making. It's actually easier for me to envision Robin Hood as good than as chaotic good, and the Shade Princes of Netheril as Evil rather than Lawful Evil.
#19 Qube Jan 29, 2009 6:59:20	I use a slighty different alignment systems: - ironclad lawfull (=ye old paladin) - live-and-let-live (=friendly and pacifistic unless provoked) - chaotic - egocentric (=will-do-much-for-power) - egocentric evil (=will-do-anything-for-power)