Can someone explain to me the appeal of alignments? I genuinely don't understand what good they're supposed to do. I feel like they only serve to neuter characters into playpieces rather than (fake) people.
this isnt bait i genuinely want to know the pros
The only use I could think of is modeling a setting with objective morality
They're pretty fun to argue on the internet about.
Something like a religion or code of honor, but without having to worry about the details. It adds a little bit of restriction to how your character can act so the other players can notice if you're being out of character.
Humans are hard wired to enjoy categorizing things, as well as grouping based on perceived similarities.
Almost entirely to give some mechanical weight to "This magic sword refuses to be welded by anyone but the purest of heart". Now only the Neutral Good peasant boy can wield the holy sword.
People forget you're supposed to assign an alignment based on what most closely fits the character, not use it to define an entire character.
It's a good seed for characterization.
The dm can look at a party alignment spread and decide what kind of plot hooks would appeal to then.
They reinforce behavior and flavor associated with certain classes so that they maintain versimillitude.
They can provide a connection between the mechanics of the game and the metanarrative of the setting.
They can serve as a role-playing assist to new players.
They can serve as an endless point of contention because people who think they understand how to use them have very strong opinions about how they are used.
Alignments are good for amateur players to build their character. When you've never written a character before, it's hard to get complex motivations, reactions, and opinions down. By giving them the template of morality, they can form the base for a decent character. Seasoned players shouldn't need an alignment to make a good character (probably would make a better one without it in fact) but a lot of people aren't very good at RPGs.
Of course, a character with an alignment can still be compelling. Like said, you're not supposed to define the character on their alignment. The character defines their alignment.
Threadkiller
Good points.
If you would make a replacement for the DnD alignments, what would you have it be?
A mechanic for a world where evil and good are set in stone and less objective. It allows the angels to know who's worthy instantly, rather than the DM knowing every detail of a backstory on the spot.
Yeah, this.
Alignment was made for older editions of D&D, where D&D is very squarely about dungeon-crawling: bashing down doors, killing bad guys, stealing the loot. Alignment provided an easy way to determine who the "bad guys" are, and allows for there to be spells and effects that can interact with an individual's bad-guy-ness (Detect/Smite/Circle Against, etc.). The Chaos-Law axis then allows for conflict within individuals that share a Good-Evil alignment and allows for the distinction between classes like Paladin and Rogue.
In other words, it helped convey a specific set of mechanics for a specific type of campaign. It really breaks down under any sort of scrutiny, but it didn't need to be robust for its purpose in smiting goblins.
In D&D context it's literally a cosmic force that fucks with freewill itself, forcing everyone into a stereotype, and if you defy it, you become an eldritch abomination hellbent on the destruction of the universe.
It's also good functionality side for the like of warding spells, categorisation for certain weaknesses/strengths, and playing a campaign like a saturday morning cartoon.
You have to read into it to notice the Tip for the stereotype part in flavour text, but it's there evidently.
It quickly and clearly states the way you intend to play your character with regards to how they generally perceive and treat others (good/neutral/evil) and how they generally go about their lives (lawful/neutral/chaotic).
> I feel like they only serve to neuter characters into playpieces rather than (fake) people.
That's because you're one of those people who things that alignment dictates actions, when in fact it's the other way around.
Alignment is descriptive of the character not prescriptive.
It is the mechanical representation of a characters soul, the "Alignment" of his soul with good, evil, law and chaos.
In D&D those forces are tangible things. When you choose to *align* yourself with one of them by way of your actions, your actual composition is change. So now any mechanic that interacts with those forces will affect you. There is something to detect or repel or attack on a magic/spiritual level. You can think of it like an Aura mechanic. How many works of fantasy have that moment of "I sense great evil in this place..."?
This is what alignment is.
Alignments are guidelines. They help you act in character.
They can also be used as plot devices. Like 'bonus versus evil'.
I like alignments. They're a neat place to start out a character and build off from, and for DnD specifically, I enjoy the idea of a cosmic set of forces based on morality ebbing and flowing, while the actual mortals are more complex beings trying to find their place in the world.
>running an evil campaign soon where the players play as absolved convicts
>convinced half of them are going to pick lawful or chaotic good and say "BUT I WAS INNOCENT"
Hey man, you can still be a convict and on the good side. Hell, even the lawful side if you willingly let yourself get arrested. Though yeah, if most of them wind up trying to say they didn't commit the crimes they did, that will be lame.
It's a short-hand that allows you to have mechanical effects for character's morality, so you can have abilities like "Detect Law" or "Smite Evil". In that role they work out fairly well as long as you a)remember that they're descriptive, not prescriptive: your behavior determines your alignment, your alignment doesn't determine what you can or can't do and b)Don't go all autistic about them: For PCs, the player determines the character's alignment. Only in extreme circumstances(such as a Good character torturing innocent people) or if the player is clearly and consistently acting outside their stated alignment should the GM interfere.
It basically prevents your players from acting like absolute fucktards by raping murdering and pillaging everything in sight since they are playing a 'Good' Alignment. It allows the DM to somewhat herd in the fuckery of the players having absolute free will, especially at higher levels when the wizard could just say fuck it and enslave the continent.Tones down the 'lolrandumb' fucktards as well.
It's a way to take a very complex concept, like morality, and explain it in two short words. While it's not very thorough, it's universally understood.