Does D&D Still Need Alignment?

[Kyutaru]

Although the War of Law and Chaos still appears to be part of the 5e setting backstory

It is?? No one told me about a Mechancus vs Limbo war. Best I know is we have the Devils and Demons fighting each other and that's more because they both get confused for the other.

[GreyBlack]

Why couldn't he deal damage to creatures that oppose his goals? That's the sticking point for me. If you have an intelligent creature and you know their goals and preferences, you can just use those. If you don't, then it must not be an important creature or you should figure those out. So encoding alignment into the mechanics and cosmology (as opposed to just a helpful shorthand for DMs or players to communicate very broad baselines) seems like it's putting the cart before the horse. It seems to me to be in a strange neverland--

* too vague to give meaningful guidance about the likely actions undertaken beyond the very most broad (see all the arguments about what it means)
* too constricting to be just a description--if it's the binding force behind the entire cosmology and the root cause of things like the Blood War, it has to have force.

To be honest? I'd argue that vagueness is supposed simply mirror the alienness of the concept of Cosmic alignment.

Best example I have is asking what the biggest number you can picture is. I'd wager it's in the 100's. No, I don't mean the biggest number you can conceptualize, the biggest number of distinct, physical objects. It's just a limitation of the human mind. However, in physics, we frequently deal with numbers in the millions and billions; it's not that the numbers don't exist, just that it's a number beyond our ability to imagine.

I mean, that's how I interpret it and have used it that way in the past; again my homebrew campaign is explicitly about exploring how weird alignment is/can be, so for the most part, I'm past some of the hang ups others have about the system and have kinda embraced it. My players seem to enjoy it.

[OldTrees1]

That in a thread about whether D&D still needs alignment your theoretical sword doesn't necessarily need to behave according to one. We can separate alignment from it and have it choose the wielder by its own subjective wants. Calm down and don't tell me what I'm seeing or not seeing. I'm merely saying there are alternative ways to handle the weapon and you're viewing it rather black and white.

While your statement (you can change the sword to use a different metric and thus not be related to alignment) is self evident, it is unrelated to the point of my post. Hence my confusion at the mismatch between your tangential reply with the contrarian tone you used in that reply. Hence the calm statement of confusion (3 eyed duck) and the analysis that we both missed each others points. Thank you for clarifying your point as the self evident tangent.

I presume you did not wish to comment on either of the points of the post. That does not indicate agreement / disagreement. Merely that neither of those points compelled you to comment upon them. A normal possible outcome so I will not repeat those points again here.

It is?? No one told me about a Mechancus vs Limbo war. Best I know is we have the Devils and Demons fighting each other and that's more because they both get confused for the other.

D&D historic Law vs Chaos war was the side of Law vs the Demons. A disagreement on the side of Law split this into the Blood War (Devils vs Demons) and other less famous conflicts.

[Naanomi]

It is?? No one told me about a Mechancus vs Limbo war. Best I know is we have the Devils and Demons fighting each other and that's more because they both get confused for the other.

Aarakocra MM entry, Rod of Seven Parts, amongst other name-drops here and there... and it was more like ‘very Lawful Giants/elementals from the plane of Air try to force Law onto Everything; an alliance of Chaotic things led by demons reacts; cosmic consequences ensue’

[Constructman]

Although the War of Law and Chaos still appears to be part of the 5e setting backstory

Can somebody explain this? I can't find any detailed info on the War of Law and Chaos anywhere. I got the impression that it's the creation story of Planescape, and the reason why the Great Wheel is a wheel, but I could be completely wrong.

[Naanomi]

Can somebody explain this? I can't find any detailed info on the War of Law and Chaos anywhere. I got the impression that it's the creation story of Planescape, and the reason why the Great Wheel is a wheel, but I could be completely wrong.

5e just hints at it, without much concrete detail... but if I’m allowed to dip into older edition lore...

Back in the very early days of the Great Wheel; before the Prime was inhabited by much besides maybe Aboleth and their creations; and when the Outer Planes were not yet fully explored... a group of beings living in the Elemental Plane of Air (called the Vaati (giants or maybe genie-like elementals of some kind who themselves were very Lawful) began a war of conquest over the Inner Planes that eventually spread to all the corners of creation. They recruited a coalition of Lawful Outer-Planes beings to their side; including both Good and Evil beings... but a loose coalition of Chaotic Powers (Demons and outsider-Eladrin mostly) rose to oppose them. The Vaati held the advantage most of the War, but the Demons eventually learned how to create soldiers from human souls... and then took the War to the young Prime. Still, the Vaati and allies managed to win a very Pyrrhic victory against the leaders of the forces of Chaos; and being Chaotic they fell into disarray. The War ended with Law winning cosmologically (which is why there is still a set structure to the cosmos) but so decimated that they couldn’t win the war materially. The Blood War between Tanar’ri and Baatezu is an echo/continuation of that cosmologically defining battle

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

5e just hints at it, without much concrete detail... but if I’m allowed to dip into older edition lore...

Back in the very early days of the Great Wheel; before the Prime was inhabited by much besides maybe Aboleth and their creations; and when the Outer Planes were not yet fully explored... a group of beings living in the Elemental Plane of Air (called the Vaati (giants or maybe genie-like elementals of some kind who themselves were very Lawful) began a war of conquest over the Inner Planes that eventually spread to all the corners of creation. They recruited a coalition of Lawful Outer-Planes beings to their side; including both Good and Evil beings... but a loose coalition of Chaotic Powers (Demons and outsider-Eladrin mostly) rose to oppose them. The Vaati held the advantage most of the War, but the Demons eventually learned how to create soldiers from human souls... and then took the War to the young Prime. Still, the Vaati and allies managed to win a very Pyrrhic victory against the leaders of the forces of Chaos; and being Chaotic they fell into disarray. The War ended with Law winning cosmologically (which is why there is still a set structure to the cosmos) but so decimated that they couldn’t win the war materially. The Blood War between Tanar’ri and Baatezu is an echo/continuation of that cosmologically defining battle

Basically all of the information on the War of Law and Chaos is in Eldritch Wizardry, from TSR, and the Rod of Seven Parts adventure. Chaos gets the upper hand when the Queen of Chaos experiments with the creation of new, powerful demons; her first attempt, Demogorgon, is rejected as being unfit. Her second, Mishka the Wolf-Spider, leads the armies of Chaos and achieves several victories. Eventually he's sealed away using the Rod of Law, which shatters.

I strongly recommend reading through the old Afroakuma Planar Questions threads if you're interested in this sort of stuff. Todd Stewart has posted in some of them as well. On other boards you can find stuff by ripvanwormer, who is a noted Planescape guru who has, I believe, written on that setting for Dragon and Dungeon.

[Naanomi]

We also got some info about it in Age of Worms, Oriental Adventures, the Inner Planes Book, 3.5s Fiendish Codexes, and a bit in Planes of Law, Hellbound: the Blood War, and On Hallowed Ground

I think it also gets a reference in Great Modron March, Tales from the Infinite Staircase, and Dead Gods... but I haven’t read the modules in forever so I could be mistaken

I think... Spelljammer and/or the last Mystara products had a big planar timeline that established when it took place (long after the Dreaden were functionally gone, but starting before any of the known spelljamming empires were established)

[Constructman]

5e just hints at it, without much concrete detail... but if I’m allowed to dip into older edition lore...

Back in the very early days of the Great Wheel; before the Prime was inhabited by much besides maybe Aboleth and their creations; and when the Outer Planes were not yet fully explored... a group of beings living in the Elemental Plane of Air (called the Vaati (giants or maybe genie-like elementals of some kind who themselves were very Lawful) began a war of conquest over the Inner Planes that eventually spread to all the corners of creation. They recruited a coalition of Lawful Outer-Planes beings to their side; including both Good and Evil beings... but a loose coalition of Chaotic Powers (Demons and outsider-Eladrin mostly) rose to oppose them. The Vaati held the advantage most of the War, but the Demons eventually learned how to create soldiers from human souls... and then took the War to the young Prime. Still, the Vaati and allies managed to win a very Pyrrhic victory against the leaders of the forces of Chaos; and being Chaotic they fell into disarray. The War ended with Law winning cosmologically (which is why there is still a set structure to the cosmos) but so decimated that they couldn’t win the war materially. The Blood War between Tanar’ri and Baatezu is an echo/continuation of that cosmologically defining battle

Huh, that seems like a big deal.

Like, a really, really big deal.

Wonder why it isn't referenced more.

Basically all of the information on the War of Law and Chaos is in Eldritch Wizardry, from TSR, and the Rod of Seven Parts adventure. Chaos gets the upper hand when the Queen of Chaos experiments with the creation of new, powerful demons; her first attempt, Demogorgon, is rejected as being unfit. Her second, Mishka the Wolf-Spider, leads the armies of Chaos and achieves several victories. Eventually he's sealed away using the Rod of Law, which shatters.

I strongly recommend reading through the old Afroakuma Planar Questions threads if you're interested in this sort of stuff. Todd Stewart has posted in some of them as well. On other boards you can find stuff by ripvanwormer, who is a noted Planescape guru who has, I believe, written on that setting for Dragon and Dungeon.

I'll check those out, thanks.

[Naanomi]

Huh, that seems like a big deal.

Like, a really, really big deal.

Wonder why it isn't referenced more.

The War of Law and Chaos is ancient beyond ancient history, faded past even legend for mortal races... heck virtually all of the common mortal races didn’t even exist until the later part of the conflict. Much of it took place on the Inner and Outer Planes, not the Prime (probably none of the known Prime worlds in campaign settings existed for most of it; though the final battle was on Oerth). Only a few artifacts from that time still exist... though a few big planar entities and Gods got their ‘start’ in that conflict.

It is like why we don’t talk about conflict between archaebacteria colonies when talking about the history of civilization; even though the results of those conflicts were astoundingly important in the larger sense.

Also, for what it is worth, the War of Law and Chaos was preceded by an even grander and longer conflict between the forces of Existence and Non-Existence (represented by the Elder Powers predating Gods and Primordial Dragons against Draeden)

[Willie the Duck]

Huh, that seems like a big deal.
Like, a really, really big deal.
Wonder why it isn't referenced more.

When it was written, grand sweeping metaplots and setting history were a big deal in the gaming community. Since then people have gotten a little burned out on the idea. Or at least that's my take.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Huh, that seems like a big deal.

Like, a really, really big deal.

Wonder why it isn't referenced more.

Because it's not really that interesting. It is, if you're interested in planar history, but it's not at all relevant to the day-to-day unless you're running a campaign focused on, like, adventurers as planar agents working to stave off (or bring about) massive, sweeping planar conflagrations. If that's the kind of game you're in, then the draeden in the Abyss, the fate of the ancient baatorians, the seal at the bottom of the Ghoresh Chasm, the three towers of the yugoloths, the nature of the 7th layer of Mount Celestia - that stuff might be relevant. Otherwise, it's just background to the setting. The War of Law and Chaos is over, except for the Blood War, and really no one wants to bring it back outside a few holdouts like the Queen of Chaos.

[Naanomi]

Because it's not really that interesting.

Well... I’d argue it is *very* interesting, just not particularly useful for most games. It may inspire some ideas; but for the most part the setting details are ‘consumed’ independent of actually playing the game. I love it all, but the average user could take or leave it without noticing

[Hail Tempus]

Maybe a better question than whether or not D&D needs alignment is: Does anyone actually use it at the table for PCs these day? I have trouble visualizing a good use for it that doesn't feel heavy handed.

Every game I've played in 5e has included alignment as one of the things you pick at character creation. Players tend to have an idea of what their character is like as a person, and choosing an alignment is one of the things that helps them flesh out their character's personality. Combined with bonds, ideals etc., alignment can create some interesting character personalities.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Well... I’d argue it is *very* interesting, just not particularly useful for most games. It may inspire some ideas; but for the most part the setting details are ‘consumed’ independent of actually playing the game. I love it all, but the average user could take or leave it without noticing

Yeah, that's what I mean. It's a background feature, and while it may be a thing that players and characters want to learn more about, it is not necessarily meant to be anything beyond window dressing. And if players are interested in learning more, it's on the DM to create it, because there really isn't much more without creating fanon, not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Kyutaru]

Yeah, that's what I mean. It's a background feature, and while it may be a thing that players and characters want to learn more about, it is not necessarily meant to be anything beyond window dressing. And if players are interested in learning more, it's on the DM to create it, because there really isn't much more without creating fanon, not that there's anything wrong with that.

It's also a reminder to everyone that there's always something stronger and scarier than you are. Even the gods themselves pale compared to a Draeden. PCs can get as strong as they want and they still have something that outclasses them.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

It's also a reminder to everyone that there's always something stronger and scarier than you are. Even the gods themselves pale compared to a Draeden. PCs can get as strong as they want and they still have something that outclasses them.

True, though there are no shortage of those in most Planescape games, where becoming an epic PC means you've just graduated to "mostly insignificant" from "completely insignificant".

[Naanomi]

It's also a reminder to everyone that there's always something stronger and scarier than you are. Even the gods themselves pale compared to a Draeden. PCs can get as strong as they want and they still have something that outclasses them.

And Draeden wouldn’t likely fare well trying to be belligerent in Sigil in front of the Lady of Pain; and even she probably shouldn’t tangle with the ‘oh we made the Great Wheel just because’ Eldest Ones; and where the biggest potential hitters in the Far Realm stand next to any of those is unknown

[Kyutaru]

And Draeden wouldn’t likely fare well trying to be belligerent in Sigil in front of the Lady of Pain; and even she probably shouldn’t tangle with the ‘oh we made the Great Wheel just because’ Eldest Ones; and where the biggest potential hitters in the Far Realm stand next to any of those is unknown

Then there's Ao, who the cleric in my epic campaign wanted to fight desperately. Where even does he stand in this cosmological government of bigger fish?

[Naanomi]

Then there's Ao, who the cleric in my epic campaign wanted to fight desperately. Where even does he stand in this cosmological government of bigger fish?

Overpowers are between Gods and Elder Powers (maybe with one Luminous Being intermediary, though that may have been an Elder Power itself); though they only have power on matters related to their own Crystal Spheres they ‘administrate’... and that power isn’t absolute, apparently Ao is unable to shut down Far Realm influence on Toril for example; and the Lady of Pain cannot be stopped at making portals to wherever she wants

[Kyutaru]

Overpowers are between Gods and Elder Powers (maybe with one Luminous Being intermediary, though that may have been an Elder Power itself); though they only have power on matters related to their own Crystal Spheres they ‘administrate’... and that power isn’t absolute, apparently Ao is unable to shut down Far Realm influence on Toril for example; and the Lady of Fate cannot be stopped at making portals to wherever she wants

I feel like their next book needs to be "Planes & Powers" and explain every major figure that exists and their hierarchy in the cosmos along with all these background wars and how the multiverse began.

[Naanomi]

I feel like their next book needs to be "Planes & Powers" and explain every major figure that exists and their hierarchy in the cosmos along with all these background wars and how the multiverse began.

Eh, I wouldn’t mind more of this sort of thing; but I don’t know it needs a whole book. Some sort of ‘manual of the planes’ that has a history section but focuses more on locations and monsters wouldn’t be bad

[Unoriginal]

I feel like their next book needs to be "Planes & Powers" and explain every major figure that exists and their hierarchy in the cosmos along with all these background wars and how the multiverse began.

5e's lore is much more "myths and legends" than "absolute truths".

It's a good thing, too, IMO. The blank spaces in the map are just as important as the marked locations, to use a metaphor.

That being said, I hope they flesh out the Upper Planes some more. Maybe after the Descent to Avernus?

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

5e's lore is much more "myths and legends" than "absolute truths".

It's a good thing, too, IMO. The blank spaces in the map are just as important as the marked locations, to use a metaphor.

That being said, I hope they flesh out the Upper Planes some more. Maybe after the Descent to Avernus?

It would be nice, but unlikely based on precedent. The Upper Planes have traditionally gotten even less attention than the Inner Planes. Even the 2E book specifically dedicated to celestials was mostly about the ways archons, eladrin and guardinals were really just like mortals and how you should play one, and less about how they were different and interesting. The old Planescape assumptions are mostly out the window though since they've reshuffled the exemplars.

[Naanomi]

It would be nice, but unlikely based on precedent. The Upper Planes have traditionally gotten even less attention than the Inner Planes. Even the 2E book specifically dedicated to celestials was mostly about the ways archons, eladrin and guardinals were really just like mortals and how you should play one, and less about how they were different and interesting. The old Planescape assumptions are mostly out the window though since they've reshuffled the exemplars.

Maybe a redux of ‘the Great Modron March’ adventure could tour the outer planes for us?

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Maybe a redux of ‘the Great Modron March’ adventure could tour the outer planes for us?

There are those modrons in Out of the Abyss, and I think it says they started on their march 289 years ago...

[deljzc]

The alignment system's main use is as a bridge to the Polytheism and Deity system.

You can play D&D without any of the religion in the books. You could eliminate all of the non-material world. You could make it a monotheism system or having something very similar to real world religions (primarily monotheism/prophet oriented or mysticism beliefs). You can certainly dial up a way clerics and paladins are granted spells and perform miracles.

Once you eliminate all the non-material world things (and say make it a very realistic based adventure with limited spells), then alignment probably becomes obsolete. At that point you're really just talking morality and how it manifests itself in your character and his location.

Of course to do that you take away a lot of the upper level adventuring hooks, take away a lot of monsters, take away some spells and its not cannon from the vision Gygax had.

I just don't really think you can keep all the other-wordly planar stuff and lose alignment. They are too tied together (for many reasons).

[Willie the Duck]

Of course to do that you take away a lot of the upper level adventuring hooks, take away a lot of monsters, take away some spells and its not cannon from the vision Gygax had.

Wait, you think that E. Gary 'no one's made it to 12th level yet'/'this guy worships, uhhhh… Church of Crom, Scientist'/'by name level people will want to switch over to running kingdoms'/'Gods, Demigods and Heroes was not meant as a monster manual' Gygax's primary vision was about upper level adventuring hooks and the Polytheism and Deity system?

[Max_Killjoy]

When I play a character, I will know if I consider them to be generally immoral, morally supererogatory, or neither. Sometimes that knowledge takes a bit of reflection & thought but that judgement of the character will be intrinsic to my playing of that character. Likewise that character will interact with choices that have a moral element to them. I can make judgements on what options are immoral, morally supererogatory, morally obligatory, or none of the above. My character can also make such judgements.

Alignment as descriptive, rather than prescriptive/ascriptive is as simple as the campaign also making such judgements about characters and options. As long as your campaign considers some things as moral (morally obligatory or morally supererogatory) and some things as immoral, then you are using alignment as descriptive. It is possible to run a campaign without doing this, but many campaigns will. If murdering puppies is deemed immoral by your campaign, then you are using alignment.

Does this require any mechanics? No. Alignment never required mechanics. Allegiance systems might require mechanics but descriptive alignment does not.

At that point, IMO, there's no need for Alignment, because you have a fully-formed consideration of morality and ethics.

To me, Alignment seems like either nothing more than Purple Team vs Orange Team, a way to put jerseys on the characters so that the PCs know who it's OK to hit with things and take stuff from, or an outright grotesque caricature of "morality".

Why couldn't he deal damage to creatures that oppose his goals? That's the sticking point for me. If you have an intelligent creature and you know their goals and preferences, you can just use those. If you don't, then it must not be an important creature or you should figure those out. So encoding alignment into the mechanics and cosmology (as opposed to just a helpful shorthand for DMs or players to communicate very broad baselines) seems like it's putting the cart before the horse. It seems to me to be in a strange neverland--

* too vague to give meaningful guidance about the likely actions undertaken beyond the very most broad (see all the arguments about what it means)
* too constricting to be just a description--if it's the binding force behind the entire cosmology and the root cause of things like the Blood War, it has to have force.

IMO, and frankly, the whole thing is because of D&D's "gamist" core. It's an objective-sounding, no-interpretation, no-argument rule that can be planned around and gamed for advantage. Sword gets the "chaotic" tag, any character with the "lawful" tag that tries to wield it gets popped. No debate with the DM about "conflicting goals" or "Am I really opposed to the sword's ideals?"

"Alignment" lets some players pretend that morality and ethics can be reduced to a set of mechanical tags, and also appeals to the Hollywood-esque "goodguys" and "badguys" quasimorality that some people like.

[OldTrees1]

At that point, IMO, there's no need for Alignment, because you have a fully-formed consideration of morality and ethics.

To me, Alignment seems like either nothing more than Purple Team vs Orange Team, a way to put jerseys on the characters so that the PCs know who it's OK to hit with things and take stuff from, or an outright grotesque caricature of "morality".

Thank you. I too agree there is no need for alignment, however I would still classify what I use (that fully formed consideration of morality and ethics) as alignment. Therefore, while I think WotC can stop making grotesque caricatures of "morality" via its alignment RAW, I do see morality as a topic DMs might want to be prepared for. WotC therefore might want to give some advice to those DMs.